Building for testing ships in different gravity and/or atmosphere.

[chaos_forge]

So, if I understand this thread correctly, you want something exactly like Hyperedit because your too lazy to have MechJeb/Kerbal Engineer calculate your Delta-V/TWR/etc

Did you even look at my example? If you know a way to figure out the flight characteristics of a plane in Duna's atmosphere using MechJeb/Kerbal Engineer/any method other than physically being on Duna, please let me know. Otherwise, please refrain from using strawman arguments.

Also, this is a single player game, so it doesn't matter whether YOU think we've accomplished something, it matters whether WE think we've accomplished something.

Edited February 20, 2014 by chaos_forge

[Tw1]

Maybe a "simulator" that works like launching, except you are on the only planet in the universe, it's all grey flatness, and before starting you can choose atmo stats (thickness at sea level, thickness curve, and atmo height), planet stats (gravity, radius, etc), starting point (ground/orbit), and more?

This is how I'd like a simulator to work as well. The experience of actually landing/launching from the place would not be cheapened, as it could be via hyperedit, and you still need to get some data of your own before you can do tests.

Though a delta V counter would also be nice. This wouldn't give you all the answers, sometimes you will need manoeuvres you didn't plan for.

[Deta]

There's a tool that allows you to test your ship in any environment. It's called Hyperedit.

the only draw back to hyperedit is you can pop up to 100km but because your not at orbit speed, you will still be affected by gravity ie descent. I test stuff in sandbox before I try it career. also hack gravity but it does not sim Duna Gs higher G more fuel needed so a test area in career mode would be cool.

[Strikerklm96]

I thought of this previously, but instead I thought of it as being called a computer simulation. So you weren't actually building the rocket, it was a computer simulation of it, in a computer.

[Greenspan]

Also, this is a single player game, so it doesn't matter whether YOU think we've accomplished something, it matters whether WE think we've accomplished something.

Yes but if the devs have to take time away from other features to create a special magic gravity/atmosphere building it affects ALL of us.

My point was that the only argument I've seen against Hyperedit is that it ruins the "feeling" of accomplishment, and that doesn't make sense to me. How does making a special building that does the exact same thing but with different textures really change that?

Your spaceplane in Duna atmosphere example suggests the need for a WIND TUNNEL. Place a model of your ship in the wind tunnel, set the density/airspeed and see what the lift/drag and torque forces are at different AoA. Now that's not a bad idea.

Edited February 20, 2014 by Greenspan

[J.Random]

While gravity simulation feels wrong, I certainly like the idea of a wind tunnel (with FAR integration... *drools*).

[xrayfishx]

The simulator idea isn't new; there already was a s*itstorm thread about it. Cba to link it here. What I believe is that a simulator would only work based on the information you have - in the beginning you only know approximate gravity and atmosphere and the planet is flat, but if you send a probe there to take pictures, gather atmospheric and gravity data etc then you get that information in your simulator. The pictures would add surface details depending on how far and where you took these pictures so you can take good pictures of your landing area to make that information in your simulator precise. This would add a reason for sending probes on planets.

Also, the simulator would get better as you advance in the tech tree.

[Dunbaratu]

While it's not realistic to magic up a different gravity for testing, it's also true that it's not realistic for the space program to have zero numerical information about things like how the suspension of the wheels of a rover works. Actual space engineers building a rover would be able to calculate "this is how many centimeters the craft will depress the suspension by, given its mass, the gravity of the target body, and the way the suspension was made." But people playing KSP have those numbers hidden from them. Some mods do help a bit, but they don't tell you everything (like the suspension isn't given to you in units where you can calculate the deflection. This makes it impossible to work out where to place that rover's docking port so it will line up correctly - a very common problem KSP players have.

[Shna_na]

Skim-read some replies , but read the OP.

I don't think a building is needed for this, though it would be a nice feature to have as a simulation. For that reason, I think that in the mission control building there should be a "simulate" button. When you press this button, it should take you to a list of variables:

1. Atmosphere: Select from a list of bodies with atmospheres to simulate their density.
   
2. Gravity: Select which body's gravity you would like to simulate.
   
3. Landing altitude: Select the altitude of your landing zone (a random button could be available for those who don't need a specific height).
   
4. Flight Conditions:
   
   • Flight Path: Select the angle at which you are landing and the current altitude (just above the atmosphere in those that have one or 10KM for those that don't by default, but is tweakable).
     
   • Situation: Landed, splashed, or sub-orbital trajectory?
     
   • Stage: Starting stage and remaining fuel.
     
   • 
     

This should display options based on the science you already have. This means that you can only simulate the gravity of planets for which you have gravioli research from and only simulate the atmosphere of a planet you have done some barometric research on.

The planet simulated should be flat at the altitude you specified and have a ground composed of different shades of grey, with a plain blue atmosphere for those that have one. This ensures that no spoilers are given in terms of the actual planet, and makes it more like a simulation.

This would be a great way of making the science more than just a currency, but also an actual piece of researching material. As more variables become a factor (such as temperature, seismology, etc.), the research becomes more and more important for simulations.

[OgreMagi]

yea I do like the idea of a simulator,

Planned a mission to deliver a space plane to eve and since regular jets don't work it needed kethan zero bypass turbins the problem was I couldn't ge them to work on kerbin so no flight testing of a design on kerbin well I made several designs to get it close

#1 worked but it was a pain to fly the center of mass/center of lift changed because of the atmosphere and gravity change. but massive effort to build it, launch it, maneuver it to eve only to find out yea ti doesn't work.

so I wouldn't mind a way to test my aircraft