Jump to content

[KSP 1.12.1+] Galileo's Planet Pack [v1.6.6] [23 Sept 2021]


Galileo
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Motokid600 said:

Thats the one! I updated GPP without Kopernicus. Thanks so much. However "1.3.0-6". It states -5 in the install Wiki. I am using 1.5 at the moment. Not GPP 1.5.1 Would that make a difference on to use -5 or 6?

1.3.0-6 should be used with any 1.5.x version of GPP. The only difference between versions is the fix for OPM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

@vossiewulf where did u get that flag from?

Actually I'm not sure. I think it's from this:

There's a flags folder in there as a .DDS so I can't quickly view it, still don't have the CC suite and most of my other tools installed on the new machine. But what I have is a selection of additional flags when I click on the flag in the UI, and there are a bunch of nice options. Many tend to be kind of European imperial period in look and feel but there is a set of "modern" flags of which the one I'm using is an option. 

Actually here it is:

https://mods.curse.com/ksp-mods/kerbal/221359-fantaisy-flags

nq7nj7hbn7c14x4fg.jpg?size_id=6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

@RocketPCGaming what mods do you use to make the ships?

Those two are primarily Ven's Stock Part Revamp (which mostly re-textures stock parts and adds a few, KW Rocketry, FASA (the launch towers) and Wild Blue Industries - Buffalo Rover & M.O.L.E. And then of course their dependencies. I have a ton more mods installed, but that is where those are from.

3 hours ago, Poodmund said:

Huge image dump incoming! Here's a catalog of the events of my first manned trip to Ceti doing an Apollo style mission on a SLS-like launcher.

aeK3KNk.png

Gallery Link: Here

I hope you enjoy them. :D 

@Poodmund Awesome stuff, Sir! That ALCORS is HAWTNESS!

4 hours ago, Motokid600 said:

Thats the one! I updated GPP without Kopernicus. Thanks so much. However "1.3.0-6". It states -5 in the install Wiki. I am using 1.5 at the moment. Not GPP 1.5.1 Would that make a difference on to use -5 or 6?

Use 1.3.0-6 for either GPP 1.5.0 or 1.5.1 ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, chimpbone said:

@Yakvi, that is the Mk1-2 IVA from forum user alexustas. He also made the A.L.C.O.R., Mk1 cockpit, and Mk1 Landercan IVA's that are all top-notch. He is currently in the process of updating/improving them right now as well. You should certainly check them out. 

 

39 minutes ago, Yakvi said:

That's an amazing gallery @Poodmund! One question: which onboard computer do you use? Pretty sure I haven't seen these visuals/interface in RPM.

o5aMxFg.png

Overall, those IVA cockpits are amazing. Would like to have some source :0.0:

Also Wild Blue Industries M.O.L.E. uses the ASET props as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sooo, update looks like it went well... 

My Iota CommsNetwork is now in orbit around Ceti, and my Ceti comm network is now orbiting Icarus :D And my Gauss and Tarsiss stuff are... Still on Tarsiss and around Gauss so yay everything looks fine :)

Edited by lBoBl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Galileo

You need to fix the netkan:

Add the line which says it provides the loadingscreenmanager

and another line which says it conflicts with the loadingscreenmanager

Actually, you shouldn't install loadingscreenmanager, it should make it a dependency, and then add an extra file with the configs.  I have to go to work, but I'll see if I can get you some info on that, but check the LSM thread for details

 

8 minutes ago, Three_Pounds said:

That can't be right ... Galileo maintains that mod as well so something must have gotten mixed up, I assume.

Ummm, I have no idea, I just installed GPP with CKAN, and it recommended OPM as well

Edited by linuxgurugamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alien™ probe with a Wild Blue solar panel. :P Launched in 2.5x sandbox just to test the lifter's range and discover the new optimal ranges of the SCANsat scanners.

If anyone else plays 2.5x and is interested, the lower altitude scanners (basically all) are still ideal at 750km, but the terrain scanner needs between exactly 1880km and 1999km.

SZyztK8.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Alien™ probe with a Wild Blue solar panel. :P Launched in 2.5x sandbox just to test the lifter's range and discover the new optimal ranges of the SCANsat scanners.

Since we are on that topic. What does FOV 5° mean exactly? Was assuming it was the angle at the scanning instrument and related that to the angle that was being scanned. It was an ugly bit of trigonometry but I got it working and even built a crude optimizer in Excel to have the individual scanner slices perfectly spaced out in relation to the central body rotation. Then I put it into practise and found that wasn't what was happening at all. It seems as if 5° was the angle being scanned, so if the scanner was at let's say 0° longitude on the equator, the sides of the track would be E2.5° and W2.5° respectively. Do you have some insights on that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

@Galileo

I noticed that the CKAN entry recommends OPM when installing this.  Is that correct, and/or necessary?

Yeah, that's correct. Version 1.5+ allows you to install OPM as a secondary system around Grannus. 

Totally optional ofc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Norcalplanner said:

@Poodmund Love the image gallery, especially this one staring down the throat of the "angry alligator":

I believe the "angry alligator" you referenced in the context of the American space program is usually associated with Gemini IX. In this mission, the Americans tried docking to a robotic space craft called ATV. When they finished the rendezvous with it, they found the fairing still attached. One half of it was dangling off to the side looking like the jaws of an "angry alligator" as one of the Astronauts, I believe Tom Stafford, remarked. Unfortunately, that was the end of the docking business as the fairing was covering the docking mechanism on the target and an effort to remove the fairing piece was deemed too risky.

Edited by Three_Pounds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Three_Pounds said:

I believe the "angry alligator" you referenced in the context of the American space program is usually associated with Gemini IX. In this mission, the Americans tried docking to a robotic space craft called ATV. When they finished the rendezvous with it, they found that the fairing was still attached. One half of it was dangling off to the side looking like the jaw of an "angry alligator" as one of the Astronauts, I believe Tom Stafford, remarked. Unfortunately, that was the end of the docking business as the fairing was covering the docking mechanism on the target and an effort to remove the fairing piece was deemed too risky.

You are indeed correct. Thanks for letting me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Three_Pounds said:

Since we are on that topic. What does FOV 5° mean exactly? Was assuming it was the angle at the scanning instrument and related that to the angle that was being scanned. It was an ugly bit of trigonometry but I got it working and even built a crude optimizer in Excel to have the individual scanner slices perfectly spaced out in relation to the central body rotation. Then I put it into practise and found that wasn't what was happening at all. It seems as if 5° was the angle being scanned, so if the scanner was at let's say 0° longitude on the equator, the sides of the track would be E2.5° and W2.5° respectively. Do you have some insights on that?

Actually I was clueless about the FOV. The acronym does mean "field of view" but I didn't think the mod used it so differently to my half-baked concept. Your discovery makes it much easier to visualize the way these scanners work.

I was always aware of one odd thing though. At stock scale, the operating altitudes were the same regardless of the size of other bodies scanned. So 750km up was always if not mostly ideal for the terrain scanner at tiny worlds like Otho's outer moons. It may also apply to giant worlds like Tellumo but I didn't pay enough attention when scanning Tellumo (example, when developing or fixing its biome map) that I can confirm this.

Edited by JadeOfMaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Actually I was clueless about the FOV. The acronym does mean "field of view" but I didn't think the mod used it so differently to my half-baked concept. Your discovery makes it much easier to visualize the way these scanners work.

I was always aware of one odd thing though. At stock scale, the operating altitudes were the same regardless of the size of other bodies scanned. So 750km up was always if not mostly ideal for the terrain scanner at tiny worlds like Otho's outer moons. It may also apply to giant worlds like Tellumo but I didn't pay enough attention when scanning Tellumo (example, when developing or fixing its biome map) that I can confirm this.

Okay, I experimented with the low resolution altimeter some more. And I made a bunch of useful observations. I tried different altitudes and exported the maps and then I counted how many pixels the tracks were wide at the equator. This allowed me to calculate the arc length of the width of the track. I was surprised to find it played no role at all! As long as the scanner was operating I was getting the exact same result. So I tried it at different stock bodies and found there is a relationship between the width of the track and the radius of the central body. Here is what I found:

 

Body Radius Angle
Gilly 13km 51°
Minmus 60km 37°
Ike 130km 22°
Mun 200km 18°
Moho 250km 16°
Duna 320km 14°
Kerbin 600km 12°
Eve 700km 11°
VEd9a1i.png

 

In the diagram you'll see it's actually a pretty clear inverse relationship. I couldn't find a neat curve to fit to it but that's probably because of the crude way I measure the angles. I'm about to dig into the code to find out how exactly ScanSAT determines this.

I guess the lesson to take away from this is the following: Choose the lowest orbit possible that's still covered by the instruments (above the minimum value) and scan away. It doesn't matter the slightest how far away from the body you are. The width of the track will always be the same.

 

Edited by Three_Pounds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, SCANSat operates the best at "Ideal" altitude. If you right-click the instrument, it says if it's "sub-optimal", "Ideal" or "too high!" (it stops working when too high). Still, interesting info, thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...