8556732

@Corax hi 97M points is huge, even for a program such as quick grid, the interpolation of such is going to be pretty damn long. I\'m downloading it now, and will leave it to grid. I don\'t think I\'ve ever interpolated so many points, this is pretty damn impressive stuff!

So that survey is in-effect the same as a guy walking round with a gps and reading out data? Nice! As I say... I have no interest in data acquisition, just the display and interpretation of it! You can keep your title for this reason If we compile a CSV or even just an excel spreadsheet of named locations we can produce some nice looking global maps. The low resolution data should be sufficient for this I\'m not saying yours aren\'t nice looking... but i get to play with the expensive software What we do need though is an agreement on the relative geoid\'s of these bodies. if we want proper maps (which I\'m guessing you guys do) then someone should do the maths related to them. I\'ve already done some sums, and I get: Munar Degree = 3481m @equator Minmusar Degree = 1047m @equator Kerbal Degree = 10,444m @equator I\'ve used these to work out the relative z-scaling factors for each planet, so that maps can be properly projected. This is using the games in-built Lat/Long, so in effect it is re-discovering the wheel I imagine standard world-based projections will suffice, with the appropriate z-conversion If anyone can get that data from config files it could save time! (if it\'s not in the spirit of RP, I apologise!)

Hey Togfox, Can you confirm this image as your flight path over the North pit? https://www.dropbox.com/s/udmp51h6j474y74/Screen1.png If that\'s the case, then I have used kriging as a method of interpolation, as there are large gaps in the data. This results in a grid that differs to yours somewhat (I believe QuikGRID uses a linear interpolation, kriging is much more robust for data that isn\'t regularly sampled): https://www.dropbox.com/s/xpnvxvkqm2xola3/tod1-DEM.jpg Contour Map: https://www.dropbox.com/s/q78s0oxewu5pfl7/tod1-cont.jpg You had a number of varying altitudes recorded for some points, I have used the mean of these when gridding. I have not smoothed the DEM to remove the errors; I recommend you only use the models from within the outer wall of the pit. As you can see, the errors are typically outside your flight paths, and hence represent nodata. I have some further analysis for you: Slope Angle - I\'ve had to do some maths to work out the conversion factor for Munar decimal degrees to metres, if anyone else wants details on this I can illustrate them in another post. Here\'s the results though, classifications are rough (lots of useless decimal places) as I don\'t have time this afternoon to tidy the histograms up: https://www.dropbox.com/s/qbd7z3dk5yq578t/tod1-slope.jpg And with contours: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ftux3mpboj2eqce/tod1-slope2.jpg Slope Direction https://www.dropbox.com/s/6owb8dn3e3oa4kq/tod1-aspect.jpg And finally, where I recommend for landing/exploration (in red) https://www.dropbox.com/s/ivx8oycvni1qxqy/tod1-lessdeg.jpg These areas appear (at least from your survey!) to be worthy of further survey/exploration. How\'s that for you? I\'ve just realised the large size of the maps (oops!). This is due to my default output of 600Dpi for large poster work (I will change this for future)

Don\'t worry about that, the effort seems pretty immense. Is the survey tool only limited to planetary wide swaths? Or can the data acquisition be limited to a certain region? What I\'m basically saying is can you do a high res survey of difficult regions such as yours, or do you need it to be planet-wide. I should probably do one myself...

I\'ll get on it tomorrow morning for ya as I need sleep ???. The surveys we currently have might not be high enough resolution - the roughness shown in the screenshot will probably be smoothed by any gridding action. But I will give you a gridded map of the area you have indicated that you can use to your hearts content. What colour ramp would you like your terrain in? Greyscale? Psychedelic? Rainbow? I\'ll give it a stab for you, I can predict that the large depressions and slopes will show up, but you will lose the finer lumps and bumps. This is pretty common, even with high resolution real satellite data. On a side note, this is quite funny as I know a guy currently doing this sort of analysis off coast of Norway... they\'re deciding how to divide the borders of the Arctic up!

@Rich Seems I\'m late to the party! Ha, well without encroaching on what you currently have, I could offer GIS if you wish. Effectively you are building one into the game, by adding the place names physically (an idea which I love, as you can easily mechjeb yourself to a feature!). However, if you want alternatives I can provide these. I\'m interested to know what method of gridding/interpolation quikgrid uses. I\'ve used nat-neighbour for mine - it doesn\'t really matter much as the spatial resolution is so low, its just a query as I have never seen that program before! @Togfox Yeah they have a pretty steep learning curve, but are incredibly useful, and generally massive time savers. I would keep the data in a geodatabase, which I could export to CSV in any header format you wish. To be honest, discovering and naming these places isn\'t really my cup of tea. I just saw the remote sensing that you guys have managed to achieve, and figured I might be able to help/offer skills. However, you seem to already have done/are doing much of it! The elevation maps seem to provide targets for further exploration, and I can offer terrain analysis of any that are produced. This could be slope angle maps (maybe useful for identifying possible landing/base sites), Aspect Ratio Maps (for quantitatively defining mountainous regions), Volumetrics, Potential Hydrology.... etc. In the case of defining mountainous regions, it would be a simple process to define what classifies as a mountain based upon a global relative aspect ratio, and then auto-generate a map of the mountainous areas. This could then be explored in kerpson (kerbal person lol!) to confirm if the areas are indeed what the computer says. Just an idea for ya, and as I say its a quick 5-10 min job for me. I simply set up a workflow with the parameters we decide and bam its done. I had a really crazy/stupid idea of running a hydrological analysis on Kerbin, and producing a prediction map of rivers. This would serve as an actual working map! Just an idea, being as we currently don\'t have rivers on the surface!

Hello all, this post might seem a bit facetious, but I think it is worth mentioning. I believe that the construction of a geographical information system (GIS) for each body is necessary to allow the proper designation of names for features, and labelling of such in a geospatial reference frame. There are plenty of free GIS softwares, and if people do not have experience with this, then I can assist. It\'s just an idea at the moment, does anyone else have experience with this? What I am Basically Proposing is... That every landmark is given to me in coordinate and name form, and placed into a spreadsheet. I can then display this and produce up to date maps of named/discovered features for each body, and their location. These maps would take me a matter of minutes to produce and update, and could be generated weekly if we wanted. I am currently producing a raster of the CSV data for Minmus, as an illustration. It\'s similar to Dani and togfox\'s maps, but I have added a grid, and contours of the surface. It\'s pretty ugly as it is late where I am, (1am!) but I can make them pretty if people wish. Credit goes to Dani and togfox +others for the data production; this is some real science! https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqyxe5qz8azyuzc/Map1.jpg I should mention that I use ESRI ArcGIS, and Surfer for my gridding and raster production, and it is within these programs that I would be willing to create a GIS.