[1.2] Galileo's Planet Pack (development thread) [v0.9]

[OhioBob]

4 hours ago, eddiew said:

Are you keeping the planet/atmosphere characteristics the same as Kerbin?

I'll be doing the atmospheres for these planets.  I haven't received @Galileo's initial cfg files yet, but if he keeps Gael about the same size as Kerbin, then I'll certainly give it the same or a very similar atmosphere.  I would also recommend keeping Gael's surface gravity equal to one Earth gravity, but we'll see.  Kerbals use the same units of measure that we do, and internally those units of measure are based on 1 g = 9.81 m/s², so it would be weird if that wasn't the standard gravity of their home world.

[Nhawks17]

6 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

I'll be doing the atmospheres for these planets.  I haven't received @Galileo's initial cfg files yet, but if he keeps Gael about the same size as Kerbin, then I'll certainly give it the same or a very similar atmosphere.  I would also recommend keeping Gael's surface gravity equal to one Earth gravity, but we'll see.  Kerbals use the same units of measure that we do, and internally those units of measure are based on 1 g = 9.81 m/s², so it would be weird if that wasn't the standard gravity of their home world.

Awesome

[Fobok]

6 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

I'll be doing the atmospheres for these planets.  I haven't received @Galileo's initial cfg files yet, but if he keeps Gael about the same size as Kerbin, then I'll certainly give it the same or a very similar atmosphere.  I would also recommend keeping Gael's surface gravity equal to one Earth gravity, but we'll see.  Kerbals use the same units of measure that we do, and internally those units of measure are based on 1 g = 9.81 m/s², so it would be weird if that wasn't the standard gravity of their home world.

 

If it's the same size as Kerbin, wouldn't it have Kerbin's gravity profile? Or is that already the same? It seems a lot less, really. (I don't mind even if you go RSS scale, for this pack I'd install SMURFF  and do it, I'd just find it weird having a tiny world the size of Kerbin with the mass of Earth... unless it already is, in which case, weird but I never noticed before. )

[TheEpicSquared]

Just now, Fobok said:

If it's the same size as Kerbin, wouldn't it have Kerbin's gravity profile? Or is that already the same? It seems a lot less, really. (I don't mind even if you go RSS scale, for this pack I'd install SMURFF  and do it, I'd just find it weird having a tiny world the size of Kerbin with the mass of Earth... unless it already is, in which case, weird but I never noticed before. )

Kerbin has the gravity of Earth, I think. The densities in KSP are a bit messed up.

[OhioBob]

39 minutes ago, TheEpicSquared said:

Kerbin has the gravity of Earth, I think. The densities in KSP are a bit messed up.

That's right.  All the planets in stock KSP are about 1/10th the diameter and 1/100th the mass of their real life counterparts.  This keeps their surface gravities the same as if they were life sized worlds, but it gives them absurdly high densities (10x real life).

 

Edited September 2, 2016 by OhioBob

[Fobok]

Ahh, cool, ok then

[OhioBob]

10 minutes ago, Fobok said:

If it's the same size as Kerbin, wouldn't it have Kerbin's gravity profile?

Not necessarily.  In KSP, each body is given a radius and a surface gravity.  Kerbin's radius is 600 km and its surface gravity is 1 g.  We can give Gael those same values or assign different values.  And even if Gael is given the same radius, there is no requirement that it's surface gravity must be 1 g.  For instance, we could say that Gael is a lower density world with a surface gravity of 0.9 g.  However, there is a limited range of surface gravities for which we can make a rational argument.  Go too high or too low and it would suggest a very strange planetary structure beyond our current experience.

[Galileo]

1 hour ago, Nhawks17 said:

I didn't even think about this. It's actually a very important question if this is gonna be the solar system replacer... Galileo?

Yes it will be the same as kerbin. Exactly. 

[eddiew]

3 hours ago, Nhawks17 said:

I didn't even think about this. It's actually a very important question if this is gonna be the solar system replacer... Galileo?

It's also pretty vital to folks who like to share their vessels. Particularly if you're into SSTOs but also relevant to rocketry, you'll want to have the planetary launch requirements be the same, else everything you share is invalid ^^;

1 hour ago, Galileo said:

Yes it will be the same as kerbin. Exactly. 

Excellent, thank you  

[Galileo]

Are 3 gas giants enough?  This system will have 24 celestial bodies.  About 5-7 of those will be moons of the gas giants 

Edited September 2, 2016 by Galileo

[eddiew]

1 minute ago, Galileo said:

Are 3 gas giants enough?  This system will have 24 celestial bodies.  About 5-7 of those will be moons of the gas giants 

Gas giants with moon systems are always great fun!   Rather than a minimum number of gas giants, I'd be more inclined to suggest a maximum number of moonless vacuum planets; namely, 1, because they are sort of dull ^^;

[TheEpicSquared]

Maybe a planet or two like Duna or Eve? And maybe one like Laythe. Although, all of my suggestions might be implemented as the moons. Just my two cents.  

[Probus]

24 minutes ago, Galileo said:

Are 3 gas giants enough?  This system will have 24 celestial bodies.  About 5-7 of those will be moons of the gas giants 

Three is probably enough.  Out of 24, how many can Jeb land on?

[Galileo]

19 minutes ago, Probus said:

Three is probably enough.  Out of 24, how many can Jeb land on?

21 unless @OhioBob make a body near the sun too hot for kerbals to be on  i think thats possible so more like 20

Edited September 2, 2016 by Galileo

[Shadriss]

OK, so you say 24 bodies. This is how I see it laying out...

Kerbol (Sun) -> Solid Planet -> Solid Planet -> Solid Planet -> Gael -> Solid Planet -> Gas Giant -> Gas Giant -> Gas Giant -> Solid Planet -> Solid Planet

This is ROUGHLY the same as Sol, replacing the asteroid belt with a formed planet and moving the Earth equivalent out another orbit. It also assumes you use separate orbits for the Pluto/Charon binary, and that the mathematically calculated new planet beyond them (not yet proven by visuals) is not included. So similar to known real structures, with small differences. This gives us 10 right off, leaving ~14 moons to place.

Assuming Gael has one (and really while I like two, I don't know that it's really needed), the leaves 13 to place.

Gas Giants tend to have huge numbers of moons, of course. But 13 moons across the three GGs is only four apiece, with a spare. SO say one has five, another four, and the final three, (total 12) and use the final one as another moon around one of the other solid planets, and that could work out about right.

It would mean that aside from two planets, none of the other solids will have moons, but that's not a bad thing depending on what you are looking for.

Any chance you could lay out your layout plan then, and perhaps you could draw some suggestions from the crowd as well?

[RedParadize]

OMG Gael is wonderfull!

I would prefer if its not the new home of kerbals, It would be nice to have a truely colonizable planet to go for.

[OhioBob]

1 hour ago, eddiew said:

I'd be more inclined to suggest a maximum number of moonless vacuum planets; namely, 1, because they are sort of dull ^^;

I'm going to try to use a scientific rationale for everything I do to make things as realistic as possible (except of course that everything is scaled to stock sized proportions and densities).  Whether or not a planet can retain an appreciable atmosphere is a function of its temperature and escape velocity.  As a gas heats up its molecules move faster, and if they exceed escape velocity the atmosphere will leak away leaving behind an airless world.  I plan to test each body to see if it's even feasible that it could have an atmosphere.  If so I'll give it one, but it's far to early to know any specifics.

52 minutes ago, Galileo said:

21 unless @OhioBob make a body near the sun too hot for kerbals to be on  i think thats possible so more like 20

All temperatures will be based on calculations taking into account the amount of solar radiation a planet receives and its albedo.  If it's too hot to land on, it won't to because on any arbitrary decision on my part.

1 hour ago, Galileo said:

Are 3 gas giants enough?

Three sounds good to me.

Edited September 2, 2016 by OhioBob

[RedParadize]

1 hour ago, Galileo said:

Are 3 gas giants enough?  This system will have 24 celestial bodies.  About 5-7 of those will be moons of the gas giants 

Can one of the giants secretly be a solid with really really thick and dense atmo? Like the most insane planet to land on.

Edited September 2, 2016 by RedParadize

[OhioBob]

14 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

Can one of the giants secretly be a dense solid with really really thick atmo? Like the most insane planet to land on.

I don't know if that would be possible to construct.  To give it a surface to land on, it would have to created as a solid planet.  We could then give it a really thick atmosphere, but atmospheres are transparent.  Therefore it would just end up looking like a rocky planet, not a gas giant.  Gas giants and solid planets are really two distinct classes, I don't think there is anyway to make some sort of hybrid that would look right.

[Galileo]

7 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

I don't know if that would be possible to construct.  To give it a surface to land on, it would have to created as a solid planet.  We could then give it a really thick atmosphere, but atmospheres are transparent.  Therefore it would just end up looking like a rocky planet, not a gas giant.  Gas giants and solid planets are really two distinct classes, I don't think there is anyway to make some sort of hybrid that would look right.

 

29 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

Can one of the giants secretly be a solid with really really thick and dense atmo? Like the most insane planet to land on.

I could simulate a gas planet with cloud layers in EVE but if you could land on it, it wouldn't really be a "gas" giant now would it? 

1 hour ago, Shadriss said:

OK, so you say 24 bodies. This is how I see it laying out...

Kerbol (Sun) -> Solid Planet -> Solid Planet -> Solid Planet -> Gael -> Solid Planet -> Gas Giant -> Gas Giant -> Gas Giant -> Solid Planet -> Solid Planet

This is ROUGHLY the same as Sol, replacing the asteroid belt with a formed planet and moving the Earth equivalent out another orbit. It also assumes you use separate orbits for the Pluto/Charon binary, and that the mathematically calculated new planet beyond them (not yet proven by visuals) is not included. So similar to known real structures, with small differences. This gives us 10 right off, leaving ~14 moons to place.

Assuming Gael has one (and really while I like two, I don't know that it's really needed), the leaves 13 to place.

Gas Giants tend to have huge numbers of moons, of course. But 13 moons across the three GGs is only four apiece, with a spare. SO say one has five, another four, and the final three, (total 12) and use the final one as another moon around one of the other solid planets, and that could work out about right.

It would mean that aside from two planets, none of the other solids will have moons, but that's not a bad thing depending on what you are looking for.

Any chance you could lay out your layout plan then, and perhaps you could draw some suggestions from the crowd as well?

here you go.. Note its not to scale

49 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

OMG Gael is wonderfull!

I would prefer if its not the new home of kerbals, It would be nice to have a truely colonizable planet to go for.

There will be more than 1 planet like Gael that will be habitable so you can colonize to your hearts content

Edited September 2, 2016 by Galileo

[OhioBob]

18 minutes ago, Galileo said:

here you go

Cool!

That 5th planet looks like a super-Earth.  I can certainly give that baby a really thick atmosphere.

(edit) If those are all drawn to scale, I can certainly envision many of them having substantial atmospheres.
 

Edited September 2, 2016 by OhioBob

[Galileo]

11 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

Cool!

That 5th planet looks like a super-Earth.  I can certainly give that baby a really thick atmosphere.

you read my mind! also the first large moon around Gauss I also want it to be an Earth like planet. The moon above that will orbit the earth like planet not Gauss if that makes sense. 

Edited September 2, 2016 by Galileo

[OhioBob]

Just now, Galileo said:

the first large moon around Gauss I also want it to be an Earth like planet. The moon above that will orbit the earth like planet not Gauss if that makes sense.

Oh yeah, that big moon will certainly have a thick atmosphere.  We can make it Laythe-like, warmed by tidal heating.  I can envision that planet having lots of volcanos.  What have you done with its appearance?

[Galileo]

1 minute ago, OhioBob said:

Oh yeah, that big moon will certainly have a thick atmosphere.  We can make it Laythe-like, warmed by tidal heating.  I can envision that planet having lots of volcanos.  What have you done with its appearance?

I have done nothing yet but I can come up with something 

[_Augustus_]

How do you make these textures?