Gravity remake!

[Llama1017]

Someone NEEDS to remake the movie Gravity in KSP. If not, just the trailer.

[Geschosskopf]

It's already been done countless times. The movie is a blatant rip-off of the typical KSP gameplay session

[Technical Ben]

Is it scientifically accurate? If so then yes. If not, then the re-enactment should be of the DVD being sent to the sun for crimes against physics.

[syfyguy64]

Do we really need to?

I mean, almost every space station attempt I have has about 4-5 dockings going good, then the last one I screw up, trying to get a cinimatic picture, but hit the main core, destroy it, and then I decide to burn, but the power supply is stuck in my rocket some how, and it hits the other parts, taking them with me, and everything falls down.

Wish I had pics.

[lajoswinkler]

The movie can't be redone in KSP because the orbital mechanics is not respected in it. As for the trailer(s), I've already contacted Nassault because he seems like a guy that could get that right. We'll see if he takes up the challenge.

[syfyguy64]

"Kravity- A KSP Movie"

And it's just a space station falling into Kerbin with Gravity sound track.

Actually, it'd be kinda easy, though time consuming, getting good angles.

[DannySwish]

I can already picture a trailer parody of Gravity with kerbals in it. Hehehe. Do want. I loved the movie.

BULLOOOOOOOOCCCCKKKKKKK

[Technical Ben]

The movie can't be redone in KSP because the orbital mechanics is not respected in it. As for the trailer(s), I've already contacted Nassault because he seems like a guy that could get that right. We'll see if he takes up the challenge.

Please tell me this is not true. I almost died when the Enterprise "fell" from luna orbit in the latest film (not to mention the numerous visuals not matching the spoken lines).

[AndyMay]

Please tell me this is not true. I almost died when the Enterprise "fell" from luna orbit in the latest film (not to mention the numerous visuals not matching the spoken lines).

I don't believe she was actually in orbit. Instead just using anti-gravity/thrusters to prevent her from falling into the planet meaning when power was lost she would've simply fallen.

That said I could be wrong. I'm no physicist after all.

Just like to note I'm ignoring everything that was happening inside the ship.

Edited October 6, 2013 by AndyMay

[Kerbart]

The movie can't be redone in KSP because the orbital mechanics is not respected in it. As for the trailer(s), I've already contacted Nassault because he seems like a guy that could get that right. We'll see if he takes up the challenge.

Sounds like the right guy for the job. After all, one of the main characters dies in the movie--a script written with Nassault in mind, I'd say

[magnemoe]

I don't believe she was actually in orbit. Instead just using anti-gravity/thrusters to prevent her from falling into the planet meaning when power was lost she would've simply fallen.

That said I could be wrong. I'm no physicist after all.

Just like to note I'm ignoring everything that was happening inside the ship.

You would probably be in some sort of orbit anyway as you keep up with the moon, has not seen this but guess.

Any high performance engine from dieselpunk Orion up to magictech can pretty much ignore gravity as they has TWR >2 and isp > 1000000 m/s.

Using the Orion mod you can get to Eve in an day and Jool in less than an month, yes normal ksp rules so you burn for 5-20 minutes and brake inside SOI.

However if engine fails the rules apply again. In most cases it would send you into interstellar space, but if you follow the moon you would either be in orbit or stationary, if close to the moon you would hit it or get into an orbit with Ap at your location and an low Pe, if earth gravity is stronger you will end in an orbit inside moon orbit, moon will interfere with this some months later.

[csanders]

5 year old film (not mine):

[lincourtl]

I thought the one scene from the trailer where the CanadArm breaks off, then the astronaut untethers looked a bit off so I tried to do an experiment. It would have been better if I had the camera mod everybody's using (KerCam?) because with KSP's camera following center of mass it's hard to see if Jeb goes spinning off like the astronaut. Rather, in my video it looks like the girder (substituting for the broken CanadArm) goes spinning away from Jeb.

Skip to the 1 minute mark for the actual experiment.

[Beowolf]

Saw it, and yes the orbital mechanics bugged me.

However, I realized after that all you have to do is treat the movie as intentionally "edited for time". If you mentally stretch it out so the "real" story was taking place over several hours instead of 90 minutes, I believe it works much better. So they're actually thrusting, then waiting half an orbit for the effect just like us.

I want to go see it again now, with this in-mind. First time I did 2D, so next time I'll try IMAX 3D too.

[justadude]

Saw it, and yes the orbital mechanics bugged me.

However, I realized after that all you have to do is treat the movie as intentionally "edited for time". If you mentally stretch it out so the "real" story was taking place over several hours instead of 90 minutes, I believe it works much better. So they're actually thrusting, then waiting half an orbit for the effect just like us.

I want to go see it again now, with this in-mind. First time I did 2D, so next time I'll try IMAX 3D too.

I do not think "edited for time" will do the trick here. They ignore orbital inclinations altogether. Hubble and ISS are in totally different orbital inclinations. Going from one to the other requires a precisely timed burn at the least, if not a rendezvous scenario to go along with the inclination change.

In the movie everything is really close. I thought that given the presented scenario (that everything is in docking distance) that the movie was realistic.

[lajoswinkler]

Please tell me this is not true. I almost died when the Enterprise "fell" from luna orbit in the latest film (not to mention the numerous visuals not matching the spoken lines).

It's true, but it's not obvious and certainly not obnoxious like in other movies. I don't think almost anyone will get that.

Sounds like the right guy for the job. After all, one of the main characters dies in the movie--a script written with Nassault in mind, I'd say

Why would you want to spoil such thing for others?

[Mokmo]

Time magazine has a review done by a former shuttle astronaut. There are a few more interviews done with astronauts who've seen the movie. A lot of it doesn't stand considering inclinations and a few other things like the use of the MMU or the collision with the station (in the trailer) that would've breached a suit easily.

Link to Time Mag review She's a veteran of five shuttle missions so she knows her stuff

[Geschosskopf]

The movie can't be redone in KSP because the orbital mechanics is not respected in it.

And because the solar panels in the movie are WAY more durable than they are in KSP .

But seriously, the movie is a remake of KSP, not the other way around. It's just another in the recent trend of making live action movie versions of cartoons and comic books.

[SkyRender]

The movie can't be redone in KSP because the orbital mechanics is not respected in it.

Given that the standard level of accuracy we can tend to expect out of science fiction is that impossibly noisy ships can somehow jump between Jupiter and Neptune in sub-15 seconds under normal drive (thank you, Mass Effect), I think Gravity's worst offense being that everything is impossibly close and behaving slightly out of sync with actual orbital mechanics is pretty minor in comparison.

[syfyguy64]

If you truly think Gravity isn't very good for getting a few things wrong from real life, then you guys would burn theaters playing Star Trek.

[lajoswinkler]

OK, let's focus on the topic here. There's already a topic about the movie.

I don't have experience with KAS mod. Would it be possible to use it as a tether for the KSP remake of Gravity trailers? A lot of scenes involve two tethered astronauts and I know ropes are very hard to simulate because of the number of elements in them.

[Kerbol Prime]

I remember seeing an article about Niel Tyson talking about the inaccuracy. He seemed to enjoy nonetheless.

[FlamedSteak]

Please tell me this is not true. I almost died when the Enterprise "fell" from luna orbit in the latest film (not to mention the numerous visuals not matching the spoken lines).

There's nothing to say that maintaining a fixed position above a planetary body is impossible, it would just require massive amounts of power, some kind of gravity repulsor technology or diddling with the mass of an object. The beauty of Star Trek is that people from the future will undoubtedly look at us studying science with the same disdain that we look at a monkey studying something it has dislodged from it's nasal cavity.

[Deadfingers]

In Star Trek, they've figured out how to go faster than the speed of light and create artificial gravity, so they probably don't have many problems executing any maneuver they want to.

[Awaras]

Yes, the orbital mechanics are inaccurate but without those inaccuracies there would be no movie... The whole plot would be "debris hits ISS and anyone not killed outright slowly dies from suffocation and exposure with no chance of being rescued by anyone".

Edited October 8, 2013 by Awaras