Mars...

[VincentMcConnell]

lol sorry that was a typo, fixed, but still isn\'t 136,000 km still really really close? maybe im thinking this wrong...

135,000 km would be... 135 million. I see. I wish they would have taught us metric instead of that stupid ass imperial system. well that solves that riddle.

Buuuut, in your op you said the martian atmosphere was practically a vacuum. As NASA used a parachute on the 2 rovers they sent back in...09? this isn\'t the case... as far as I konw its mainly co2. I\'d check but i gotta goto bed now for work. later guys

The Martian atmosphere is so thin that it\'s almost a vacuum... You know the people who don\'t believe the Martian rovers are real? Their argument is that the atmosphere is too thin to deploy a parachute in... I am kind of unsure as to either side.

[Causeless]

The Martian atmosphere is so thin that it\'s almost a vacuum... You know the people who don\'t believe the Martian rovers are real? Their argument is that the atmosphere is too thin to deploy a parachute in... I am kind of unsure as to either side.

Well, maybe that\'s why it doesn\'t actually land with the parachute but only uses it to slow down for a semi-powered landing?

[Ntmoore19]

the atmosphere so thin that it\'s practically a vacuum.

I don\'t think you understand Mars. It is not almost a vacuum. Much thinner than Earth, but still not comparable to the vacuum of space.

Rovers also weren\'t deployed by simple parachutes. They also had powered descents paired with massive air-bags that bounced on the surface for miles.

An argument favoring Mars rovers being a hoax is more laughable than the Moon Landing conspiracy theories.

[Bluejayek]

You know the people who don\'t believe the Martian rovers are real? Their argument is that the atmosphere is too thin to deploy a parachute in... I am kind of unsure as to either side.

So... The argument is 'We know the atmosphere on mars is really thin because of the rovers we put on mars. Therefore, its impossible for rovers to land on mars since they all used parachutes! The rovers are a hoax!'

I see a logic fail.

As per the other comment... Martian surface atmospheric pressure is 6mbar as per nasa (http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/marsfact.html). While this is less then 1/100th of earths surface pressure of ~1000mbar, it still is very significant. At surface, this would be like kerbin at 20km altitude. Not massive, but 20km is around where serious braking starts to occur when in kerbin re-entry, to put it in perspective. (I refer you to the challenge on maximum g force, pulling around -40g\'s at 20km in atmosphere)

I suppose it really depends what you mean by 'Almost a vacuum'. It is much lower, but still for atmospheric drag it is very significant. Not enough to do a full parachute landing with the small parachutes we have now, but enough to slow down a lot.

[VincentMcConnell]

I don\'t think you understand Mars. It is not almost a vacuum. Much thinner than Earth, but still not comparable to the vacuum of space.

Rovers also weren\'t deployed by simple parachutes. They also had powered descents paired with massive air-bags that bounced on the surface for miles.

An argument favoring Mars rovers being a hoax is more laughable than the Moon Landing conspiracy theories.

I\'m not really all that knowledgeable on Mars rovers, honestly. I\'m more in favor of a manned landing and I consider robotics to just be a bunch of jerking around. I do believe they are real, but I don\'t really have the care enough to get real into the argument.

As for the moon landing conspiracy theories... Well... I know almost everything there is to know about Apollo and I KNOW that that is a bunch of nonsense. I spend a lot of time on youtube arguing that the moon missions were real. (I used to be a hoaxer.)

[VincentMcConnell]

Here\'s an article talking about the atmosphere on Mars.

http://www.bigsiteofamazingfacts.com/what-is-the-atmosphere-on-mars-like-and-how-much-carbon-dioxide-is-there-on-the-planet-mars

[DeCi]

Shall we stay On-Topic guys? Make a new thread in General or Off-topic if you want to discuss Mars hoaxes further :.

As some already mentioned: Harv will release more planets once the \'game\' and \'Core\' systems are in place.

It\'s like building a skycraper: one starts with a good foundation to build on. It would be disastrous for one to start putting up walls without a stable platform.

[AD-Edge]

And so it begins

Feels like just yesterday that people were getting impatient for the Mun to be added.

You young kerbalnaughts! Should be glad you have a Mun to land on let alone Mars! Back in my day... *waves walking stick around like an old man*

Regardless, it just occurred to me, what will the Mars in the Kerbin universe be called?? Mars is a bit too originial, just as the moon was, so everyone started calling it the Mun.

Murs? Hmm. S:|

[Nibb31]

The thing is, there will be no flags and footprints on Mars for at least the next 50 years, and probably the next century. So in the meantime, rovers and probes are cool. MSL will probably be the last rover. The next step for Mars missions are ISRU and sample return, which are both steps that have to be accomplished if we want flags and footprints one day.

As for KSP (back on topic), there is a big problem with getting to other planets: launch windows. For Mars, in RL, we get a launch window every 2 years. This would make KSP a pretty boring game if you had to warp 100000000x for 20 minutes to reach the next launch window. As you add more planets, the problem of planet alignment gets more difficult. It\'s going to be hard to keep a good balance between fun, game mechanics and orbital constraints, which is why Squad needs to have solid game mechanics first.

[sal_vager]

Actually I have a thought regarding this, when flying the starrally I realized I could go from geostationary orbit to the Mun a lot faster if i dropped back to Kerbin first, the Mun wasn\'t in the right place to just boost there without a lengthly orbit you see.

Now replace geostationary orbit with Kerbin and Kerbin with the sun, if we dropped down nearer to the sun first we could orbit much faster, then boost back up to the outer planets orbit, it would take fuel sure but not as much as you think, as you wouldn\'t need to drop that much.

[LaydeeDem]

I think Harvester wants to implement all the core stuff (docking, warping to a point on an orbit, ect.) before even thinking about adding a Mars like planet.

Also, why hasn\'t this been posted yet?

[AD-Edge]

Yep exactly.

A planet you want to land on may be in the wrong position to go directly from Kerbin, so hook it around the sun, or a planet (or both). Honestly it will just add to the experience.

Either wait for the planet to come around and launch some other missions during the wait, or make your own path.

Along with that idea, remember that soon we\'ll be getting a flight planning system, and whatever else that will lead on to bring. This is the perfect time for such a system to be introduced, because it will make the transition into a multi-planet solar system much smoother for the general players (when some new planets come along post-0.15 release)

Squad know what they\'re doing

[LaydeeDem]

Yep exactly.

A planet you want to land on may be in the wrong position to go directly from Kerbin, so hook it around the sun, or a planet (or both). Honestly it will just add to the experience.

Either wait for the planet to come around and launch some other missions during the wait, or make your own path.

Along with that idea, remember that soon we\'ll be getting a flight planning system, and whatever else that will lead on to bring. This is the perfect time for such a system to be introduced, because it will make the transition into a multi-planet solar system much smoother for the general players (when some new planets come along post-0.15 release)

Squad know what they\'re doing

Definitely post 0.15. It would be much easier to launch your lander into an orbit, and then launch an orbital fuel station and dock to it, and to Mars, or any planet, you go!

[Kryten]

Why the hell are you trying to lecture us about the space program, when you don\'t believe most of it even happened?

[LaydeeDem]

Why the hell are you trying to lecture us about the space program, when you don\'t believe most of it even happened?

Who, might I ask, are you directing this towards?

[Kryten]

Vincent. He doesn\'t believe the Mars rovers existed, he doesn\'t believe the entire Chinese space program exists...and he insists on lecturing us about whether you can see the bloody stars, and off-topic rubbish about what Mars is like.

[Causeless]

Ehm, Kryten...

I\'m not really all that knowledgeable on Mars rovers, honestly. I\'m more in favor of a manned landing and I consider robotics to just be a bunch of jerking around. I do believe they are real, but I don\'t really have the care enough to get real into the argument.

As for the moon landing conspiracy theories... Well... I know almost everything there is to know about Apollo and I KNOW that that is a bunch of nonsense. I spend a lot of time on youtube arguing that the moon missions were real. (I used to be a hoaxer.)

I think you misunderstood what he way saying.

[Kryten]

[gmod]*snip* Walking a line Kryten, be careful which side you're walking on.[/gmod]

[Warshawski]

Conspiracy idiot through and through.

Get back onto topic.

[SmiteZero]

[gmod]*snip* Watch it.[/gmod]

[Capt'n Skunky]

[gmod]This topic is going downhill fast. Clean it up yourselves or I will.[/gmod]

Cheers!

Capt\'n Skunky

KSP Community Manager

[Bluejayek]

Forget mars. What I really cant wait for is the jupiter system. Setting up massive fuel depots in orbit, staging multiple missions to the 4 galilean moons... Attempting to land on the tiny moons (try landing on something with 1/10th or less munar gravity!).

However, there are a lot of things that need to be done before this. I would much rather see docking, fuel transfer, complete multibody flight trajectories, and all of the other goodies that are being worked on complete and functional before they jump ahead and work on new planets. A lot of what I would want new planets for would be useless without those features anyways.

Getting all, or most, of the planetary bodies at once will be a lot of fun as well. There is so much that can be done that it will be more fun failing trying to do all 1000 possible missions at once, rather then mastering them one at a time when they become available.

One thing I would really like to see when the solar system gets implemented is the asteroid belt. There are a lot of opertunities there, and I would hate for them to be left out.

Clearly having all of the countless tiny asteroids is a) pointless and prohibitively time and processor consuming to do, but a reasonable number of the larger ones would be nice.

[VincentMcConnell]

Conspiracy idiot through and through.

Wow... What a quote mining, dishonest, lying moron you have proven yourself to be...

First of all, yes, I am highly skeptical of China\'s space walk and I have not seen enough of the 2003 footage to know if China showed videos of their taekonauts floating for more than 30 seconds. If they did not, it stands to reason they could have been on the vomit comet. Second of all, I am also highly skeptical of the Russian early spaceflight. While there is technical data all over the place that documents American early spaceflight, the secretive nature of Russia makes it impossible to tell, and there is evidence to suggest that Leonov\'s spacewalk was a fake. I do believe Americans have flown in space... Why? Because we were not secretive with every little thing we did. We didn\'t lie and coverup if one of our astronauts died. We admitted it, solved the problems and moved on. (Apollo 1).

The Russians had troubles launching all of their rockets, could not land on the moon and provided NO evidence that their men even flew in space. In addition, Gagarin the 'first man in space', descended to Earth on a simple parachute... Why?

If the Russians were putting people into space in the 60\'s, they failed and probably realized they needed to fake Gagarin\'s flight. At least that\'s what I believe. IF the Russians were putting people into space, I believe they all turned out as 'phantom cosmonauts' and the Soviet Union covered that up. If you look it up, you\'ll see what Phantom Cosmonauts are.

So here\'s the issue. You think I think the rovers are fake... I clearly stated that I DO NOT think that. After calling me an idiot, I feel I have the ability to give you two options, one of which you *MUST* choose.

1.) You either didn\'t know I said I believed the Martian Rovers, even though I posted it two times. In that case, you\'re ignorant and don\'t pay attention.

2.) You knew what I said about the rovers, but avoided it and lied anyway.

Have fun.

[VincentMcConnell]

Vincent. He doesn\'t believe the Mars rovers existed, he doesn\'t believe the entire Chinese space program exists...and he insists on lecturing us about whether you can see the bloody stars, and off-topic rubbish about what Mars is like.

Off topic, hmm? On a thread about MARS nothing can be off topic if it is ABOUT MARS.

Jeez. I\'m beginning to think you may want to just choose option one on that choice I gave you earlier... idiot? Me? HA! Maybe time to take a look at your own intelligence, posts and LIES.

[sal_vager]

I\'m probably making a mistake getting involved with this, but guys, really, It\'s not worth getting so riled up.

Kryten, Vincent is a reformed hoax believer, ok he has issues with the chinese and russian space programs, he also had issues with the moon landings but he eventually took the time to learn about them and it changed his mind, that means he is open to new evidence.

Which leads me to you Vincent, Kryten is upset as he believes hoaxers are blind to the truth, that is the case with many, but he forgets they are people, not weird morons, who just have difficulty getting their heads around these concepts.

There\'s stuff on the russian and chinese space programs that you may have missed Vince, and by reading up on more authoritative sources you may change your mind about them as well.

You mentioned the phantom cosmonauts, better known as the lost cosmonauts, this story has been addressed by a man called James Oberg.

He searched for info on this, and other space related matters, both russian and chinese, and he found that the russians in particular were from the beginning very open about their failures, they didn\'t like it but they did make them known and they moved on.

He also found nothing to support the lost cosmonauts, and much of the evidence would have been impossible to obtain, the heartbeat for instance, the russians didn\'t use audible heart rate monitors on any missions, that was an american thing.

Take a look here: http://www.jamesoberg.com/ the cosmonauts can be found in the history section.

There is also wealth if information regarding various space programs, and it\'s a pretty interesting read whether you\'re a believer or not.

I hope you find this useful, otherwise this thread might as well be locked, to sink into obscurity.

Now I\'m off to bed, I hope this threads still here tomorrow.