OhioBob

No known bugs or problems. JNSQ is perfectly safe to use.

@linuxgurugamer, the version of NH that I'm using doesn't work in 1.8.1 either, and I downloaded it before you merged Greg's stuff. It hangs up on the main menu screen.

That would be another way to compensate (good thinking). The only problem with your suggestion, however, is that every atmosphere I've done so far is based on the flux at Kerbin being 1360 W/m2. If it were to change, the already completed atmospheres would have to be redone.

Yes, I think so. Although there was certainly artistic license taken in some cases, for the most part I tried to make sure there was real life justification behind what we did. For instance, we have a couple celestial bodies with methane lakes and another with a liquid nitrogen ocean. For those I made certain the temperature and atmospheric pressure on those bodies was adequate to support those liquids on the surface. There are a few things we did that are borderline, but if something was way out of the realm of possibility, we didn't do it. We tried to balance realism with just making it cool and fun. Both GPP and JNSQ lean more toward realism than does stock KSP. The things in stock that have always bugged me for not being very realistic were fixed in JNSQ. I can see the logic behind what was done in New Horizons, and for the most part it make sense. I'm not going to criticize it for not being realistic because it was never intended to be ultra realistic. It's a simple reorganization of the stock bodies to provide something new and different. In that regard it succeeds wonderfully. It goes without saying that if a body is moved from the outer system to the inner solar system, or vice versa, its temperature and atmosphere is going to change. But the original designer wasn't concerned with that. He just wanted to take a body that everyone knew and was familiar with and put it in a different location. No other changes where made other than the relocation. I find no fault with that, it served a purpose. But now that I'm redoing the atmospheres in a more realistic manner, some of the issues that were previously ignored are starting to surface. By the way, I'm changing the atmospheres via a patch file rather than editing the original configs. That way if somebody wants to play New Horizons using the legacy atmospheres, they can just delete my file and it will go back to the way it was. (Though there are a few things in the original configs that should be fixed regardless.)

The other body for which I might have a similar problem is Eve. Even in stock KSP Eve is too hot for liquid water, but in New Horizons Eve is even hotter. Of course the usual explanation for Eve's oceans is that they're not water, but perhaps a hydrocarbon of some type. In the case of stock Eve the temperature and pressure is just about right for heavy hydrocarbons to exist as liquid on its surface. I haven't investigated yet how plausible it is with the hotter Eve. I might have to raise its albedo too to bring the temperature down. We'll see.

A magnetic field would deflect changed particles, but not radiant heat. Raising Laythe's albedo would bring it's temperature down. For instance, if Laythe had an albedo of 0.75 (rather than the default 0.3), that would be enough to bring it's temperature down to something earthlike. But to have an albedo that high would mean Laythe would be completely covered by clouds. I suppose that's possible, but it's not the way Laythe is depicted in game. I could change Laythe's albedo and recompute the atmosphere accordingly. I'm now leaning toward this as our solution. It would provide a realistic explanation for the lower temperature and the existence of oceans. The only discrepancy then would be the visual depiction of Laythe with EVE clouds, where the cloud cover is much too sparse.

@linuxgurugamer @GregroxMun, I'm about halfway finished with the atmospheres, but I'm now running into some issues that I want to get your opinions on. As I always do, I'm trying to make these atmospheres reasonably realistic. That's not really a problem for most of the planets, but since the stock planets have been moved from their original positions, this is creating some inconsistencies that cannot be realistically explained. To assure that Kerbin remains earthlike, I've assumed that the solar flux at Kerbin is the same as it is in stock (1360 W/m2). From that I've computed the solar flux at other planets (using inverse square law) and computed those planets' effective temperatures. The effective temperature then becomes the basis for developing a global temperature model. An atmospheric planet really can't be any cooler than its effective temperature (it is typically hotter due to greenhouse effect). One of the first planets I worked on was Laythe. In New Horizons Laythe has been moved from being a moon of Jool to being a planet inside the orbit of Kerbin (the orbit of Sonnah actually since Kerbin is now a moon). When I compute Laythe's effective temperature I get a value of 328 K, with the temperature at daytime noon above the boiling point of water. At these temperatures, Laythe could never retain its oceans, they would have evaporated long ago. So that's my quandary, we have a planet that could never exist in real life in its current state. So what to do about it? We could change Laythe to a dry desert world, but I don't think changing the planets in that way is the intent behind New Horizons. I could change the planet's temperature to something that would be conducive to an ocean world, but that would be unrealistic and inconsistent with the planet's position relative to the sun. Or we could just marry the realistic atmosphere to the existing planet and not worry about the inconsistency, or try to explain it. Opinions? I think my preference is for the last option. Just compute the atmospheres realistically (which is what I have been doing so far), slap them on the planet, and don't worry about what conflicts may arise.

Are you using a thermometer? The thermometer doesn't read the ambient temperature, it reads the temperature of the thermometer. So the temperature reading can be affected by the orientation of the vessel. For instance, greater exposure to the sun will read a higher temperature. If you want to read the true ambient temperature, I recommend using the Aero GUI from the cheat menu.

As I understand it, this is the order of execution: :FIRST :LEGACY (or any patch without a tag) :BEFORE[A] :FOR[A] :AFTER[A] :BEFORE[Z] :FOR[Z] :AFTER[Z] :LAST[A] :LAST[Z] :FINAL I'm not sure how important FOR is, though I typically use FOR[MyMod]. I do know that FOR is one of the things Kopernicus uses to identify something as a mod so that other mods can reference it using BEFORE and AFTER. But it's not the only way. I believe that any folder in GameData is tagged as a mod and can be referenced using BEFORE/AFTER. So I don't think FOR is strictly necessary. But using FOR[MyMod] definitely tags "MyMod" as a mod that can be referenced, and that's regardless of whether there is a "MyMod" folder in GameData or not.

@GregroxMun, I didn't know you had a version. I don't keep tabs on what others are doing. I just volunteered to help out when I got a ping from LGG, basically I'm a sub-contractor. If you guys want to team up, that's fine with me.

Yes, the atmospheres. Not the whole mod. lol While I'm working on it, if I see anything else that needs revision I'll let you.

@linuxgurugamer, I've looked over the atmospheres. If it were my mod, I'd scrap it all and start over. I just don't see enough there worth salvaging. But that's just me, I like things realistic. If you don't care about realism, I could probably just fix the few problems already addressed and leave it at that. I don't mind redoing things - now it actually a good time for me to work on it. Just give me the word and I'll get started. If you don't want a complete overhaul, then let me know and I'll just patch things up a little bit.

I'll take a look. If they're not too bad I'll probably just tweak them. But if something looks really out of whack, I may have to redo it.

Although I've heard of New Horizons, I really know nothing about it. I just downloaded it and started familiarizing myself with it a little bit. I'm I correct in understanding that all the stock planets still exist with Kerbin as the home world? It appears that everything gets moved around with some new planets added. If I work on the atmospheres, how much are you looking to change them? I can basically leave them as is and just make a few tweaks here and there to fix any problems, or I can start from scratch and completely redo them. I guess it depends on whether you want to stay true to the original mod, or prefer to do a realism overhaul.

I don't know anything about this mod, but @Kerbolox is right in that atmosphereMolarMass = 0.00018 is unrealistic. If there is anything you want to look at, or make new atmospheres for these planets, just let me know. I'm happy to help out. He's probably also right about staticPressureASL. Many old mods don't use this because it wasn't a thing in very earlier versions of the game. You have to be careful in what numbers you use for this, however, because the home world value is used in the computation of engine ISP. There's a trick to it, I can explain further if you need help.

UPDATE Version 1.1.3 Changelog Added custom science definitions, by @darwinpatrick. Activated Kopernicus solar panels for GEP_JNSQ. See opening post for download link and instructions.

This should do it... @Kopernicus:AFTER[modName] { @Body[bodyName] { @Properties { %sphereOfInfluence = 30000 } } }

A 1.8.1 version is planned, it's just not ready yet. 1.8.x required a lot of changes, and the people who make those changes are really busy right now. I wouldn't expect anything for another couple weeks.

I can do that. I'll send you a private message when I have the files set up.

There are several descriptions in GEP where I required two versions, one for secondary and one for primary (Grannus and Nodens for instance). So making it switch from one description to another is not that big of a deal. But, of course, I'd need an alternate set of science definitions. If you'd be willing to provide the extra definitions, I'm sure I can set it all up and make it work. I've got another release planned, but probably not for another couple of weeks. I'll probably wait until after the new Kopernicus is released. Is that enough time? I'm sure I'll never be able to test all 1800 if them. lol Do you recall which ones specifically where giving you trouble?

That is awesome! I can't believe you did that. Custom science definitions where never on my to do list because I thought they where just too much work. I'm definitely going to have to check this out. If I like what I see, would you be agreeable to incorporating it into GEP?

Solar Panel fix for GEP_JNSQ... This is no longer an issue in GEP v1.1.3.

I don't know why you're getting this bug. I'm hoping it's because these celestial bodies were added into an already existing game. Had you started a new game after installing the GEP update, I suspect things would work as normal. If there is anyway you could test that I would welcome seeing the results. But please don't feel an obligation, it's not you job to test my mods.

UPDATE Version 1.1.2 Changelog For GEP_JNSQ: Added Red Esther sunflare by @JadeOfMaar, to match JNSQ art style. Used JNSQ's water texture for Nodens in place of stock texture. Increased maxLevel for better terrain detail and scatter density. Deleted maxScatter multiplier. Adjusted navballSwitchRadius. Changed Grannus' semimajor axis. This update changes GEP_JNSQ only, other installation options are unchanged. See opening post for download link and instructions.

@Galileo has changed the GitHub repo status to Private. Not sure why, it makes no sense having a mod that people can't download. He needs to either change it back to Public, or we need to set up an alternate download site.