Comet 67P vs the KSP Asteroid

[Sky_walker]

Some photoshop fun I had in a spare time... enjoy

Link the whole sequence on a single image.

To give perhaps a better sense of scale, here is my station build on that asteroid:

Edited September 8, 2014 by Sky_walker

[Aningaaq]

Awesome scale imagery! +1

[Streetwind]

Psst... your title contains an embarrassing mistake...

[Tommygun]

So no NASA redirect mission for Comet 67P?

[Sky_walker]

Psst... your title contains an embarrassing mistake...

Thanks for pointing it out Fixed already.

[lajoswinkler]

Nice collage.

KSP "asteroids" are not all asteroids by typical definitions people used throughout the history. A class certainly isn't an asteroid. It's some 3 metres in diameter, making it a meteoroid, a typical rock in Solar system, impacting Earth on weekly basis or even more often (usually detonate high above oceans). I don't know the dimensions of other classes, but B and C might be falling under meteoroids, too.

E class certainly is an asteroid, a tiny one, measuring some 30 metres in diameter.

I'll see if I can do something with Churyumov-Gerasimenko, too.

[magnemoe]

Nice collage.

KSP "asteroids" are not all asteroids by typical definitions people used throughout the history. A class certainly isn't an asteroid. It's some 3 metres in diameter, making it a meteoroid, a typical rock in Solar system, impacting Earth on weekly basis or even more often (usually detonate high above oceans). I don't know the dimensions of other classes, but B and C might be falling under meteoroids, too.

E class certainly is an asteroid, a tiny one, measuring some 30 metres in diameter.

I'll see if I can do something with Churyumov-Gerasimenko, too.

The NASA asteroid capture mission would go after an KSP sized asteroid, 3-8 meter in diameter as I remember.

But I agree that is not that people think of as an proper one.

[Sky_walker]

Nice collage.

KSP "asteroids" are not all asteroids by typical definitions people used throughout the history. A class certainly isn't an asteroid. It's some 3 metres in diameter, making it a meteoroid, a typical rock in Solar system, impacting Earth on weekly basis or even more often (usually detonate high above oceans). I don't know the dimensions of other classes, but B and C might be falling under meteoroids, too.

E class certainly is an asteroid, a tiny one, measuring some 30 metres in diameter.

Yea, I know Shameless disregard to nomenclature. I just kept it within KSP naming convention so that folks here would know what's going on

But now that you are on it:

[lajoswinkler]

Gilly is the smallest natural satellite in KSP universe, E-class asteroids are the largest off-rails objects, and 67P is a comet we've got the best photos of, so I've made this comparison.

(right click, view image to see it in full resolution)

In this scale, E-class asteroid is half pixel wide so one pixel would mean 60 m, but that's the best I can do.

I've lowered the brightness of the comet significantly because its albedo is around a typical albedo of comets, which is 4%. We can say it's darker than a pile of fresh coal, or of freshly laid asphalt.

It's extremely dark and the photos presented in the media are overexposed to actually let people see the details.

[deadshot462]

Nice pictures.

Matter of time before someone docks a bunch of E-asteroids together to form their own Comet 67P

[lajoswinkler]

In case someone wants a nice wallpaper, this is the original one of that low resolution Tommygun had posted earlier.

https://i.imgur.com/1OF5OEK.jpg

[Mighty1]

You are all comparing kerbal with rw asteroids and it seems that you are all forgetting that in ksp everything is scaled down roughly 10 times. So an E class 30 meter roid would be some 300 m in real world. Not the biggest in the sol.system but still a killer if it hit earth.

[General Rarity]

You are all comparing kerbal with rw asteroids and it seems that you are all forgetting that in ksp everything is scaled down roughly 10 times. So an E class 30 meter roid would be some 300 m in real world. Not the biggest in the sol.system but still a killer if it hit earth.

I'm sure that's wrong.

Yes, the planets are scaled down. But the meters aren't. If you rescaled the meter, wouldn't it make more sense to name it something else?

[peadar1987]

I'm sure that's wrong.

Yes, the planets are scaled down. But the meters aren't. If you rescaled the meter, wouldn't it make more sense to name it something else?

I think planets are scaled down, but tanks, engines, command pods, and basically anything you need to move isn't, which would include asteroids (If everything was scaled down ten times, Kerbals in real life would be some 8 metres tall!

[Mighty1]

Well, you are close. It's 7 meters according to this. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80099-Kerbals-are-Giants?highlight=kerbals+giants