"Impactor" science experiment

[peadar1987]

I'd like to see a science experiment (or at least science points) for flying a probe into a body like the Deep Impact mission, I think it'd fit well into early career-mode missions when we'll be looking for experiments that are cheap, uncomplicated, and don't require great piloting skills or higher-tier parts to pull off.

[DELTA_12]

it would be interesting but it would be hard to code sice that science part would require big impact tolerance and event if some part has big impat toreance it doesnt always means that it will survaive a hard impact since other parts mosly rip off

[Atoning Unifex]

I like this idea. The first moon landings were hard impacts to provide data about near surface and surface conditions and similar IRL suggestions have been made for other planets.

Plus I'm very good at crashing into planets! No, really! I do it all the time!

Not sure about the implementation of such a device but it sounds like fun anyway.

[Themohawkninja]

it would be interesting but it would be hard to code sice that science part would require big impact tolerance and event if some part has big impat toreance it doesnt always means that it will survaive a hard impact since other parts mosly rip off

The structural panels already are pretty close to this. If you just double the numbers, it should work perfectly.

[Themohawkninja]

This would probably require that two parts are "connected" in such a way that when part A is destroyed, part B counts it as an experiment, and stores the data for recovery, storage, or transmission.

[JumpsterG]

Would be cool to have a REASON to crash into something...

The very nature of the experiment requires the destruction of the part involved, so yes challenging! Actually, the science value of impactors comes from cameras pointed at the impact point and by geologically sensitive instruments that record the seismic activity caused by the impact. That would also be a challenge to simulate in KSP.

There could be contracts with the objective to impact a body, though it still seems more "right" to reward science for it.

[S4qFBxkFFg]

I think this would be good once we get the observatory, and instruments like telescopes/cameras/spectrometers. As stated, the instruments you'd be getting the science from wouldn't be the part impacting.

[allmappedout]

I think this would be good once we get the observatory, and instruments like telescopes/cameras/spectrometers. As stated, the instruments you'd be getting the science from wouldn't be the part impacting.

Agreed. Usually, there are seismometers deployed relatively near, so perhaps the science part from an impactor would only work if the part that was the science creator exploded within 2.5km physics range of the piece.

[r4pt0r]

i had a similar idea wherein a special "mass" part could be added to probes. if this mass collided with a planet or moon at more than 3000m/s in vacuum then you would get science points(presumably from kerbin based spectrum telescopes reading the ejected matter) no need for transmission. or we could do it like the real life mission OP suggested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Impact_(spacecraft)

[peadar1987]

I think having to have a seismometer network and observatories is probably a little complicated, I would have imagined the impactor expriment as something to do for less advanced players who aren't yet able to make a controlled landing on the Mun or Minmus

[JumpsterG]

I think having to have a seismometer network and observatories is probably a little complicated, I would have imagined the impactor expriment as something to do for less advanced players who aren't yet able to make a controlled landing on the Mun or Minmus

Agreed. From a gameplay perspective, this is more useful. A popup after the crash, similar to what you get from recovering a vessel on Kerbin, could let you know you got x science points for impacting a body. I'm guessing, to register an impactor, it would need to have focus at the time of crash?

[Themohawkninja]

Something just occurred to me.

You would only be able to transmit the data, because the experiment itself is self-destructive.

Edited December 24, 2013 by Themohawkninja

[Atoning Unifex]

Something just occurred to me.

You could would only be able to transmit the data, because the experiment itself is self-destructive.

This is probably a perfect example of why transmission losses are ill conceived!

[Themohawkninja]

This is probably a perfect example of why transmission losses are ill conceived!

Although, on second thought, you could build it with two parts, the impactor and a video camera to record the impact. At least then you could both transmit or recover the data.

[TimMartland]

I did an impact mission in 0.22. I just flew fast at the Mun and spammed the send key as much as I could before I hit the ground!

[zxczxczbfg]

I think it might be a possibility to take a QBE probe body or something similar, add an integrated RTG so it doesn't die, add an "impact analysis" science experiment, add a transmission module, and ramp up the impact tolerance to twenty gajillion. The analysis would have to give relatively little science to balance out the other capabilities, but still.

Edited January 1, 2014 by zxczxczbfg

[akalla]

What if the seismology component was an optional extra? The ship orbiting the planet dropping impactors could have instruments for analyzing the plume, etc., and if you had previously landed a seismograph close enough then you could receive extra science points. The difference between just watching an impact from orbit vs. recording the seismic data might be on par with the difference between transmitting data about a sample vs. returning it to kerbin.

I have no idea about coding any of this... I assume it complicates things to try to have two ships working together on a science experiment like this?

[Specialist290]

There could be contracts with the objective to impact a body, though it still seems more "right" to reward science for it.

Agreed. While coding a specific part to actually survive impact unscathed to transmit science might be very difficult for obvious reasons, I can definitely see how this might integrate well with the contract system, giving you a science reward for completing the mission.

I can even see a good in-character justification for it, in light of the comments others have made: The contracting organization has their own measuring instruments to observe the effects of the impact, and they'll share the data with your space program if you'll construct the probe for them to their specifications.

[Whirligig Girl]

I think that if you destroy a part, the science log will show up and it will be automatically be sent back for 100% transmission value. In addition to biome, speed ranges should be a factor. Between 10 m/s and 40 m/s. Between 40 m/s and 70 m/s. Between 70 m/s and 150 m/s. Between 150 m/s and 270 m/s. Between 270 m/s and 400 m/s. Between 400 m/s and 800 m/s. Between 800 m/s and 2.5 km/s. Between 2.5 km/s and 5 km/s. Between 5 km/s and 70 km/s. 70 km/s+

[Atoning Unifex]

I can definitely see how this might integrate well with the contract system, giving you a science reward for completing the mission.

Yes this sounds like a good way around implementing something tricky. As an aside it's also been suggested that resources could be handled the same way - we identify their existance for another company to then exploit, so we have none of the grinding but get some monetary or other benefit.

[Stargate525]

Uh guys...

Couldn't you just code the game to run a check to see if the ship is capable of transmitting (which is already does on command), and then code the end screen to award a 'recovery of data from a ship crashed on X' the same way it handles determination whether you recover or scrap a vessel? To prevent it happening for landers, it only works on a 'catastrophic failure!' screen.

I mean, the game is already doing everything it needs for this to work. The different aspects just need to talk to one another.

As for seismometers and stuff. Yeah, that's one thing that they do. Though I think it's much more common to send the impactor, and then watch the resulting plume/crater with spectrometers and telescopes and such. Since we don't HAVE those... I think it's a fair abstraction to assume the kerbals have their big lenses trained on your kaboom.

[mc8888]

You could do it as a hard lander type thingy. The idea is you fire it at the said planet/moon and it sticks into the surface, then sends back information. You could make the whole experiment a single part, maybe like a hybrid between a solid rocket, a probe core and a science experiment. That way, you could make the whole thing strong without worrying about things falling off on impact.