Jump to content

[UNOFFICIAL/FANMADE] 0.17 Discussion thread


kacperrutka26

Recommended Posts

I wonder if wings could be used on the Mars equivalent with atmospheric pressure mostly between 2% and 20% of that of Kerbin ... But I assume a landing with a combination of parachutes and retroburn is more efficient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you\'re wrong, if we nagg hard engoung they wont have much choice and add more planets..

Also i reed somewhere that they will add other stars and as i can see stars aren\'t mentioned here.. so probably later with stars will come more planets.. Would be nice for Pasing..

In an interview done by a youtuber with HarvesteR he said he was planning to make 40-50 planets (I'm pretty sure about that but I could be mistaken) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gB_XOb0h8hE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think he was with squad yet when he posted that, but he seems to be the one making the planets, so it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume we might get something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A thought on Apollo 11-style missions: You don't need to launch two rockets because of the lack of docking, you can just attach the lander to the orbiting stage and decouple it for deorbit/landing, then rendezvous with the orbiting craft. The on -

Oh, wait, we don't have empty command pods. Never mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could certainly beam a planet into that orbit, and a planet would have sufficient mass to maintain a circular orbit off centre for at least a little while (and by a little while I mean maybe an 8th of one orbit, if it's really really big), but it would pretty quickly degrade into a brand new eliptical orbit which would then probably take a few million years to stabilize. If it was placed poorly to begin with, it would actually turn into a parabolic or hyperbolic orbit before it completes one revolution, and just leave the system entirely.

That 1/8 of an orbit would fit whatever trajectory it gets due to the vector you initially give it by 'beaming it into an orbit': either circular, elliptical or hyperbole.

It might look like it's circular if observed for a short while, but that would be a limit of the observation. You could give the planet propulsion to keep it in an 'impossible' trajectory, but using propulsion does not count as orbiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what rarities must be in the soil to give it that purple color...

Anyways, this proves that we can land on planets just by strapping a million parachutes to our lander.

Assuming it survived...

Also, let them have their washed out red/oranage planet. We get kool-aid purple :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is 8, maybe 10 planets, and a whole lot of moons. If we someday have an ability to refuel during flights, or some sort of rechargeable engine, then we could go on moon hopping expeditions, or set up central bases on a planet or moon from which to launch other missions to other moons in that planets orbit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those images and sometimes additional comments provides us much information about future celestial objects:

The red planet has an atmospheric pressure mostly between 2% and 20% of that of Kerbin. The polar regions are seemingly covered in snow/ice. The planet has at least one moon that appears to be similar to the Mun, and has a diameter that is 40-50% of that of the red planet. For comparison: the Mun has a diameter that is 33,33% of that of Kerbin ... ! The purple planet has a denser atmosphere.

Kerbol (the sun) however isn't visible on the posted pics so it's nigh impossible to determinate the position of both planets in the Kerbol system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...