New Addict with a question

[Grahamglas]

Hi All

Just saying hello.

I got the game about a week ago and boy am I hooked, it should comw with a health warning or something.

Its the best game I've played since I got Elite for my bbc micro back in the 80s. I even dug out my old astrodynamics book from that very same phisics degree that got disrupted by Elite.

Which leads me to a question. How good is the physics in KSP? I assume its purely Newtonian but can you really do things with real world math. I got protractor from the space port roughed out a few numbers on Mathematica and missed Jool by a country mile. I'm assuming the problem is my rusty physics but I'd like to be sure before I try again.

G

[Capt'n Skunky]

The physics are fairly accurate and maths can be used to perform various tasks. Just make sure you're using values from our imaginary universe and not the real one. Some things have been altered for gameplay, such as the density and mass of Kerbin.

Check the wiki for good starting values.

Happy Launching!

Arrr!

Capt'n Skunky

KSP Community Manager

[musicpenguin]

Welcome newcomer!

[Eric S]

One thing to keep in mind on planetary transfers: Most of the planets don't have circular orbits, but rather elliptical ones. Some even have fairly high inclinations. Protractor doesn't take either of those factors into account.

[Flixxbeatz]

Hello and welcome to the club.

[Promii]

KSP does not have proper n-body physics. When your craft is within a body's sphere of influence, it is the ONLY that body that is gravitationally affecting you. One consequence of this is that there are no Lagrange points in KSP. Also, the planets and moons are all 'on rails' and do not perturb each others orbits in any way.

[sal_vager]

Welcome to the community Grahamglas

KSP uses patched conics approximation for all spacecraft, this is the system that was used in the Apollo days to send man to the moon (and bring them home) so yeah, it's pretty good I think