[1.12.1] JNSQ [0.10.0] [23 Sept 2021]

[Kwebib]

@cxg2827 Thanks for taking the time to make your great videos. They've been an inspiration.

[Bombaatu]

On 8/14/2023 at 6:13 AM, OrbitalManeuvers said:

Maybe check your scatterer version - JNSQ requires 0.7x, not the latest which is 0.8

Is there any hope this will get updated? I'd love to use Volumetric Clouds w/ JNSQ, but (I think) that requires latest Scatterer.

[OhioBob]

3 hours ago, Bombaatu said:

Is there any hope this will get updated? I'd love to use Volumetric Clouds w/ JNSQ, but (I think) that requires latest Scatterer.

JNSQ may someday get updated to the latest scatterer, but that's likely to be just for compatibility.  I wouldn't expect there to be any feature additions, like volumetric clouds.

[Kriegio]

for some reason rescale wont work on jnsq but the added planets are still here

[zakkpaz]

Has anyone made a patch for this and Blackrack's volumetric clouds?

[panarchist]

On 8/15/2023 at 6:30 PM, cxg2827 said:

The Lindor V mission was the finale to completing my JNSQ career save.  Huygen is probably the prettiest moon to visit, though was on the same challenge level as Eve.

A big thanks to the mod team for making this planet pack.
 

 

Gorgeous ship, great video! Also, a real nail-biter at the end.

[damerell]

I guess it's no coincidence that Nara's 40 atmospheres of pressure is the crush depth of most parts. (Kerbal engineering really is excellent, given they are designed for use in space).

Does anyone know if significant portions of Nara are _below_ nominal sea level? I met some small below-sea-level areas on Elcano missions.

[OhioBob]

15 hours ago, damerell said:

I guess it's no coincidence that Nara's 40 atmospheres of pressure is the crush depth of most parts. (Kerbal engineering really is excellent, given they are designed for use in space).

Does anyone know if significant portions of Nara are _below_ nominal sea level? I met some small below-sea-level areas on Elcano missions.

You are correct, 40 atm is no coincidence.

We tried to set the lowest elevation on all celestial bodies to 0, so you shouldn't find any below sea level parts unless something else changed to mess it up.

[Kerbal_Tim]

Does anyone know where you can download the volumetric clouds config for JNSQ??

[Krazy1]

28 minutes ago, Kerbal_Tim said:

Does anyone know where you can download the volumetric clouds config for JNSQ??

Nope. Read back top of the page... 

[OhioBob]

6 hours ago, Kerbal_Tim said:

Does anyone know where you can download the volumetric clouds config for JNSQ??

There is no volumetric clouds config for JNSQ.  Though I know of someone who is supposedly working on one.  I don't know if it will ever be released.

[RevanX_LSR]

On 9/9/2023 at 9:58 PM, OhioBob said:

You are correct, 40 atm is no coincidence.

We tried to set the lowest elevation on all celestial bodies to 0, so you shouldn't find any below sea level parts unless something else changed to mess it up.

Thing is, 40atm and 4000kPa aren’t the same.

Some terrain below 100m could be above 4000kPa.

[OhioBob]

On 10/22/2023 at 10:16 AM, RevanX_LSR said:

Thing is, 40atm and 4000kPa aren’t the same.

Some terrain below 100m could be above 4000kPa.

That's correct.  We did that by design.  We planted a land mine for those foolish enough to stray into the wrong area.

 

Edited October 24, 2023 by OhioBob

[bigyihsuan]

I'm using the JSNQ_Rescale10x addon patches and trying to make sense of Astrogator's dV readout.

It says that it takes ~8554 m/s to Kerbin orbit. The provided, stock 2.5x dV map says it takes 4900 m/s.

The rescale factor of stock JNSQ is 2.5x, so its dV values should be sqrt(2.5) = ~1.58x as much as 1x scale (4900/sqrt(2.5) = 3100m/s). (which is accurate, though undershooting it a bit. The community dV map says it takes 3400 m/s to orbit.)

The difference in scale between stock JNSQ and rescaled JNSQ is 10/2.5 = 4, so the dV should be about sqrt(4) = 2x as much. But, getting to Kerbin orbit, using the 4900 number, says that it takes 9800 dV to get to low orbit, while Astrogator (and experience) says you need less than that.

Is there something going wrong in my calculations?

[Leganeski]

1 hour ago, bigyihsuan said:

Is there something going wrong in my calculations?

On a perfectly round airless body, your reasoning would be correct. However, Kerbin is neither of those things, and in particular its atmosphere causes a lot of imprecision.

Although the scale factor increases by 4, the atmospheric scale height only increases by a factor of 1.1-1.2x, and the low orbit altitude increases by 1.5-1.6x. This means that delta-v losses from both of these sources scale up by significantly less than 2.

[bigyihsuan]

2 hours ago, Leganeski said:

On a perfectly round airless body, your reasoning would be correct. However, Kerbin is neither of those things, and in particular its atmosphere causes a lot of imprecision.

Although the scale factor increases by 4, the atmospheric scale height only increases by a factor of 1.1-1.2x, and the low orbit altitude increases by 1.5-1.6x. This means that delta-v losses from both of these sources scale up by significantly less than 2.

I see, thanks! So Kerbin (and other aired bodies) will have their losses/multipliers reduced, but everywhere else will be in line with the rescaled multiplier (subtracting getting to LKO).

[Leganeski]

23 minutes ago, bigyihsuan said:

but everywhere else will be in line with the rescaled multiplier

Almost. Most* terrain only scales up by a factor of 2.5 instead of 4, so low orbits around airless bodies will still be closer than expected. This means that getting to orbit takes slightly less than double the delta-v, and transfers usually take very slightly more.

By "slightly" I mean less than 0.5%, so you can probably ignore the difference without issue.

*Gilly, Dak, and Tam keep their shape, so their terrain is scaled up by the full factor of 4. However, they aren't exactly the places where you have to worry very much about delta-v.

[Krazy1]

Just a little realism improvement... I've flown around Kerbin a lot with KSRGAP (lots of pics on What did you do in KSP1 today thread). The auroras look cool but you shouldn't be able to fly above them. The default is 15 km but they should be higher in the atmosphere. So I changed the EVE config to raise them close to the edge of space: Kerbin 70 km, Jool 470 km, Lindor 400 km. Looks much better to me (Haven't been to Jool or Lindor yet) 

Some pics:

Spoiler

And a VIDEO

Edited November 5, 2023 by Krazy1

[FukkIvDan]

Hello guys, im not native eng speaker, im sorry
I have the problem with ksc terrain

https://imgur.com/a/KB7UxB2

I set terrain textures quality to JNSQ High, Default and has no changes - ksc also bugged.
Pls help

[Awesomesauce1337]

@FukkIvDan

Can you provide a list of your mods? This will help with finding the issue.

[JadeOfMaar]

@FukkIvDan @Awesomesauce1337 The terrain isn't even the right color so there must be a mod that allows for moving the KSC and that mod is misbehaving. This is either an effect of KSC Switcher, or of a patch concerning another planet mod.

JNSQ is NOT compatible with  KSC Switcher... as far as I know. It has its own alternate space centers, requiring Kerbal Konstructs and Omega's Stockalike Structures.

Edited November 21, 2023 by JadeOfMaar

[FukkIvDan]

On 11/22/2023 at 4:27 AM, JadeOfMaar said:

@FukkIvDan @Awesomesauce1337 The terrain isn't even the right color so there must be a mod that allows for moving the KSC and that mod is misbehaving. This is either an effect of KSC Switcher, or of a patch concerning another planet mod.

JNSQ is NOT compatible with  KSC Switcher... as far as I know. It has its own alternate space centers, requiring Kerbal Konstructs and Omega's Stockalike Structures.

Yeah, i have KSC Switcher, and only JNSQ (i dont have other planet mods). I didnt see any issues about JNSQ + KSC Switcher in this topic, thank you!
 

[UndercookedKerbalSoup]

Hey there! Just wanted to ask but are comets supported in JNSQ? I've been playing a save for a couple of decades now but I have not seen a single one, just wanna make sure that I'm not just incredibly unlucky.

[OhioBob]

20 hours ago, UndercookedKerbalSoup said:

Hey there! Just wanted to ask but are comets supported in JNSQ? I've been playing a save for a couple of decades now but I have not seen a single one, just wanna make sure that I'm not just incredibly unlucky.

That's controlled by a Kopernicus setting...

Quote

UseKopernicusAsteroidSystem = True //String with three valid values, True,False, and Stock.  True means use the old customizable Kopernicus asteroid generator with no comet support (many packs use this so it's the default).  False means don't generate anything, or wait for an external generator.  Stock means use the internal games generator, which supports comets, but usually only works well in stock based systems with Dres and Kerbin present.

By default it is set to True.  The default setting works best for JNSQ because JNSQ has custom asteroids.  But that means you get no comets.  To get comets you need to switch to Stock, but then you won't get the customized JNSQ asteroids.

Edited December 10, 2023 by OhioBob

[silvermistshadow]

So, I've seen scatter version compatibility mentioned... I just grabbed Blackrack's volumetric clouds earlier, which did replace scatterer, probably with a later version. It seems to be working fine, though I haven't really gone outside the Kerbin system. Not sure what problems having a later version of scatterer will actually cause. Maybe just graphical things. I'm fine with those. Other planets do seem to have lost some of their brightness in the tracking station (mainly the ones with big atmospheres like Eve and Jool).