Chik Sneadlov

I heard there is a free download / upgrade available, enhanced edition or something. Whats available? How do I go about applying it?

Funny you should mention the closeness of the thrust to the mass. At one point it looked like they inhabited the exact same spot on my ship. First time ever. I'm trying to build a squat ship. I'll probably have to stretch it a little. I saw a Manley video called "your gravity has no power over me". He just throws together some parts it seems, and blasts off, setting huge records. I think 50 g's is all that's possible. Top speed can be almost anything as long as you're willing to wait, but the ship under constant full thrust will melt in space if you don't put on radiators. I've had it happen after hours of flight sometimes. Also, you can't thrust while warping in time so it takes forever in real time even at high speeds. What is the best configuration of thrust to center of mass for descents? I'd like to make a powered descent. I am using cheats and empty fuel tanks so I'm very light, but I want a nice stable descent. Empty separatrons and unlimited fuel cheat on = incredible acceleration. You pull 50 g's but you can't slow down or turn them off unless you eject them somehow and then you won't have any power. If you bring along some other type of engine and fuel, you probably won't get to pull 50 g's. Unlimited Fuel cheat alt + f12 I'm talking about a rocket. I've also been using those radiators that expand in the vacuum of space. They work, but I don't know how to make a sleek ship with them. They tend to make the ship look pretty lumpy.

I'm going for high speed or high g's and I'm not against using cheats for this. I've had a lunar can up to 50 g's for awhile and then it overheated and blew up or spun out and blew up or just got into some horrendous never ending oscillations. I've been using empty sepratons and recently I've mounted them on I beams that are mounted on a fuselage radially. I can see where the sepratrons lined up on the beam might not all be angled exactly the same way or the correct way. How do I do it the right way? I've been using the rotate tool. It appears to have spots where it clicks in. Its not like you can have infinite degrees to choose from. If radially mounted fuselages and I beams are a bad idea, I didn't have great luck with mounting on vertical fuselage parts either. Is there some trick I'm missing to get this sort of thing mounted with the perfect angle even though I'm using multiple engines? do I have to choose rigid attachment or whatever? I've tried struts. I thought I knew all about struts, but they aren't working either. I also can't make any sense of the way rockets or the camera behaves these days on the ascent through the atmosphere. The rocket just decides to flip at some point and become uncontrollable. Sometimes you can blame this on air resistance but other times it happens in the vacuum of space and it just doesn't make any sense.

Oh dear, I think you're right. I've made a huge, obvious mistake and I'm going to lose my job at the KSC. I'm up to 2,900,000 m/sec now. Think I might go back to the drawing board. I had a smaller ship yesterday pulling 29 g's. That would get me to light speed faster. I think this is the fastest I've ever gone.

Cheat codes for unlimited fuel and electricity activated. I'm going 3 times the speed of light. Been pulling a steady 20.74 g's since leaving the atmosphere. 8 mammoth liquid fueled engines going full blast the whole way. Had some trouble with previous flights when the fuel tank vaporized after about 40 minutes so this time I've got radiators and extendable radiators. Parts are overheated, but no disassembly so far. I'm finally out of sight of minimus and the mun and closing in on Eve's orbital lines. Movement through the solar system feels slow at this speed because I'm used to accelerating time. I'll be passing the sun on near moho's orbital line, the side that moho comes closest to the sun if I stay on course, but it looks like the sun or something has pulled me of course by about 25 degrees so far. 1+ million meters per second now.

I fiddled around with the ship back on earth. Took the fins and 3 radially mounted fuselage pieces off and tried it with fins near the top pointed down and again pointed up and finally just took off all the fins and put all the lights down under the rocket where the engines are attached. That worked the best, but if you come blazing in in reverse on kerbin and then you apply a lot of thrust to where you hover your computer will go nuts and pointing at retrograde won't mean pointing up, the rocket will tend to spin like a top and swing side to side like a pendulum. Turn off SAS and the spinning will stop but you have to just guess at whats straight up. You almost never get stable, steady descent with gentle movements unless you descend very slowly. Even then it tends to spin. So I built another rocket. I was going to make it very squat, but just putting on the science stuff and payload and it was already getting taller. I had wanted to bring the center of mass closer to the center of thrust, but it just wasn't possible unless that's all you want to do. I also tried putting rcs below as well as above the center of mass. That seemed to help some, but again, limited. Took the new ship to the moon without even going to orbit, thanks once again to cheats for unlimited fuel and electricity. Then I landed near the north pole in the smoothest landing I've ever made in Kerbal. Later I noticed I couldn't deploy my payload or use my science because it told me I had to be stationary to do seismic readings. I noticed the ship constantly rocked, which is not realistic as it's on a tripod of landing gear and tripods do not rock. I thought I'll just move it a few feet and see if I can stop that rocking, but I was careless and oh, I lifted the landing gear thinking it wasn't necessary, but no. It slowly fell on it's side. In my attempt to right it, I snapped off the capsule so that's over. The rest of the ship is roaming around the huge crater on the top of the moon at low thrust. I guess the unlimited fuel cheat applies to the personal rcs jetpack. I got myself going about 400 m/sec and am heading out into space if I don't correct. Just surveying the area. Its neat but I wish there wasn't that pop up and there are vents and rocks now. Don't have the equipment to analyze though. I've been thinking about building a self righting mechanism. Seems like landing is always risky. If you think Kerbal is above criticism, pick up a three legged stool or three legged anything and put it on any kind of ground. Does it wobble once it settles down? No. It can't unless the leg is loose or the ground keeps settling. Kerbal terrain acts weird and its not intended weirdness.

Turns out it was my rcs nozzles that were heating up in the vaccuum of space from running for so long. I don't remember my exact speed. I only have one crew, a pilot. I can't repack chutes and so i don't want to deploy until I'm back on kerbin. I wanted to do a powered descent, ideally. I'm on my way to eve now. Set a maneuver node and chose warp to. Didn't realize until ten minutes later that it was a about 66 years away at the fastest time acceleration or about an hour in real time.

Please pardon my rants if that's what you consider them. Thanks for the replies. I ended up surviving a landing attempt on eeloo, the rocket on it's side. It once again was behaving oddly as I lowered it to the ground. It was in once piece and undamaged this time, but when I tried to take off by sliding it up a hill it exploded several times. (reloads) Talking to myself is actually very helpful. I often figure things out when I try to write about the problem. Of course people on the forum are the best. Fins on the top makes sense for Space x. I put my fins on the bottom because I want to do that gravity turn and I want to be able to control spin and that kind of thing as I lift off from kerbin. It worked fine and in the past this kind of thing has given me no trouble on low gravity planets. I think my COG is only a little higher than my COT. That might be part of the problem. Its my first time running with cheats and a rocket that has 0 fuel weight. With the mammoth engines it accelerates like crazy. Pulling like 29gs at times. I'm pretty sure it would kill astronauts. No blood in the brain. The lower part of the rocket has also started to heat up badly even in deep space. In a vacuum. How can that be? Can i make a gravity turn with just fins on the top? Maybe I should put them on top? Air brakes might work but only on planets with atmosphere. I'm sorry i don't do pictures or video. I've tried it a few times but can't figure out how to set up an account. That's how it went last time. I finally put something on reddit and linked to that and they started griping about me drawing on the image and questioning if i was a robot or something, They have all these rules and they expect you to know everything before you post the first time. I can never remember my passwords for the sites and the software I have to remember doesn't work and I don't understand that either. Kerbal is a great game because of what it can do, but it is also a jerk because of the way things work. Like the editor for example. They give you all these parts and you try to use them the way you want to use them, but they don't snap together. You have to know how to use them or do a lot of trial and error. That's what I did with the small wire frame beam. Tried to attach it to the side of an engine, but it doesn't let me. It attaches to the center of the engine. You can't stack this way. You have to stack vertically from the bottom of a fuel tank or a capsule and then you can break it off and attach it radially to a fuselage. Then you can magically bend all 8 of your assemblies, which is great but also not like anything in reality. You just bend these beams at 90 degrees and they stay welded together and incredibly strong. I've got a save before eeloo. I think I'll just orbit the planet because there really isn't anything interesting down there anyway. Obviously I need to change my rocket design. Then I'll beat it back to kerbin and try to land there. That'll take me a day and a half. Either that or go play with some of those robotic parts. That looks interesting. What would I even want to build? I never know what I'm trying to do with stuff like that. Have the same prob in scrap mechanic and factorio. I need to work under the wing of an expert like Manley.

I'm trying to land on Laythe and I'm using the infinite fuel and electricity cheat. Got myself into a nice tight orbit and picked a land mass. Narrowed my trajectory down to land on solid ground near a crater. So I'm coming down now in reverse. The rocket's light because there is no fuel except infinite fuel. I do have a lot of fins on the bottom and the base is that huge engine with four nozzles, but drained of fuel. The game usually lets me descend quite a ways and then it starts with the spinning. i can stop it manually, but only for a moment and I have other things to do like control my descent speed. I have at times slowed the rocket way down. It still flips. Tends to point right at the land for impact which ends badly for anyone on board. i could deploy my chute, but I wanted to save that for earth or maybe just never use it. I like the idea of powered descent and see no reason why my rocket suddenly decides it has to spin and flip when I'm controlling the descent nicely with the application of thrust. I've tried turning off SAS. That cures the spinning problem but the rocket still tends to flip and become uncontrollable. I need it to point in the direction opposite to it's trajectory so that I can apply thrust and slow down. It works on the moon but not on Laythe, maybe because it has an atmosphere. To me it feels like the game thinks the rocket should be hurtling through atmosphere when its actually creeping. The game is thinking, I'm flying through an atmosphere in reverse and I'm unstable and stuff so I've got to go into a death spin because I'm the game and i insist that you use a parachute or a plane if you want to land on a planet with atmosphere. In other words the game is a jerk. Edit: No ones here. fine. I'll talk to myself. I've crash landed on Laythe. Stopped the spinning by turning off SAS, but when I got very low the rocket still wanted to flip and it ended up crashing on it's side. My Kerbal survived, but am now stranded. I think the aerodynamics being all wrong are part of the problem, but Space X has similar aerodynamics and they've been landing. It should work. Edit 2 I reloaded and lowered myself very fast. Then I gave it high thrust for a brief period and managed to lower my incoming speed greatly. The rocket swung back and forth. I managed to apply thrust at critical points and land on my landing gear at a pretty high speed. Probably around 50m per second. My landing gear consist of long structural beams that radiate out and down and are nearly as wide as the rocket is tall so the rocket bounced and settled down. I destroyed a few short segments of my landing gear but its still usable. Due to high gravity I was unable to exit the craft as I'd never be able to climb back up and the jet pack isn't powerful enough to get me to the capsule. I found that out on a previous crash. I took off after awhile and I don't think there was any damage to the engine nozzles or the fins. However, the rocket flew bizarrely. I think the atmosphere is unusually thick because the rocket heated up really fast. I had to throttle down and I had a lot of trouble going in the direction that I wanted to go. The rocket kept swinging around. Is this caused by gravity from Jool? Jool is very close, quite huge and moving. I managed to get out of the atmosphere and right away the rocket started to behave itself so i think the atmosphere and the game engine are to blame for all the bizarre behavior.

This is probably not the song that comes to mind when you think of Ray Charles but its a good one, especially after three listenings. By the end of the song he's worked himself up so much that he looks like he's shuddering with the cold sweats and nausea from the agony of loss. (or something) https://youtu.be/QzT46g-my0U?list=LLLxT_uclQqI4KcOC10TwDyw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGjflhMxjyM&index=106&list=LLLxT_uclQqI4KcOC10TwDyw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbLzALqryLY&list=RDEbLzALqryLY Its da staple

You mean Fairport Convention was one of the bands on your tape, but you didn't know the band's name until now?

I just clicked on this song the other day. I'd heard of them but never listened and they didn't get much radio time. The very sweet sounding singer was a bit of a drunk. She fell down the stairs, hit her head and died a few days later. That was about forty years ago. Who knows where the time goes indeed Was also reading about some South American poet, songwriter musician, a friend of Dylan. The army chopped his hands off and shot him 40 times. I think it was on live tv. Manduka just happened to pop up as suggested listening. The first song really sets a mood.

It was a huge ship with a Kerbal piloting it. That's probably it, Harry and HvP, the filter options. I totally forgot. Been doing the scenarios to try to familiarize myself with RCS controls while docking. Its the first time I've ever done scenarios. I just did a survey of Eeloo scenario. A you tuber doing the same scenario gets a button under the "i" button that I don't. I don't get that info about ore. I see the different overlays and I assume the bright pinkish or reddish areas have the most ore, but...

I decided to try docking with a fuel station in space during sandbox mode. I set it as a target and got very close, but never actually touched it as far as I know. I reentered Kerbin, landed and recovered. Then I went back up in a new rocket and the fuel station was no longer there. Its no longer there no matter how many times I launch new rockets. Do you "use up" a space station when you try to dock with it? I think I might have got into the fuel station at one point, but it was in a pretty stable orbit about 600 km up. I don't think taping it or taping the thrusters would have changed much of anything.

I tried your pyramid or cone. I built sort of a wireframe of half a dome because it had to go out and then down and I didn't want the upper engine blowing on the lower engine. (I think that would cancel the thrust but don't know if there's a visual of that) I built 8 legs with 5 engines each. Then I built a tower and put on gigantor solar. I launched at night and got into the sun, but it wasn't enough thrust and I went into the dark side of the planet. Then I launched into the sun and against the spin of the earth. That worked better, especially since I added eight more legs full of engines. I could burn at a quarter of power and not run out near earth, which is pretty good, but I need more thrust and more electricity. The first important thing is that I got rid of the shaking problem by using a lot of struts and placing them carefully so that the radial parts don't start to twist. Saw a video of rockets with wide radial parts and the outer SRB's for instance will be at an angle to the vertical rocket. This catches the wind and turns the rocket into a huge air screw. The radial parts can also start to oscillate if it gets into a harmonic situation, which is what I think causes the shaking. I don't think that putting the engines too close together is the problem right now. Its putting them close together and having the frame of the rocket twisting and then the oscillating. My problem now is lag and the computer shutting it down because it can't handle the large number of parts. Once the first stage is away the computer works a lot better. I was thinking I needed actuators to make a frame that can unfold in space for my solar farm, but I'm now thinking I'd be better off building a space station with snap together parts. Build the long range xenon ship with tons of solar in orbit by sending up the parts in huge ships that just have to orbit earth. That way I won't have to deal with the computer crashing because the ship has so many parts on earth and I can build huge frames in space because there's no gravity or air resistance. All I have to do is plan and build everything perfectly, send it up, put it into precise circular orbits and think of everything and then go up there, learn to dock and assemble and then take off with a ship with enough solar that it runs on full power. Probably won't take more than 20 rl years.

I didn't know ions were especially prone to this problem. I probably should try to scale it down. I just like to build in huge numbers. I've already got an idea in my head and It isn't compact. Thanks

I understand the game thinks that way. That's not the current problem. The problem is shaking that wasn't happening a few hours ago. I have a lot of those nuclear electrical generators attached to a piece of structural tubing and the SAS on top with the capsule. I just put that with all its maybe 50 nuke generators attached radially and it just blows up from shaking so hard while sitting on the launchpad. I took off all the generators. I have a lot of engines that are clipping together under the battery. I do this all the time with different engines and it isn't a problem. This time the whole thing is shaking. A few hours ago I launched this thing into a nearly perfect circular orbit. Now it just blows up on the launch pad. I take parts off it blows up again. It drives me nuts. I put so many parts on there because Xenon engines are so weak. I have to use a lot of them. I like xenon because its so efficient. I thought I was on my way to building a two stage rocket that could visit most of planets without needing more fuel. I thought I was using a lot less parts than other projects, but it just always ends in disaster and frustration with KSP. Earlier I thought the parts weren't connected. Now I think the violent shaking has broken the bonds. Its like my rocket yesterday that was parked on Gilly. I came back to it and it suddenly jumped up into space. It went up 12 km! thats after I made it indestructible with the cheats. Before that it just blew to smithereens.

This is built like a tree. In my last lines I was thinking back to another incident in the last week where I was trying to build a ring out of Modular Girder Segments XL . The current problem is with xl modular girder segments attached radially to a fuel tank. The MGSs are almost horizontal and they appear to be touching each other. Both parts lit green, but on the launchpad they aren't attached and they're rotating around the rocket inside the payload fairing. It sucks. I spent a lot of time after watching a video on how to cure the rotating rocket problem. I very carefully attached struts so they're as close to centered and equal on each side of a part if necessary. The game fought me the whole way with the mysterious, "Oh sure we'll look like we're going to attach, but when you actually snap in place we won't or we'll attach to something else" thing that KSP likes to do.

I've never run into this before. Usually when I do a butt joint on a couple of modular girder struts it fuses even if I don't bother to get the nodes facing each other. This time, I looked inside my payload area and not only are things not fused, they are also slowly rotating which results in my rocket rotating and as i get going faster the whole thing blows up. I take it to the VAB and everything looks fine. I thought I read that there is a key to hold down that shows you if anything is broken, but I don't remember what it is. Sounds like a great feature. I also mounted an engine on a modular girder strut and then mounted that assembly on the bottom of an inline battery. Half of those are also floating around inside the payload area before launch. Yes. I put too many engines on and it gets hard to see. That screw up is a little more understandable, but it had been working fine. In fact this rocket had been working pretty good. I had it in orbit, but it didn't get there smooth enough. I had to keep modifying it. I used the subassembly thing. They have a thing in Scrap Mechanic. Its called welding. Works pretty nice. You can see sparks shoot out where all your stuff connects so you know its joined. You can take a thing and weld it to something else, which seems pretty obvious. Not in KSP. You can't pick up a part and pull it over to another and join it in a ring.

Yea. "ease in gravity" is lit up. I've got max debris I don't have "tidy up debris". Seems to me that used to be a good idea. I'll try alt + f12 Okay. I have tried the alt + f12 cheat. As my eva guy approached the rocket it jumped into space. I guess it worked. It didn't explode. Now I have to wait for it to come back down and I'm almost out of propellant. Why does my eva guy keep changing direction? I think he's going from maneuvering on the ground to orbit, but it is making it hard for me to aim him and I waste a lot of mp with all these transitions.

Landed on Gilly with a big rocket and went EVA. I was on steeper terrain than I'd have wanted and I appear to be touching a big boulder with my feet and maybe other parts. So I was trying to fly get back to the ship with my EVA guy and at one point I went to the tracking station and got into the landed ship. It might be the ship slid downhill since I'd left it. As soon as gravity or whatever kicked in the ship violently blew up sending my command module way up and parts spinning wildly. Tried it a number of times and always the same, big explosion. Tried reloading and it exploded. My guess is that the rocket slid very slowly against this boulder and it sort of builds up stresses, which get real and concentrated when I focus on the ship or try to take control of the ship. I'm guessing there's no easy way to fix this. I need to land on level terrain, away from boulders.

I am getting MP to my MP thrusters. In the overlay they used gray for MP. I don't know if they know this but in gaming when something like that is gray, it usually means that it isn't working, isn't getting fuel, but of all the colors they chose gray anyway. I had a problem earlier where MP was being drained from my rover while in flight. I thought I fixed that by turning off crossfeed at the appropriate docking port, which I'm using now as a connector. My tanks drained right this time and they even ejected like they were supposed to. I landed on my feet intact like I'd intended for the first time (while staying up). This impressed the heck out of me because I was on a steep slope and my entire rocket started sliding down the slope with the rover mounted on top. Devilishly clever, I used Cubic Octagonal Struts in the VAB to create a rocket stand which I attached to the bottom of my huge landing ship. Sure, I could land with a little thing but I want to prepared for when it comes time to impress aliens. If they creators had any sense of humor they'd have given us a horn that sounds like the tripods in War of the Worlds. My Cubic Octagonal Struts got me thinking about drag. Do they create drag when on the exterior of a rocket? Inside a payload fairing? I've assumed the payload fairing is to prevent drag from exposed parts to the smoother drag of a shell. How about the SRBs under the huge fairing. Are they protected from drag or should I put a nosecone on each one? I ran into the rocket jumping off the ground on reload glitch. That's messed up. I managed to re-land once, but I get tired of having to re-land every time my rocket jumps because of a save. I tried to turn the graphics up once on the surface, but that caused the game to crash. Crashing seems worse than ever. Earlier I had crashes when staging and then spontaneous explosions while staging. Too many parts. Gotta get more efficient. Gotta pop the payload before separating the boosters because somehow the boosters are jumping up and wrecking the fairing and rocket. One big problem solved was all the bizarre changes in course I was taking as the rocket accelerated. stiffening the payload by putting struts from the fairing to the boosters and the core rocket improved this situation about 95%. I think the payload was swinging from side to side and getting into a harmonic situation. I actually saw this happening when I built a smaller rocket that didn't lag as bad. Not much to see once you're on the moon with your intact rover (for all of the 30 seconds they last before flipping on an invisible rock), but what a thrill to finally be getting things together. Great game and great folks on the forum and YT helping me out. I'd never make it without them. Yesterday I launched my first payload of a big rocomax fuel tank. I was surprised to find I was draining fuel from it as I flew. I ejected it once successfully with seperatrons but the next time I had rotated the module or something and the separatrons were pointed the wrong way. I left the doors open while in a vacuum and undocked the tank and it slid out easily on its own when I accelerated. Maybe next time use a landing gear to eject it or a solar panel. The rover detached and slid off easily too, landing on it's wheels. Next time I'll try out my sky crane. Even with graphics turned way down, I still get lag when I hit a certain part count. Explosions seem to cause problems. Be nice if there was a way to turn down that effect and keep the arrows on my fuel lines although I guess I don't really need those anymore.

KSP lagged so much I turned everything way down. Now I can't see the arrows on the fuel lines and my tanks aren't draining the way I thought they would. First off, I thought I didn't need fuel lines for tanks mounted on decouplers that are mounted on big fuel tanks but now it seems like I do need those fuel lines. Also, my monopropellant lines are grayed out. I thought I was getting mono to everything before just by putting mono tanks on top of fuel tanks and making sure that crossfeed was enabled. I look at the fuel overlay and I see arrows going to the center of the rocket and arrows going up and arrows going down. This is supposed to clarify things? Why, after 5 years have they not learned to consolidate all SRBs to one SRB in the staging stack? Such an obvious thing. I really don't need to see every single SRB 99% of the time. The mouse wheeling is awful and you can't tell what's going to happen next during launch because its just SRB after SRB. Awful lag with big rockets and you can't see what's going on, but you forever running out of fuel which makes you add more SRBs. Endless cycle.

The title is "In theory" and I clearly set some "rules" for this hypothetical situation right there. In this problem the atmosphere and orbit are precise and they never vary. It doesn't matter how the real world really is, this is a hypothetical question. So in this place the atmosphere does end at exactly 100,000 feet. The orbit is circular and exactly 100,009 feet. I'm no expert and I'm not orbiting when I drive a car, but let me just point out that there is gravity, which pulls towards the center of the earth and 100,000 feet probably doesn't affect gravity much so wouldn't anything "dropped" out of a spacecraft also be pulled toward the center of the earth? Your reply makes it sound as though the rope and clothing would go up and away from earth and back. Then you assumed I "pushed" which sounds like you're thinking of every action causes an equal and opposite reaction. If I'm driving in a car I'm above the earth by about 3 feet and if I'm going 30mph and I let a piece of rope hang out it might drift back, but that's because its hitting the atmosphere. In my original situation I'm in the precise space vacuum so there is nothing to drag the rope back. As long as the rope is in vacuum it should hang perpendicular to the ship pointing at the center of the earth. If I drop it even further, lets say to exactly 99,999 feet it will hit the top 1 foot of very thin atmosphere. I can see this would cause the rope to drift back but its because it is encountering atmosphere. Is there gravity just above the atmosphere? I would say yes, but your response seems to ignore gravity while focusing on other parts of Newton's laws, like the reaction of the craft to me "pushing" the rope out. I don't have to push the rope. It falls because of gravity. I just release the rope and "toilet waste". Also, why do people assume I don't pull the rope back in if it starts to heat up? The air at the top is very, very thin, I doubt it will heat rope up much in a second and it will drag back just like if I was hanging a rope out my car window because it encountering friction with the air whereas my space vehicle is not yet encountering friction. It is still in a vacuum. Eventually, it will slow because of the drag of the rope, but that will take quite a bit of time, assuming the ship and I are of substantially greater mass. And sure, once the ship starts to hit the atmosphere it will slow even more and fall even more and heat up dramatically but that will take awhile. Can we agree that a 8 foot rope hanging from a craft in vacuum hangs straight down from a ship in vacuum when we are at an altitude of 100,009? The rope would not drift back or up at all since it is in a perfect vacuum even though it and the ship are moving thousands of mph. The first thing I looked up was the temperature at high altitudes and I was shocked to find that there are places with very high temperatures. Most places high up are very cold. I don't know how big these high temperature areas are or widespread. I don't think they belong in this problem because they aren't uniform and they don't have much to do with gravity, vacuums and orbits. How could any space program survive if the earth's high atmosphere is full of vast areas at 3000 degrees F? Sure, ships heat up as they reenter but that's because of friction with atmosphere the result of an object hitting something at high speed.