[1.1.2] Real Solar System Expanded (0.14.0)

[Einkleinermensch]

But how strong it affects real-life things like, umm, dV maps? Does your approximation allow mission planning using real data?

[ImkSushi]

4 minutes ago, Einkleinermensch said:

But how strong it affects real-life things like, umm, dV maps? Does your approximation allow mission planning using real data?

The orbits are all the same as in real life, so dV requirement will differ. HOWEVER, using real life trajectories for rockets may or may not work, most of my figures are for the J2000 Ecliptic. You are best off planning your own missions by using transfer window stuff like Kerbal Alarm Clock, and launching to get slingshots for when the transfer windows line up more or less correctly.

[Einkleinermensch]

Oh, have you changed Moon's orbit? But 5 degrees is an inclination relative to ecliptics, not to Earth' equator. Relative to equator it's around 26 degrees, which makes missions from Cape Canaveral easy to get there.

Edited May 17, 2016 by Einkleinermensch

[ImkSushi]

Just now, Einkleinermensch said:

Oh, have you changed Moon's orbit? But 5 degrees is an inclination relative to ecliptics, not to Earth' equator. Relative to equator it around 26 degrees, which makes missions from Cape Canaveral easy to get there.

I'll see what I can do.

[MatterBeam]

I'm going to start an RSS Outer Planets playthrough soon, so I'm very interested in what you've done so far!

[NathanKell]

All epehemera should be via JPL HORIZONS using Earth-equatorial coordinates. Anything else will be rather messed up.

[ImkSushi]

4 hours ago, NathanKell said:

All epehemera should be via JPL HORIZONS using Earth-equatorial coordinates. Anything else will be rather messed up.

Ah. I was wondering what was being used.

Also, do you know how the ring radii work, i.e. 2500=80000km? or something like that?

Edited May 18, 2016 by ImkSushi

[Phineas Freak]

10 hours ago, ImkSushi said:

Also, do you know how the ring radii work, i.e. 2500=80000km? or something like that?

IIRC the inner and outer radius values are added to the planet radius value (e.g. Planet_Radius + Inner_Ring_Radius).

[ImkSushi]

40 minutes ago, Phineas Freak said:

IIRC the inner and outer radius values are added to the planet radius value (e.g. Planet_Radius + Inner_Ring_Radius).

Nope, the rings are higher than 1.25-2.5km above Saturn, nearer 80000km.

Edited May 18, 2016 by ImkSushi

[ImkSushi]

Sorry for the lack of updates. Computer had a rather annoying virus.

[curiousepic]

On 5/17/2016 at 3:40 PM, ImkSushi said:

No, I removed that 'axial tilt', because of this logic:

With that extra inclination, ALL bodies were extra inclined, and so all but one was rather wrong;
Without that extra inclination, NO bodies were extra inclined, and so all but one was almost right;

If you think about it, it is logical.

I'm confused by your response to Einkleinermensch. So is it intended that Enceladus is changed from inclination 0.009 to 29.239?

Edited May 20, 2016 by curiousepic

[ImkSushi]

I'm Busy^TM tonight and Saturday day, so I will release an update patch/thing on Sunday hopefully.

Poll!

http://www.strawpoll.me/10263601

Edited May 20, 2016 by ImkSushi

[Einkleinermensch]

So, what are you going to do in a next update? Would you handle inclinations of planets relative to Sun's equator or like @NathanKell said relative to Earth using JPL data?

[MikiCPH]

is it coming out in stock scale?

[Phineas Freak]

10 hours ago, Einkleinermensch said:

So, what are you going to do in a next update? Would you handle inclinations of planets relative to Sun's equator or like @NathanKell said relative to Earth using JPL data?

I would think that it would be better for @ImkSushi to stick with the Earth as a reference point since this is an expansion aimed for RSS.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Phineas Freak

[Gannaf]

Love this expansion but would also much prefer earth to have seasons(read: axial tilt).

Great stuff, thanks for taking on the job! Also kudos to original author.

[ImkSushi]

Breaking news!

Rumour has it that by 22:00 BST today, update 0.14.1 will be released. It is unknown how reliable this is, but the maintainer of the mod says:

Quote

It may or may not happen by then, but in order to meet my deadline, I might have to leave out coding in the new Saturn Rings due to unforseen flickery bugs it causes, but it may or may not be left in the textures file.

I guess we'll all have to wait and see. The question is, will rings come in 0.15.0 or 0.14.2?

[PingTe]

is this supposed to happen?

Thats no moon....

[ImkSushi]

On 24/05/2016 at 6:09 PM, PingTe said:

is this supposed to happen?

Thats no moon....

Which celestial bodies are those, and what mods do you have as well.

[HerrGeneral]

The orbital inclinations are definitely incorrect- while they are correct relative to the ecliptic, standard RSS is designed to have them all highly inclined in order to simulate Earth's axial tilt. Installing this mod over stock RSS overwrites even the regular RSS inclinations and acts as if Earth has no axial tilt at all, like Kerbin.

 

[Gannaf]

On 28.5.2016 at 3:47 AM, HerrGeneral said:

-schnipp-

Please take the time to read back a couple pages through this topic.The mod author is aware. Let's all try and be patient.

[ImkSushi]

Sorry for my recent absence, I have work that has to take priority to coding. I will be back to coding at the end of next week.

[angrybold]

love this mod.

thanks so much for maintaining/expanding it

[Manabender]

Howdy! I must say, you've put a lot of work into this mod, and I salute you for it.

However, there are a couple subtle problems. Problems that would easily creep past. Problems arising from the KSP engine.

For whatever reason, I decided to start putting together a database of all celestial bodies' various stats. As I was doing so, I started to notice a couple of odd things.

The first thing I noticed is that, for some bodies, particularly the super-small ones, you've defined their boundary between "low space" and "high space" for science purposes too high, and are thus outside their sphere of influence. This could be by design, considering the size of some of these rocks, but then came the bigger problem...

You have some bodies that have a radius larger than their sphere of influence. This means that they are, quite literally, impossible to orbit or land on. (Hyperedit can't even do it.) This is a pretty big problem. I don't want to have these completely useless rocks lying around, especially when they consume load time and RAM space.

The way I see it, there are three possible solutions to this problem, listed below in order of what I deem most to least reasonable.

1. Crank up their mass. This'll increase their gravity, and in turn, their SoI. This may go against the whole "realism" thing, but it gives them a reason to be loaded. Besides, even if you have to increase gravity tenfold, ten times almost nothing is still almost nothing. Take Pan for example; the difference between 0.00017g and 0.0017g is basically unnoticeable to humans.

2. Remove them entirely. If you can't land on Pan in real life without Saturn screwing everything up, why should we be able to land on it in KSP? And, as stated before, if I can't land on or orbit it, then why am I loading it?

3. Decrease their radius. I list this only because it would fix the problem, not because it's a good solution. These bodies are already small enough as-is, making them any smaller is likely to just make the game engine go nuts.

[ricardoguedes21]

you know a mod to reduce the size of the planets?