A descent in to madness.

[ColdJ]

If you made the solarsystems biggest ever cherry picker(folding and extending arm with a command chair or ladder at the tip) then went in to orbit around the gas giant. Could you lower a Kerbal all the way down to the surface?

[Turf]

Nah, you can't.

It's simple, there's no surface on a gas giant.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

...

Okay, let's assume that you still want to go low anyway. You still can't.

Air drag and physics range stuff. The arm couldn't extend that long without the physics breaking down, and even if you do, the arm would've burned in the atmosphere.

Thank you for coming to my second TED Talk.

[ColdJ]

Don't worry about this any more. I have done it and you explode a little over 370 meters below the surface.

[eddiew]

I... I really want to see some pictures of this particular science experiment 

[herbal space program]

On 6/16/2021 at 7:10 PM, ColdJ said:

Don't worry about this any more. I have done it and you explode a little over 370 meters below the surface.

What exactly do you mean by this? Just that you've dropped something  by whatever means to 370m below datum on Jool and that's when it exploded?  Or did you do something more interesting than that?

I am actually kind of curious now what would happen if you placed such a setup in an orbit so that the command pod is always just above the atmo, but you can extend your arm far enough radial inwards that the tip is  actually inside of it.  Does the game treat the different parts of your vessel differently, or does it calculate everything based on where the command pod is? If it's the latter, then your arm wouldn't feel anything at all no matter how far you extend it, although the question of what happens if you extend the tip beyond physics range is still there. Surely somebody must have tried to build a station over 2.2 km long at some point. Any idea what happens @eddiew?   @Turf?

[Bej Kerman]

On 6/17/2021 at 3:10 AM, ColdJ said:

Don't worry about this any more. I have done it and you explode a little over 370 meters below the surface.

The deepest you can go inside Jool is 250 meters. Did you explode 370 meters above the 'surface'?

[Dientus]

32 minutes ago, herbal space program said:

I am actually kind of curious now what would happen if you placed such a setup in an orbit so that the command pod is always just above the atmo, but you can extend your arm far enough radial inwards that the tip is  actually inside of it.  Does the game treat the different parts of your vessel differently, or does it calculate everything based on where the command pod is?

Was there a thread about this? I can't find it and don't remember what was said so maybe my imagination. But now that you have verbalized this, it would be a good experiment.

 

Assuming all atmospheric bodies are treated and calculated the same, would it matter where the experiment was held? I.E. the affects in Jool orbit should be replicable in Kerbin orbit.

[herbal space program]

26 minutes ago, Dientus said:

Was there a thread about this? I can't find it and don't remember what was said so maybe my imagination. But now that you have verbalized this, it would be a good experiment.

There has not been a post about this to my knowledge, but I've only recently become active on the forum again after a couple of years mostly away. If not, then I agree it could be an interesting experiment!

26 minutes ago, Dientus said:

Assuming all atmospheric bodies are treated and calculated the same, would it matter where the experiment was held? I.E. the affects in Jool orbit should be replicable in Kerbin orbit.

I can't imagine that it would matter what body, but I'm also not at all above using alt-F12/HyperEdit to move such an experiment to wherever it needs to go. I think I'll have to give it a try this evening after I get bored with my endless Eve aerobraking passes.

[ColdJ]

@eddiew@herbal space program@Bej Kerman@Dientus

I had already popped this on another thread.

I did teleport my Eagle to about what the game considered a stable orbit around Jool. I moved in that orbit till I was in sunshine and then started my descent. The parts of my Eagle have a 5000 crash tolerance (it is from a time of much more advanced engineering) I had set it up with the lightest pod I have that has rocket thrust and attached the heavy lift unit to it as I didn't know what to expect when it came to gravity. My Eagle is not what comes in the mod pack, it no longer has unrealistic levels of thrust, weight and crash tolerance. It came originally with 9999999999999 crash tolerance.

I slowly descended in, and once the gravity well had me, I kept the VTOL rockets on at a low level so that I didn't get too fast, It took a fair while. Unfortunately at around 5km from the surface the game takes away your ability to adjust thrust. I had already turned up the thrust before that to slow me down but I was still going about 60m/s when I exploded at 374 meters below sea level. As you can see from the second screen shot.

When I visited the lowest point on Kerbin, The game sabotaged my Submarine as soon as I touched down, I was able to walk a Kerbal with a weight belt around till I found the lowest point. So I think there are coded in parameters to stop you from achieving certain things. I can't say if a Kerbal would have survived being on Jool or not. This was all done in 1.9.1

Here is the link to in my thread when I walked to the lowest point on Kerbin.

 

[herbal space program]

@ColdJ Got it.  The Jool dive is something pretty much every long-term player tries at some point, although it sounds like you pushed it to the extreme with that vessel! At any rate, I am now much more interested in the question of what happens if you put a ship half-in, half out of an atmosphere, and how far you can push that....

[Zacspace]

A couple of questions have come up in this thread that I just so happen to know the answers to.

1 what if your craft was orbiting outside the atmosphere, but was long enough to theoretically reach into it? The entire craft is either in the atmosphere or not as long as the root part it above the atmosphere you're in space. maybe the center of mass, but probably the root part.

2 big long craft extends all the way down from orbit? This is a no go. KSP unloads physics on crafts apart from part colliders at something like 250m away from the root part and unloads the craft entirely at 2.5km. Jool's atmosphere is quite a bit thicker than that

3 landing on Jool in general? Fact. in past versions of KSP an EVA kerbal could just kind of do it sometimes, in current versions you can string together a few glitches and make a floating platform. upon which a kerbal or even a spacecraft can land and count as landed. If you try to just yolo it, there's a boundary inside that just kills you once you cross it, no craft is immune no matter what values are applied, kind of like landing on the sun. ( I hope somebody proves me wrong about landing on the sun)

as for the bove mentioned glitches, specifically you want to have: the platform section, the root part 250m below it, and a bunch of long extendable ladders attached underneath with stack separators. The ladders become fixed in place when detached from the stack separators which holds the platform in place. Normally this doesn't count as landed but on jool, maybe because your root part is at or below "surface level" it seems to. Now that the platform is in place, the root part being so far below means that only it's colliders get loaded in when you approach  or even land on it so it never falls. Voila, landing on Jool.

This craft does it, I haven't gotten around to making my own yet abc123

Edited June 19, 2021 by Zacspace

[Dientus]

34 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

A couple of questions have come up in this thread that I just so happen to know the answers to.

I ran out of likes. Thank you very much for the reply

[ColdJ]

3 minutes ago, Dientus said:

I ran out of likes. Thank you very much for the reply

How do you run out of likes?

41 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

A couple of questions have come up in this thread that I just so happen to know the answers to.

Owing to the loss of control at around 5 km out from the surface. I guess you have to calculate how much thrust you need to stop you in time, beforehand?

[herbal space program]

51 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

A couple of questions have come up in this thread that I just so happen to know the answers to.

1 what if your craft was orbiting outside the atmosphere, but was long enough to theoretically reach into it? The entire craft is either in the atmosphere or not as long as the root part it above the atmosphere you're in space. maybe the center of mass, but probably the root part.

I suspected that, but I was about to test it anyway with this:

There's a docking port, a thermometer, and a barometer at the end, to test if atmo physics apply at that point and also to see if switching control points changes what happens. Don't need to bother with that now, thanks! I should have known that no such question would go unanswered for long in this particular community!

 

Quote

2 big long craft extends all the way down from orbit? This is a no go. KSP unloads physics on crafts apart from part colliders at something like 250m away from the root part and unloads the craft entirely at 2.5km. Jool's atmosphere is quite a bit thicker than that

 

So what does that mean? If you create a craft longer than 2.2 km, does the game just load the part that's within that radius of the root part and ignore the rest?

Edited June 19, 2021 by herbal space program

[Zacspace]

10 minutes ago, ColdJ said:

Owing to the loss of control at around 5 km out from the surface. I guess you have to calculate how much thrust you need to stop you in time, beforehand?

I'm pretty sure no stock engine produces thrust at Jool's surface due to the pressure. I know that's no issue for you, but parachutes are effective to the point that it doesn't matter. A lot of the old land on Jool bugs seemed to ocur because parachutes would slow a craft down so far it would count as landed. I'm not entirely convinced that's not a factor in how the craft I linked above works too.

[herbal space program]

4 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

I'm pretty sure no stock engine produces thrust at Jool's surface due to the pressure. I know that's no issue for you, but parachutes are effective to the point that it doesn't matter. A lot of the old land on Jool bugs seemed to ocur because parachutes would slow a craft down so far it would count as landed. I'm not entirely convinced that's not a factor in how the craft I linked above works too.

(Channeling Terry Jones) How is it that you have so few posts and yet are so knowledgeable in the ways of KSP?

Edited June 19, 2021 by herbal space program

[Zacspace]

Just now, herbal space program said:

So what does that mean? If you create a craft longer than 2.2 km, does the game just load the part that's within that radius and ignore the rest?

If you're controlling such a huge craft, you'll see the whole thing, but it won't interact physically with anything outside the physics range, if you're approaching it, the whole thing will just disappear once you're 2.5km away from it's root, even if part of it is right next to you, just poof. gone. I've seen people build megastructures like dyson spheres with tweakscale and those behave pretty strangely, but in general what I've said should hold true.

[ColdJ]

4 minutes ago, herbal space program said:

I should have known that no such question would go unanswered for long in this particular community!

I wish that were true. I originally posted the question in May, and only after saying not to bother, that I have tested it did I get a sensible answer. I have other questions on other things still out in the forums, waiting for proper answers.

6 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

I know that's no issue for you

My engines aren't magic. Yes I can make magic engines if I choose, but I like them to be realistic. So my ISP is about the same as Rhino I think, would have to check. I did use the Fuel generator that came with it originally, because I wasn't sure how long I would have to use the rockets for.

I find the fact you could use parachutes interesting and bizarre.

[herbal space program]

Just now, Zacspace said:

If you're controlling such a huge craft, you'll see the whole thing, but it won't interact physically with anything outside the physics range, if you're approaching it, the whole thing will just disappear once you're 2.5km away from it's root, even if part of it is right next to you, just poof. gone. I've seen people build megastructures like dyson spheres with tweakscale and those behave pretty strangely, but in general what I've said should hold true.

Hmm, makes me wonder what happens if you place separate control points that are all within physics range of the adjacent point, collectively spanning some larger distance.

Just now, ColdJ said:

I wish that were true. I originally posted the question in May, and only after saying not to bother, that I have tested it did I get a sensible answer. I have other questions on other things still out in the forums, waiting for proper answers.

You just haven't been around that long, and frankly a lot of these questions are completely trivial for those who understand the code behind the simulation.  I have been willfully blind to those things in general, just so I could feel like more of a scientist about it.  Regardless of that, there have been endless discussions about just about anything you could imagine, which is why this forum has been so cool! This particular question is just something I never saw discussed before myself.

[Zacspace]

21 minutes ago, herbal space program said:

(Channeling Terry Jones) How is it that you have so few posts and yet are so knowledgeable in the ways of KSP?

I'm like 90% lurker even when I'm active here. This is the rare topic that I can contribute to meaningfully while still being able to explain it adequately and (hopefully) not come off as a know it all jerk. I've also been toying with the idea of putting a runway on Jool lately so that stuff happens to be fresh for me. Maybe the Jool 6 will become the new KSP end boss.

13 minutes ago, herbal space program said:

Hmm, makes me wonder what happens if you place separate control points that are all within physics range of the adjacent point, collectively spanning some larger distance.

the part that's made root at the time of your vessel's construction is what it's all based on, doesn't even have to be a command point. There's a video on youtube by stratenblitz (I think) where he abuses this kind of stuff to stack a bunch of segments on each other across the canyon on dres, making a bridge. Each segment is a separate vessel, so it's more work but I think that's probably the direction the wheels in your head are turning in. I suppose somebody with a lot more patience than I have could make a space elevator or something like that

Edited June 19, 2021 by Zacspace

[ColdJ]

10 minutes ago, herbal space program said:

This particular question is just something I never saw discussed before myself.

Yeah. I tend to ask those sort of questions. I joined the forum to ask questions and ended up answering myself and creating an underwater mod pack. Some simple answers from experienced people could have made things so much easier.

@Zacspace I retract my Rhino statement. My engines are far more efficent to counteract the rapid fuel drain they used to have.

        atmosphereCurve
        {
            key = 0 4200
            key = 1 3650
            key = 9 0.101
        }

4 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

This is the rare topic that I can contribute to meaningfully while still being able to explain it adequately and (hopefully) not come off as a know it all jerk.

Decent people will always appreciate coherent answers. Any body else is a jerk. And don't bother with stratenblitz , he shows off but doesn't answer questions.

[Zacspace]

4 minutes ago, ColdJ said:

Yeah. I tend to ask those sort of questions. I joined the forum to ask questions and ended up answering myself and creating an underwater mod pack. Some simple answers from experienced people could have made things so much easier.

@Zacspace I retract my Rhino statement. My engines are far more efficent to counteract the rapid fuel drain they used to have.

It seems like the knowledge keepers from the old days have mostly gone from the community. It's a shame, but bound to happen, we are coming up on the game's 10 anniversary after all. as for the rhino thing, I didn't mean that as a dig. it's not like you're quickscoping noobs with an aimbot or anything. I just know you know how to edit configs.

[ColdJ]

2 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

I just know you know how to edit configs.

Yep. 99% self taught by looking at configs that already exist and learning from them. Still many questions. Hopefully somebody will eventually give me a clear answer on the Buoyancy parameter.  I appear to be strange as I will share any info I glean, rather than hoard it for myself. Like I found that you can have node directions that are less than 90deg by putting in a number between 0 and 1 or 1 and 2. e.g 0.5 will give you a 45 degree node.

[herbal space program]

4 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

I'm like 90% lurker even when I'm active here. This is the rare topic that I can contribute to meaningfully while still being able to explain it adequately and (hopefully) not come off as a know it all jerk. 

You sure don't seem like that to me. 

4 minutes ago, Zacspace said:

the part that's made root at the time of your vessel's construction is what it's all based on, doesn't even have to be a command point. There's a video on youtube by stratenblitz (I think) where he abuses this kind of stuff to stack a bunch of segments on each other across the canyon on dres, making a bridge. Each segment is a separate vessel, so it's more work but I think that's probably the direction the wheels in your head are turning in. I suppose somebody with a lot more patience than I have could make a space elevator or something like that

I don't think I really have the patience to try something like that either, but indeed, that's the direction the wheels in my head were turning!

[Zacspace]

2 hours ago, ColdJ said:

Hopefully somebody will eventually give me a clear answer on the Buoyancy parameter.

I was pretty sure I didn't have an answer for this one, but now I've thought about it. I'm quite sure that currently KSP's buoyancy calculations are based, if not entirely then at least mostly, on the part's drag cube and mass. That's why fairings and service bays can be made so sinkable. Is it possible that the Buoyancy parameter is a deprecated hold over from the pre-1.0 ocean physics? It would explain why stock parts seem to omit it entirely. Oceans behaved much differently in prerelease. Might be worth combing through some very old threads.