atmosphere heights

[KerbMav]

Several times I wondered if the information for the height of a planets atmosphere given in KSP is really correct.

Especially Eve (higher?) and Duna (lower?) seemed to be incorrect.

Was I breathing to much booster exhaust or is there something to it?

Edited January 26, 2015 by KerbMav

[Th3F3aR]

Well the stock souposphere is not good atmo model if you want to know the exact values go here:

-> wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Atmosphere or the wiki sites for the different planets.

[eddiew]

Yeah, the two you list are definitely wrong.

Eve; game says 90km, drag continues up to 100.

Duna; game says 50km, drag ends at 41,600m.

[UmbralRaptor]

The values shown in game in map view / tracking station are wrong. Sometimes trivially so (Kerbin), other times dramatically so (Jool). The actual top of the atmosphere for (stock) planets/moons is scale_height * ln(1e6).

Rounding to the nearest meter:

[table=width: 500, class: grid]

[tr]

[td]Body[/td]

[td]Nominal Atmo Height (km)[/td]

[td]Actual Atmo Height (km)[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Eve[/td]

[td]90[/td]

[td]96.709[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Kerbin[/td]

[td]70[/td]

[td]69.078[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Duna[/td]

[td]50[/td]

[td]41.447[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Jool[/td]

[td]200[/td]

[td]138.155[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Laythe[/td]

[td]50[/td]

[td]55.262[/td]

[/tr]

[/table]

Edited January 26, 2015 by UmbralRaptor

[KerikBalm]

They could do something like this intentionally... for example, one could have the tracking station provide "estimates" that get better if its upgraded, and of course, much better if you actually send a probe into the atmosphere.

The actual top of the atmosphere for (stock) planets/moons is scale_height * ln(1e6)

Ummmm..... 1^6 = 1. So then its scale height * ln1 = 0

Thats not right...

If you mean 1e^6, then its just scale height * 6... which for kerbin is 5km* 6 = 30 km.... that isn't right

Did you miss a zero? ln (10^6) = 13.8155

So 5km * 13.8155 = 69.078 km.... that must be it.

derp.... I don't like e notation, especially when using natural logs (which are base e, where e = 2.71828...) but I guess e6 = 10^6 in your notation. I generally think its a bad idea to mix e notation with ln

Edited January 26, 2015 by KerikBalm

[AlexinTokyo]

Ninja edited while writing a response.

For reference 1e6 is common engineering shorthand for 1 x 10^6

(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering_notation for details if you really care)

[KerbMav]

Huh ... and it took me 20 months ... I simply resorted to insertion burns very soon as aerobreaking did not deliver the desired results and all my missions to Eve were lander probes or high orbit mapping satellites anyway.

Thanks!