[00:16:09] my Kerbals don't generate enough carbon dioxide for the greenhouse to stock up on food [00:16:23] Action: packbart installed Tac LifeSupport today - Tamagotchi in a lander can [00:16:58] tell em to breathe harder ;) [00:17:22] When in doubt, set something on fire [00:28:03] packbart: Burn some kerosene. [00:34:16] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o UmbralRaptor' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [01:25:40] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+v erio' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [02:45:50] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+v eriophora' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [03:04:50] Hi all. [03:05:12] I was wondering, how do I see the gravity of some body in ksp at sea level? [03:05:24] I've seen it mentioned that kerbal is 9.81 [03:05:31] kerbin* [03:05:53] But where is that shown in game? [03:06:47] IIRC, when you have a planet focused in map mode. [03:07:05] The tracking station is probably the easiest way to get there. [03:08:23] Oh it's the ASL Gravity from the tracking station? [03:09:39] yeah [03:10:14] uh, since I'm not in front of a machine running KSP, O forget what units it's in. [03:10:24] yeah I was gonna say [03:10:37] s/O/I/ [03:11:13] how to I turn 1.00034g (ASL Gravity) into the 9.81 "units" that I put into my equation for working out TWR? [03:11:24] is the 9.81 in newtons or something? [03:13:50] ;c 1.000034*9.80665 [03:13:50] UmbralRaptor: 9.8069834261 [03:14:07] ;c 1.000034*9.81 [03:14:07] UmbralRaptor: 9.81033354 [03:14:11] Hrm [03:14:39] Yeah, you'll have to multiply it on other bodies by 9.81. [03:15:14] Sort of how look earth's gravity gets called both 9.81 m/s² and 1 g. [03:15:43] yeah I see [03:16:04] so kerbin is 1.00034g which is 9.81 m/s^2 [03:16:47] so another body which is say 0.75g, I can work it out [03:16:59] but where dose the 9.81 m/s^2 measurement come from? [03:17:03] and where can I see it in game? [03:18:14] I mean, I've been using Thrust / Mass / 9.81 to work out the initial TWR, but that 9.81 is just a magic number I got off the internet [03:18:18] not a value I got in-game [03:18:49] and since I want to work out some TWR for other bodies, I was wondering how I get the magic number for them too [03:18:56] funksh0n: The game doesn't show 9.81 m/s2, but you can calculate it: a=Gm/r2. [03:18:58] *other than looking it up on the wiki [03:19:09] ah I see darsie [03:19:28] is there a name for that? [03:19:50] It's called acceleration. [03:20:08] Gm is the Standard gravitational parameter [03:20:18] It's G*m. [03:20:20] so that's the acelleration applied by the force of gravity? [03:20:38] G is the gravitational constant and m is the planets mass. [03:20:41] yes [03:20:51] r is the planet radius [03:20:58] is that r^2? [03:21:02] yes [03:21:40] is r^2 rather your radius from the center, we treat it as a point mass? [03:21:49] yes [03:21:54] what is G? [03:21:58] G is the gravitational constant and m is the planets mass. [03:22:06] so G = ? [03:22:23] G=Gm/m [03:22:42] I guess I misunderstand the constant bit [03:22:43] sorry [03:23:04] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant 6.67408(31)×1011 m3Åkg1Ås2 [03:23:36] The game tells you m and G*m. [03:23:40] and r [03:24:18] Oh so it does! [03:24:19] and a/a(Kerbin), e.g. 1 g. [03:24:30] I see [03:24:51] ^ You can also 'measure' local gravity with the negative gravioli detector. [03:24:59] yeah :) [03:25:12] nice [03:25:25] Uses a bit of EC for the LCD :). [03:25:37] heh [03:25:39] For KSP purposes, it divides the acceleration by 9.80665 to get the g numbers. [03:25:56] Action: UmbralRaptor may have fired up KSP to check [03:26:56] https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Kerbin says Standard gravitational parameter 3.5316000×1012 m3/s2 and Equatorial radius 600 000 m and with that Gm/r2=9.81 exactly. [03:27:59] Action: darsie fires, too. [03:28:18] ðŸ”¥ðŸ”¥ðŸ”¥ [03:29:21] funksh0n: gravity is giver at 0 altitude, which may not exist for some bodies. [03:29:28] given* [03:30:44] funksh0n: Spherically symmetric spheres (e.g. core and mantle) can be substituted with point masses to get identical results for gravity. [03:31:06] so if the game says Kerbin mass is 5.292E+22 kg, does that mean I move the decimal 22 places to the right to get it's mass in kg? Sorry for newb questions :P [03:31:45] and if I'm going to manually work out a from a=Gm/r^2, what unit should I use for m? [03:31:57] kg or tonnes or what? [03:31:59] funksh0n: yes [03:32:06] use SI units. [03:32:10] m, kg, s [03:32:18] imperial? [03:32:27] If you're masochistic. [03:32:32] heh [03:32:33] Only if you hate yourself [03:32:36] Or imperialistic :). [03:32:37] what does SI stand for? [03:32:43] system international [03:32:45] ah [03:32:51] metric it is [03:32:56] yes [03:34:02] so what's a convenient way of using the a=Gm/r^2 here? If I was going to attempt it by hand (or by typing into python or something) should I really put m as 5292 with ~20 zeros after it? [03:34:08] i.e. using kg? [03:34:19] funksh0n: I usually use scientific notation (5.292E22) with my calculator rather than moving the decimal places. [03:34:36] ah nice [03:34:48] so I can just keep that shorthand for the calultion [03:34:51] calculation* [03:34:57] Depends on your calculator. [03:35:37] Forget credit card sized solar powered calculators :). [03:35:55] Unless you keep track of decimal places separately. [03:36:31] eh, random scientific calculators have ways. Graphing ones more so. [03:40:58] well [03:41:03] Python 3 [03:41:11] but I don't mind switching to something else [03:41:42] so yeah, I'm kinda confused right now [03:41:49] The numbers shown in the game may be rounded from internally used values. [03:42:00] how do I work out the twr of my craft on the mun? [03:42:12] I know the thrust of the engines and the mass of the craft [03:42:16] F=m*a [03:42:25] funksh0n, f = ma; a = f/m [03:42:46] TWR=F/F [03:43:05] thrust/gravity [03:43:17] And the Mun has 1.63 m/s^2 gravity [03:43:20] https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Mun [03:43:38] lordcirth: yeah, that's the value I'm having trouble with getting [03:44:06] I know it's 9.81 m/s^2 for kerbin because I saw that outside of the game [03:44:32] I'm pretty sure you guys have just given me the answer already [03:44:38] I just need to math a bit more [03:45:01] gravity could mean either acceleration or force. [03:45:16] I think [03:46:05] well as I said, I was using (thrust / mass) / 9.81 [03:46:22] We could measure gravity to high precision by observing circular orbit period. [03:46:30] Technically gravity is the force and m/s^2 is "acceleration due to gravity", but so long as you include units, it's obvious what is meanth [03:46:36] so for mun I guess it's (thrust / mass) / 1.63 [03:46:43] funksh0n, indeed [03:46:48] do I just need a gravioly detector to tell me? [03:47:21] or is there another way to infer that 9.81 or 1.63 or whatever value? [03:47:34] Gm/r^2> [03:47:35] ? [03:47:42] We could measure gravity to high precision by observing circular orbit period. [03:47:44] ^ [03:47:50] ah [03:47:59] funksh0n, if you know the orbital radius and period of the Mun, you can calculate the gravity of Kerbin, and so on. [03:48:06] I see [03:48:24] The other wat would usually be to read off the values on the map. Measuring orbital distances and periods is how we do this in real life, though. [03:48:38] lordcirth: I'll watch that, inferring Kerbins gravity by observing a Mun orbit :). [03:48:48] yeah I understand [03:49:07] ahh, Mun's orbit around Kerbin. [03:49:09] s/wat/way/ [03:49:49] Hmm, I guess the game uses a massless Mun for that calculation. [03:52:34] Yeah, KSP doesn't do n-body [03:53:06] Gravity goes down the tree one-way [03:56:27] funksh0n: Feel free to calculate Kerbin's Gm: http://bksys.at/bernhard/temp/screenshot33.png :) [03:58:30] Dunno if calculating Gm from elliptic orbits is much harder. [03:59:17] appreciate it darsie [04:02:02] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_period#Small_body_orbiting_a_central_body [04:02:15] It's not too much harder. You just need semimajor axis instead of radius. [04:02:21] mhm [04:02:39] another thing, when I'm working out the TWR for some rocket that has multiple engines [04:02:45] do I just add the thrust values? [04:02:52] yeah [04:02:56] okay nice [04:03:05] If they burn simultaneously and in the same direction. [04:03:08] yeah [04:04:34] funksh0n: Beware, those altitudes are above surface, not center. [04:04:59] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-major_and_semi-minor_axes [04:21:43] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apsis SMA=(Ap+Pe)/2 [04:24:45] Circular and elliptic orbits: http://bksys.at/bernhard/temp/screenshot34.png [04:42:08] From the elliptic orbit I get GM=3.5377 m3/s2, a=9.8269 m/s2. [04:42:27] 3.5377E12 [04:47:16] From the larger, almost circular orbit I get GM=3.5314 m3/s2, a=9.80947 m/s2. [04:48:23] 3.5314E12 [05:34:41] From Mun's orbit GM=3.53157E12, a=9.809912 [05:39:13] With these two subsequent occultations of a red giant (about 1.5 Kerbin diameters above its equtor, already half eclipsed) by Mun I determined Mun's orbital period: http://bksys.at/bernhard/temp/screenshot38.png http://bksys.at/bernhard/temp/screenshot39.png [05:39:57] So it appears they use 9.81 m/s2. [08:47:37] look at the size of that thing https://i.redd.it/9kyv7fia8hb21.png [08:50:18] What engines are these? [08:50:41] rapier engines with nose cones [08:51:06] weird [08:51:22] the nose cones decrease drag [08:51:36] Look at the size of that (off topic) thing: http://bksys.at/bernhard/temp/IMG_1665.JPG [08:51:38] ic [08:51:47] tiny [08:52:07] I wound 32 turns on a 3 mm ferrite toroid core. 1.13 mH. [08:52:27] Found it in ethernet isolation transformers. [09:06:20] looks like I'll be hunting down some tube sockets.. once friend gets around to testing some stuff for me... [09:06:37] while on the topic of electronic hardware. [09:06:52] darsie: 10 fps? :D [09:07:06] oh, wait, that was Althego [09:07:18] Action: darsie waits ;). [09:07:25] probably lower than that, but i dont know [09:07:27] Althego: also the nose cones don't work anymore :( [09:13:40] Althego ya.. I saw that pic too. something about being able to lift 200 tons or something? I don't remember where I saw it now though. [09:13:50] 550 [09:14:09] i find these on ksp twitter, but most of them are on reddit too [09:18:37] oh right twitter... was back when trying to find any news on the webstore acting weird [09:19:27] then I saw this... https://twitter.com/KerbalSpaceP/status/1085588035381719041 [09:19:27] <KerbalSpaceP> This guy landed a landing pad on a peak and then landed a reusable rocket on the mountain peak landing pad... ðŸ¤¯& https://t.co/3k9owTpC55 [09:19:37] seem to recall someone brought that up here not too long ago [09:19:48] that was me [09:20:22] :) [09:21:14] I would have needed such a thing on Gilly's pole. Impossible to remain stable on that peak. [09:21:39] hehe [09:24:18] Ugh... I would love to land on the Mun's polar area... too bad terrain is crazy as ffffff.. [09:24:49] unless they got around to 'fixing' the map scaling for the polar areas... [09:25:30] JVFoxy: There's an anomaly in one of those pits. No sunlight. tough [09:27:02] not so much the pits I worry about.. the valley and mountains get overly exaggerated closer you get to the center of the polar areas. Mostly because of how they did the map overlay.. not sure if its still an issue? [09:48:35] JVFoxy: just bring enough fuel to hover ;) [09:49:06] rather fly than hover.. [09:49:11] also the scale of KSP (and our solar system) always gets me. [09:49:19] if I couldn't would love to find a spot for base [09:49:25] ... if I could.. ugh [09:49:27] LSP PLANETS AND DISTANCES ARE TINY [09:49:31] eh [09:49:37] Sent a rover to Eve. Drove for a few km. Marker didn't move on the map screen [09:49:40] i was cleaning the keyboard, and pressed capslock [09:50:00] Then built a plane and flew around Kerbin [09:50:05] better [09:50:13] that is why i want electric props [09:50:24] going around on eve and duna with rover is really dangerous and slow [09:50:30] timewarp makes things look so much closer... [09:50:51] Timewarp is dangerous, too. [09:51:01] physics warp is [09:51:41] physics warp + wheels = doooom [09:51:51] Timewarp sometimes makes things *be* much closer [09:51:56] hencet he need fro electric props [09:53:45] EM drive! ;P [09:56:22] unicorns! [10:08:59] gas props.. electric props... either would be nice [10:09:19] no, because fuel based props wouldnt work on eve and duna [10:09:38] but if you dont need speed that much, props are the most efficient you canget [10:10:11] Oh. .eve.. was thinking kerbin mostly. [10:10:33] electric on eve.. sure. Hopefully big enough powersorce [10:18:35] https://i.redd.it/mphlp1i53uc21.jpg [10:20:20] heh, hehe, ant them messed up anthem too [10:20:27] and they [10:21:35] looks amazing and it is bugged to the point of unlplayable [10:26:40] Althego: LF+O powered jets [10:26:58] we have that already. other name is rocket :) [10:27:01] ie, you provide the oxidizer too, but use the local atmosphere for reaction mass [10:27:17] that could work [11:18:11] "Plant a flag on Eve". [11:18:33] Ok, who's going to live the rest of their life on Eve? [11:18:35] :D [11:21:15] it is relatively easy to bring back one kerbal from eve [11:21:25] at least compared to the soup era [11:26:16] Well. It still takes a lot of 7.5 m power [11:26:24] also you have to land it, too... [11:32:00] when did 'soup era' end btw? [11:32:21] I first poked KSP back when it was 0.18 [11:32:21] ksp 1.0 [11:32:41] Mind you.. can't say I've gone past minmus yet.. sigh [11:32:49] "soup era" replaced by "magic wing era" :P [11:33:08] what magic? [11:33:13] JVFoxy: heh, I have bases on Mun, Minmus, Gilly, Duna and Pol [11:33:35] attempted to jool.. a few times. I know transfer windows its just.. so far between [11:33:37] soup era? [11:33:42] Althego: changing from high-aspect straight wings at slow speed to delta-wings at high speed [11:34:03] (visible wing shape is (mostly) irrelevant) [11:34:11] hehe i didnt know that. it was just fuiny that all wing shapes always worked [11:34:21] darsie: completely wrong aerodynamic model [11:34:27] ok [11:34:32] those swept stock wings I find too far swept [11:34:40] darsie: also commonly known as the souposphere, before the atmosphere was really not realistic [11:34:40] darsie: drag was based on part mass [11:35:04] it's still souposphere :p [11:35:12] biggest problem with that is an empty tank and a full tank would fall at exactly the same speed [11:35:14] but old aero was hilarious [11:35:19] (correct for Mun, wrong for Kerbin) [11:35:22] so you had huge drag, thus you always went straight up to 10 km before banking, now you can have a more reaistic ascent [11:35:44] soup-sphere to me was back when it was so thick, no matter what you made, always ran out of fuel before reaching space even [11:35:49] also you could just use blunt shapes [11:35:58] very wide blunt shapes, usually [11:36:01] in fACT IT WAS BETTER [11:36:09] BECAUSE THE NOSECONES ADDED MASS, THUS DRAG [11:36:19] Althego: fine control ;) [11:36:40] you can still fly a box.. wings vs panels [11:36:56] with enough power, even a brick can fly [11:37:09] ya but in ksp... brick will fly. Just hide wings inside it [11:37:16] stock air has body lift these days? [11:37:19] install FAR :) [11:37:28] VanDisaster: hacky [11:37:31] ya.. stock has body lift but careful, sometimes doesn't mirror properly [11:37:37] there is a tiny bit of body lift with high enough angle [11:37:48] even then.. it acts up [11:37:52] FAR has done body lift (reasonably) correctly forever [11:37:57] but mostly it is limited with mk2 parts with built in lift [11:38:04] (all parts) [11:38:24] which is part of why rockets are (and always were) harder in FAR [11:38:51] (sure, soup-days it took less ”V getting to orbit, but good luck getting /through/ the atmosphere) [11:39:12] yes the jets working at near orbital speed at 79 km :) [11:39:13] 69 [11:39:27] 79km would be impressive ;) [11:39:31] soup-day era FAR didn't have proper shape drag [11:39:46] soup-day? soup-air [11:39:46] VanDisaster: yes it did, since 0.25 or so [11:39:58] not the voxel analysis bit [11:40:02] yes, the voxels [11:40:10] My speedbird could do 69km and even go a little faster than orbital speed... that was prior to jet engine revamp [11:40:14] they're older than 1.0 [11:40:19] now I'm curious [11:40:22] firing up a 0.9 [11:40:37] might have been 0.9 [11:40:45] well, 0.90 [11:40:54] 0.9 may not have had FAR ;) [11:41:17] Action: JVFoxy has far back as 0.23 [11:41:40] I installed FAR a week after I started playing [11:41:46] that was in 0.18 or something [11:41:56] I started on friend's laptop with 0.18 [11:42:05] 1-2 weeks for me, 0.19 [11:42:21] looking for my first voxel/shape screenshot [11:42:24] wow, 0.9 fires up fast [11:42:37] lol [11:43:11] I might be wrong and maybe it was 1.0 that added voxels [11:44:04] 0.24 or 0.25 is when FAR got aero-confetti [11:45:50] ok, into 1.0 shots, no sign of voxels [11:45:52] sorry [11:46:31] sorry, voxel..? [11:46:32] ok, it was 1.0 from the looks of it [11:46:33] don't think it's something worth apologising about :p [11:47:39] http://taniwha.org/~bill/screenshot3162.png [11:47:43] all your voxel are belong to us :) [11:47:46] seems to be my first voxel-shot [11:47:50] (well, shape-based) [11:47:53] jets I think got preformance modeling around 1.0.2-1.0.3 [11:48:10] dated 2015/9/5 [11:48:29] JVFoxy: 1.0 [11:48:36] I'm *pretty* sure [11:48:54] (I remember checking lots of model dimentions for NK) [11:49:04] or at least just shortly after... some posts about drag modeling too, but is going all over the place [11:49:09] https://flic.kr/p/y8exqp yea sometime around then [11:50:10] uff.. I did a delta wing craft using old school mk3 body cockpit [11:50:28] FAR body lift in action :) http://taniwha.org/~bill/screenshot3172.png [11:50:41] (FAR stole the wings) [11:51:07] http://taniwha.org/~bill/screenshot3173.png [11:51:12] did not end well, though [11:51:24] (couldn't brake in time for the hills) [11:51:43] https://i.imgur.com/hsIxYfm.png that's the voxels [11:53:02] yeah, mine was the result of the voxels [11:55:33] btw, first ever Tylo landing (second attempt) http://taniwha.org/~bill/screenshot4534.png [11:56:11] (just the other night) [11:56:48] first attempt went badly because I warped too close to the ground (which was odd: before, KSP wouldn't let be warp below 30km) [11:57:13] also, second attempt had more ”V [11:57:32] The Pol-Tylo stage had more fuel [11:57:43] lol... ksp didn't catch my warping fast enough. went from coming from lunar orbit, to instantly underwater by a few miles [11:58:32] ah, 100k warp [11:58:37] don't do that in Kerbin SoI [11:58:52] ... ya oops? https://imgur.com/a/a6N0FOd [11:58:54] Nyquist bit your bum :) [11:58:59] hehe [11:59:15] 100k warp: 2000s every /frame/ [11:59:29] ... ok correction, almost 120km underground somehow [11:59:46] 2000s is a LONG time on trans-Mun orbit [11:59:54] (when near the periapsis) [12:00:17] I'm going to guess 1.8million kpa kind of a lot of pressure [12:00:27] yeah [12:00:36] but anyways... was one of the funnies I had in the game [12:00:49] you are under the ground surface too [12:01:00] my other was the font glitch... [12:01:10] https://flic.kr/p/rQdFY6 kPa is small change [12:01:21] one mission, two relay sats: http://taniwha.org/~bill/screenshot4505.png http://taniwha.org/~bill/screenshot4510.png [12:01:40] (some time later, Val stole the first and flung it almost out of the solar system) [12:01:54] I wanna record the landing leg launching funny. Probe body, 4 little landing legs, reduce spring and damp down to 0... launch. watch it hit nearly 80g off the pad for some reason [12:02:20] physx spring bug [12:02:42] it'll compress, then suddenly 'snap'... [12:02:56] when the suspension spring hits its limits, physx goofs and goes non-physical [12:03:06] (recently fixed in physx, so in KSP... never?) [12:03:15] (if KSP never updates beyond unity 2017) [12:03:17] hehe [12:03:22] how things are goin, yes never [12:03:34] I hated when the landing gear bug/glitch thing hits.. you landing, back wheels touch, but soon as your front wheel comes down, it punches back and flips the plane over [12:03:58] need stronger spring [12:04:02] and slower decent rate [12:04:07] it's tricky [12:04:21] decent descent rate :) [12:04:26] no... was something else going on. even strong spring will cause problems [12:04:27] that too [12:04:34] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWen0HvqZsA [12:04:34] YouTube - Landing Practice [12:04:58] JVFoxy: spring, damper, /and/ descent rate [12:05:03] the lvl0 landing wheels were horrible for just exploding if a fly so much as touches them [12:06:10] (btw, because it's unrecognizable at 10x, the music is the soundtrack to Horizon Zero Dawn) [12:06:16] no .. my flying is good. been causes where front wheel didn't bounce on landing, but soon as you hit the brakes, it compressed, started trying to kick back twice as much force [12:06:35] JVFoxy: spring is too weak for the mass of the plane [12:06:57] but it still comes down to that physx bug [12:07:08] you overextended the spring, physx goofed [12:07:12] some cases, if that landing leg isn't exactly straight, it can cause problems too [12:07:49] thankfully, it hasn't been a problem these days.. [12:07:56] better than the version that used to make the runway explode every time I landed on it [12:08:11] old wheels, couldn't even set spring/damps [12:08:38] JVFoxy: yes you could: part.cfg hacking :) [12:08:45] or the medium landing wheel, couldn't even steer.. was sad, till that got fixed [12:09:01] large still can't [12:09:04] https://flic.kr/p/roz4XU [12:09:15] hehe [12:09:25] medium.. not large. Medium has one axel, two wheels [12:09:37] the plane is fine. the landing strip exploded [12:09:39] JVFoxy: yes [12:09:42] just saying [12:10:08] I've hacked.. I rearranged gauges in the mk2 cockpit once... made an adapter section into a service module with extra resources [12:10:14] however, because of my WIP input mod, lack of wheel steering is not a problem [12:10:18] I have brake steering :) [12:10:31] nice [12:10:36] differential brakes [12:10:42] like in real airplanes [12:10:46] (I wrote a module to give linear stearing split over left/right/center) [12:10:52] feh.. my older big big planes would snap like twigs in older ksp versions [12:10:53] center might be a mistake [12:12:36] https://flic.kr/p/MkiKQt old days :p [12:14:22] simpler times [12:14:42] when wheels worked [12:14:47] (because there were none) [12:14:51] hehe [12:15:48] my Gilly base, with Duna expedition (big ship) and interplanetary shuttle (small one on base): http://taniwha.org/~bill/screenshot4463.png [12:16:19] lol.. speaking of landing planes and stuff.... yikes: https://imgur.com/gallery/JTLmAmM [12:16:20] https://i.imgur.com/RtoqMkq.gifv [12:16:24]