raptop changed the topic of #principia to: READ THE FAQ: http://goo.gl/gMZF9H; The current version is Fréchet. We currently target 1.5.1, 1.6.1, and 1.7.x. <scott_manley> anyone that doubts the wisdom of retrograde bop needs to get the hell out | https://xkcd.com/323/ | <egg> calculating the influence of lamont on Pluto is a bit silly… | <egg> also 4e16 m * 2^-52 is uncomfortably large
<discord->
Kobymaru. — since the problem is time-dependent, the next state depends on all the previous states. So you can't parallelize the calculation by time
<discord->
Kobymaru. — you could parallelize by crafts, but that only starts to make sense when you have hundreds thousands of spacecraft. Before that, it's just additional overhead. And your main CPU cores are much faster than the cores on your GPU.
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — I thought the topic came up already
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer how is KC doing, I haven’t followed the latest developments
<discord->
egg. — have you looked at the GNSS DOP thing ?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — DOP not yet. I’ve got a couple of contracts that I’m playtesting myself, they’re all more or less revolving around real satellites. Last contract I addded is one that wants a satellite view of the earth with the sun in the back, it’s an excuse for @Damien to do something at ESL1 mostly.
<discord->
egg. — ah, the DSCOVR contract
<discord->
Damien. — don't mention that name egg
<discord->
egg. — Triana :-p
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — One of my gripes is parts, I’m currently poaching BDB for instruments that remotely look like the real thing.
<discord->
Damien. — DSCOVR aka goresat, which has an ingame part literally called goresat, that you can't use at ESL1 to do the experiment it actually does
<discord->
egg. — (the Capderou book talks about Triana, because that was its name at the time)
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — @Damien that’s a DMOS part. All rights reserved.
<discord->
egg. — Deep Space Climate ObserVatoRy
<discord->
Damien. — ksp situation restrictions are tyranny
<discord->
egg. — makes STARLETTE look reasonable
<discord->
Damien. — why can't I do earth science from a solar orbit?
<discord->
Damien. — *rage*
<discord->
egg. — yeah SoI-based situation restrictions are irrelevant in a KC world
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Can’t be helped I’m afraid, @Damien
<discord->
Damien. — I know, still fun to bitch about it though
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — You’ll get science points for the contract. Fair enough?
<discord->
egg. — the sophisticated requirements of KC do effectively incorporate experiment requirements
<discord->
egg. — so effectively it seems to subsume most of the role of stock science
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — I also thought about earth observations from ESL4/5 but that’s so far away it would be a terrible excuse for going there
<discord->
egg. — yeah iirc Spitzer wanted to go there at some point?
<discord->
egg. — well, Spitzer has wanted to go literally everywhere at some point in its design process
<discord->
egg. — cc @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇
<discord->
egg. — (also cc UmbralRaptor in case you are on IRC but not here)
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — What’s a good excuse for L2?
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer really L4/L5 is a thing that can arise as a possible solution for a bunch of things, you don’t need to have a contract that specifically steers you to it
<discord->
egg. — STEREO is what I was thinking of
<discord->
egg. — one of the plans for STEREO was to have them at L4 and L5
<discord->
egg. — instead they ended up on normal earth-leading and earth-trailing solar orbits
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Yeah, and one at L3 for full coverage 🙂
<discord->
Damien. — yeah ESL4/5 are useful
<discord->
egg. — so « look at a bunch of the sun » is a requirement that *can* (but need not!) be fulfilled that way
<discord->
Damien. — EML4/5 only really good for relays
<discord->
egg. — > Yeah, and one at L3 for full coverage 🙂
<discord->
egg. — That one really needs a relay obviously
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — But that contract already exists. It also plays into how good your solar storm warnings will be, and if you get one at all 😇
<discord->
egg. — the sun is not exactly transparent
<discord->
egg. — (good book btw, strongly recommend)
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer yeah, you just need to make sure that somehow the system does require comms back to earth to get the data, not just "having something in L3"
<kmath>
<eggleroy> Michel Capderou (2012), Satellites : de Kepler au GPS. https://t.co/vAqW1Adq8Z
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — One of the things I have to keep in mind tho is the playability of the contracts without principia. So they get a few parameters that might seem odd, or too easy when you really use principia.
<discord->
egg. — yeah
<discord->
egg. — but it is quite rare for something to only have multibody-dependent solutions
<discord->
egg. — do you have an eggsample of such a parameter?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — DISCOVR. You can’t remain at a position with the sun in your back.
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — So instead of „do this for X days without interruption“ it’s just „do this for a total duration of X days“
<discord->
egg. — this is, tbh, perfectly reasonable
<discord->
egg. — because we don’t really want to steer people into exactly one solution
<discord->
egg. — and "~full-globe illuminated pictures" is a thing that we do IRL with non-DSCOVR things too
<kmath>
YouTube - What Does A Solar Eclipse Look like From Space?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — I still need to come up with a good restriction that prohibits doing kerbin observations from moho
<discord->
egg. — ひまわり8号
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer that is a relation of telescope bulk to angular resolution mostly
<discord->
egg. — I can probably give you a back-of-the-envelope calculation for that (or @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇 can)
<discord->
egg. — the diffraction limit relates angular resolution to aperture, give the contract some requirement of minimal spatial resolution at the surface of the imaged body, and from Moho you start needing immense telescopes
<discord->
egg. — that restricts you insofar as you don’t launch the VLT to moho
<discord->
egg. — and tbh, if you want to launch the VLT to moho, I have no problem with you being able to fulfil that contract
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — 😂
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Anyone got an idea for white?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Black is planning for a discovered check: c4, Nf3, forking king and queen...
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — I’m thinking Kh1
<discord->
Standecco. — and then?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Depends on what this indian guy does next 🙂
<discord->
Damien. — @Sir Mortimer the pro gamer move is to start a game with someone, and also a master level bot. you put all their moves in vs the bot and play the bot's moves vs your opponent
<discord->
Standecco. — just copy alpha go
<discord->
Standecco. — the chess version
<discord->
Standecco. — alpha zero?
<discord->
Standecco. — can't remember at all
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — That’s lame. Computers play differently.
<discord->
Damien. — @Sir Mortimer it's blatant cheating, pls don't do that lol
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Raf1 stops c4.
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — I’ve had opponents doing that to me
<discord->
DRVeyl. — This is "live" game, not puzzle?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — 3 days max per move against humans, on chess.com.
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer so, re. the Kerbin-from-Moho eggsample; if you want a 1 km resolution (so that the imaged disk is effectively 1 megapixel), at the closest possible distance between Moho and Kerbin, in green light, you need a telescope 86.7 metres in diametre
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Three days per move? That's hella correspondence!
<discord->
egg. — gotta allow time for postage
<discord->
egg. — ship the board
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — The longest I’ve played is 2 weeks per move. Never again.
<discord->
Standecco. — my terribly ignorant about chess brain (I just know the rules and that's almost it) would probably move f4 to f5 and see what happens
<discord->
Standecco. — my terribly-ignorant-about-chess brain (I just know the rules and that's almost it) would probably move f4 to f5 and see what happens (edited)
<discord->
Damien. — disregard all other pieces, use the queen as john wick
<discord->
Standecco. — if anyone wants to explain to me why it would be a terrible move, I'd be happy
<discord->
egg. — and in its longest wavelength of 779 nm the diffraction limit for Earth seems to be about 4.6 km
<discord->
egg. — (using its 30.5 cm aperture)
<discord->
egg. — So basically, parts that do imaging should have an aperture, part designers should ensure that the part is larger than the aperture and has a mass that makes sense for a telescope of that aperture, and your range limit will come out naturally
<discord->
egg. — (and that still allows for ground-based observation from Moho if that happens to be convenient for a player who has a base there and massive launchers :-p)
<discord->
egg. — it might be useful to add those diffraction limit observations
<discord->
egg. — but if I am touching this, might as well deal with the question of where it should go
<UmbralRaptop>
figures that optics discussion happens while sleeping
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Not sure we've made it to discussion so much as 'preface' so far 😉
raptop has joined #principia
<discord->
egg. — opticks
<discord->
egg. — clearly since we have a KSP mod called *Principia* we need one called *Opticks*
<UmbralRaptop>
In which we consider focal ratios, Seidel aberrations, etc?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — @egg move the wiki page, please
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer do I have that power
<discord->
egg. — (I don’t think I can edit the KC wiki)
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Oh
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Wait...
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — @egg now you should
<discord->
egg. — indeed
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — If for some reason we're simulating detectors, the rule of thumb is ~2.5 pixels/resolution element. I think you want airy disk diameter for that.
<discord->
egg. — I’m not sure going into the weeds of detectors helps much (since parts are atomic, I don’t think making the player do instrument design is in scope), so the resolution element is probably the relevant quantity rather than the pixel
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — procedural telescope parts! (this is probably not a good idea)
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Well in the end it boils down to a distance limitation that can be set on the part module, or on contract level.
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — It also gets into why the planetary science portion of the contract discussion is blank
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Maybe procedural telescopes light: one part with 2-3 variants
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Someone convince me there's enough overlap in Kerbalism and Principia to do this? 😉
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Someone convince me there's enough overlap in Kerbalism and Principia to do this? 😉 🎣 (edited)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — ~~Someone convince me~~ (Sanity returned:I will be glad if nobody convinces me there's enough overlap in Kerbalism and Principia to do this) 😉 🎣 (edited)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — ~~Someone convince me~~ (Sanity returned: I will be glad if nobody convinces me there's enough overlap in Kerbalism and Principia to do this) 😉 🎣 (edited)
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — The nice thing is that this would give tradeoffs like "send large telescope into easy orbit" vs "send small telescope into hard orbit" I think?
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — ...but if it costs SAN
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer yeah it is a distance limit, but one that depends both on contract (desired resolution) and part (aperture)
<discord->
egg. — @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇 well, I don’t think you need *procedural* telescopes for that
<discord->
egg. — you need multiple telescopes differing in size
<discord->
egg. — but not necessarily a continuous space of telescopes
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Well, yes
<discord->
egg. — space telescope space
<discord->
egg. — also, galaxy brain: send large telescope into hard orbit
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — @Sir Mortimer Yeah, gnome terminal seems good, xterm bad. Also firefox bad on ubuntu
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — @boxboxboxboxbox i'll uninstall this thing here. it works better in the browser.
<discord->
egg. — tbh I am not completely sure whether 𒄈𒀭𒁇 is a correct sumerogram
<discord->
egg. — I should check the CAD
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — so. bottom line - what do we do with telescopes?
<discord->
egg. — bottom line: telescopes have some properties
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — i'd like to avoid using too many different parts. so one part with ~3 different setups / sizes would seem OK
<discord->
egg. — wavelengths, aperture, maybe focal ratio
<discord->
egg. — bear in mind that, e.g., Hubble is a telescope in the same way that EPIC is
<discord->
egg. — just a much bigger one
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Some sort of FoV consideration, anyway. (Unless we want to assume that anything that's not x-ray is diffraction limited?)
<discord->
egg. — we could assume that I suppose
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — yes. and also one that can't look into the sun, while some corona observation thingies can't look anywhere else
<discord->
egg. — yeah most things can’t look into th esun
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Can't look at something x magnitudes brighter than typical target, and can't look near something y magnitudes brighter?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — also, throwing telescope building at KSP players is probably going to be too complicated. it needs to be dumbed down
<discord->
egg. — yeah I agree
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — (and I know that saying that on the RO discord is probably going to get me banned)
<discord->
egg. — hence parts that are telescopes, and have a handful of number synthesizing that
<discord->
egg. — and then for solar system observation, requirements are about resolution (that can be expressed as spatial resolution at the surface), how much of the body is seen, in what light, and that defines the space of solutions
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Also, those should be soft can'ts. Probably don't actually damage the telescopes
<discord->
egg. — so the DSCOVR-type contract is see more than some percentage of the body in full illumination, with *some* small enough that you can fulfill it from GEO (Himawari-type solution), but if you have base on Mercury with giant telescopes this naturally becomes an option
<discord->
egg. — (and L1 obviously works, too)
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — there is another thing that will be problematic: distances in stock systems vs. RSS. The stock system is so samll, you basically can throw a rock to jool when standing on moho.
<discord->
egg. — that is a matter of configuration
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — there is another thing that will be problematic: distances in stock systems vs. RSS. The stock system is so small, you basically can throw a rock to jool when standing on moho. (edited)
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — ok. so a telescope gives you a resolution R at distance D, where R = f(D). Contracts require a minimum resolution for whatever they're doing. KC comes with a selection of telescopes of different sizes, and you better select a telescope that is not too small.
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — not having separate parts for all types of missions would be a plus, because part spam is an issue.
<discord->
egg. — yeah you definitely want to abstract as much as possible, also because it is very cool if you can reuse a part from an old mission
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — so, the thing that looks at the sun also looks at earth, although you wouldn't pull that off in reality.
<discord->
egg. — we might want to have separate parts for solar observation specifically, since they are so different
<discord->
egg. — but if you want to reuse Spitzer to do IR imaging of Earth, why not
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer I think @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇 has a point re. FoV though, that should be a property of imaging instruments (for Earth observations that defines the swath, which is a very important consideration for mission design)
<discord->
egg. — > AAAAAA
<discord->
egg. — I wonder what IRL considerations lead to that :-p
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — IRL means Infra Red Light now
<discord->
egg. — :D
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — hm.
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — so, with FOV, you wouldn't point a deep space telescope at earth from low orbit because then you're looking at areas the size of a football field?
<discord->
egg. — yeah
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — that would make a nice spy sat
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — yes to both
<discord->
egg. — but other than that, a thing that looks down and a thing that looks up are very much the same kind of animal
<discord->
egg. — which means that you avoid part-type spam
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Yeah, and Roman is literally a reporpoised spy sat
<discord->
Damien. — 🐬
<discord->
egg. — TIL WFIRST got a name
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — @egg Literally yesterday
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — hm.
<discord->
egg. — hahaha
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Not sure there's much of a mechanic for brightness, to limit things with.
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Stock-sized systems just wouldn't require telescopes as large, is all.
<discord->
egg. — yeah, not just because brightness but also wrt diffraction limit
<discord->
egg. — everything is smaller, balanc e by tweaking weight which is insane in stock anyway
<discord->
egg. — everything is smaller, balance by tweaking weight which is insane in stock anyway (edited)
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Obviously Kerbals use glorified DSLRs
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — there is another thing. I can't really be picky with parts, because I don't know the first thing about how to make any, and won't even look into it. So I have to poach something from someone who has a thing that looks like a camera *and* has a license that allows me to use it. Which narrows it down quite drastically, because for some odd reason I don't understand those part makers are a speci
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — example telescope sizes: 0.1 m (probe), 0.3 m (large probe, small telescope), 0.9 m (Spitzerish), 2.7 m (better HST), 5.4 m (smol JWST)
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Or just use a few actual ones
<discord->
egg. — @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇 would be interesting to look at some earth observation instruments to see how they fit in that classification
<discord->
egg. — @Sir Mortimer so that is an issue for stock-KC, rather than RO-KC where RO will slap KC scope configs on whatever scope parts RO reconfigures
<discord->
egg. — I presume
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (Not that RO has scope parts either, I don't -think-)
<discord->
egg. — @DRVeyl well, not yet, because there was no need nor mechanism
<discord->
egg. — but RO’s thing is reconfiguring the parts of unsuspecting mods
<discord->
DRVeyl. — V true.
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — ok. looking at it from a gamers perspective: size determines the resolution, FOV determines the mission types. can't do low orbit observation with low FOV, but need low FOV from low orbit for spy sats. also, low FOV for deep space observation (for which I don't have a contract yet)
<discord->
egg. — except surveys, where you want a large FoV
<discord->
egg. — but that sounds about right I think?
<discord->
egg. — @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇 is the telescope bird
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Time-domain astronomy gets you high FoV for deep space (TESS, Fermi-LAT). Surveys tend towards larger FoVs, but those might be smaller than you'd think.
<discord->
DRVeyl. — > but need low FOV from low orbit for spy sats
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Better is to determine resolution on the body surface for this kind of thing, not angular resolution.,
<discord->
egg. — right, I was thinking of TESS as a survey
<discord->
egg. — it does say *Survey*, but it is admittedly an atypical one
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (ie small telescope close, big telescope from far away)
<discord->
egg. — yeah, that is how the technical requirement should be implemented
<discord->
egg. — in practice, the reasonable solution is likely a normal spysat
<discord->
egg. — (but yes, if you have a Mun base and massive telescopes there, that should be an option :D)
<discord->
Damien. — @Sir Mortimer researchbodies has a telescope model and the artwork and graphics are CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0
<discord->
Damien. — not sure if that's any use
<discord->
Damien. — tarsier space tech too but they don't have the licence listed
<discord->
egg. — > <@𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇> example telescope sizes: 0.1 m (probe), 0.3 m (large probe, small telescope), 0.9 m (Spitzerish), 2.7 m (better HST), 5.4 m (smol JWST)
<discord->
egg. — > <egg> would be interesting to look at some earth observation instruments to see how they fit in that classification
<discord->
egg. — so Sentinel-2 MSI has 150 mm aperture, 600 mm focal length, FoV 21° by 3.5° (I don’t think we want to get into FoV shape and pushbroom considerations)
<discord->
egg. — so that is 21°
<discord->
egg. — probeish on the @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇 classification
<discord->
DRVeyl. — So... what are the contracts? If we assume we can build a few [or many] telescope parts and we can dial their angular resolution and FOV independently (is this fair, or the limits reasonably easy to bound?), what are you asking them to do?
<discord->
DRVeyl. —
<discord->
DRVeyl. — "Map Moho to 10m surface resultion."
<discord->
DRVeyl. — "Map Eve to 1m surface resolution."
<discord->
DRVeyl. — "Observe any point in the northern hemisphere with 10m accuracy every 24 hours" ?
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — Also, I messed up. Was just doing 3x, but last jump was 2x
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (Non-circular FoV tends to get annoying only because there isn't a sane representation of part orientation in KSP. Is a reason I avoided the idea in RealAntennas, as example.)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (Non-circular FoV tends to get annoying only because there isn't a sane tracking of part orientation in KSP. Is a reason I avoided the idea in RealAntennas, as example.) (edited)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (Non-circular FoV tends to get annoying only because there isn't a sane tracking or control of part orientation in KSP. Is a reason I avoided the idea in RealAntennas, as example.) (edited)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (Non-circular FoV tends to get annoying because there isn't a sane tracking or control of part orientation in KSP. Is a reason I avoided the idea in RealAntennas, as example.) (edited)
<discord->
egg. — @DRVeyl yeah, or "image 40 % of the Earth’s surface at once, in full illumination, at a 25 km resolution, every day for a year"
<discord->
egg. — which is a contract fulfillable by DSCOVR or a GEO sat (or probably by a giant space telescope orbiting Venus and another one on Mercury)
<discord->
egg. — or if you want to go from the original blue marble vibe of DSCOVR, you could say once a month, and then a telescope on the moon would do the job as well
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Does ScanSat provide any tools to make any of this easier, or harder, or worth integrating to?
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — @DRVeyl Giving a player a few fixed telescope sizes, and letting them do FoV/resolution tradeoffs (modulo wavelength/diffraction) in them is as best I'm aware fair
<discord->
egg. — will add things about imaging instruments, their properties, the diffraction limit, etc., later
<discord->
egg. — @𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇
<discord->
egg. — > FoV/resolution tradeoffs
<discord->
egg. — what do you mean?
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — @DRVeyl scansat won’t help
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — Unless...
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — *disappears into a rabbit hole*
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Might just be a later thing to show the state of the maps you're making.
<discord->
DRVeyl. — You are, essentially, making maps 😉
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — But a hard dependency on scansat?
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (That occasionally wipe old data.)
<discord->
egg. — yeah the thing is you need maps with a sense of freshness
<discord->
egg. — e.g. some earth observation contracts should care a lot about freshness
<discord->
DRVeyl. — I haven't looked at any of the implementation at ScanSat. I do see that DMagic has very recent commits. No clue where he's going with it.
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Entirely possible -- maybe even likely -- it doesn't give you enough to make a requirement. Maybe makes for some interesting interoperability later.
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Entirely possible -- likely really -- it doesn't give you enough to make a requirement. Maybe makes for some interesting interoperability later. (edited)
<discord->
egg. — yeah I think ignoring it for now may be the least rabbitholey course of action
<discord->
DRVeyl. — Not sure how you're implementing the tracking for how much of the surface you currently see. Or if there's any useful techniques in there for representing the body surfaces. (In a sense you're doing something very similar... I don't know if ScanSat has eg a fixed resolution or not...)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — But agree, avoid rabbitholes for now. 🙂
* discord-
egg. — points at the /topic_
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — @DRVeyl dacansat uses an array of integers to track mapped areas of bodies. Each bit represents one map type. Resolution is limited, as is the interoperability capability of the plugin. Plus, I’d rather keep it simpler for now
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — @DRVeyl scansat uses an array of integers to track mapped areas of bodies. Each bit represents one map type. Resolution is limited, as is the interoperability capability of the plugin. Plus, I’d rather keep it simpler for now (edited)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — The limited resolution is probably your biggest pain. Ok.
<discord->
Sir Mortimer. — So, look at target for X amount of time has to be enough for now
<discord->
DRVeyl. — The limited [fixed] resolution is probably your biggest pain. Ok. (edited)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — (Impatiently waits for Kerbalism Contracts + Principia to craft a separate flexible Mapping Tool spinoff...)
<discord->
DRVeyl. — _Impatiently waits for Kerbalism Contracts + Principia to craft a separate flexible Mapping Tool spinoff..._ (edited)
<_whitenotifier-d13c>
[Principia] pleroy opened pull request #2588: Add support for transmitting the status's message to the C# code - https://git.io/Jf2eq
<discord->
𒀯 𒄷 𒄈𒀭𒁇. — @egg I'd need to double check on some spacecraft, but I want to say that eg: TESS' giant pixels are rather larger than they could have if they weren't doing that all sky thing. If we're considering wavelengths, if you're diffraction limited in NIR, you're leaving some resolution (or FoV) on the table in NUV. Also I think there's something going on with tradeoffs in some x-ray/gamma
<UmbralRaptop>
okay, but consider speggtroscopy for precise radial velocities
<UmbralRaptop>
Including heated gas cells with some Fun gases
<UmbralRaptop>
Currently popular: iodine. At one time in the 80s: hydrogen fluoride
<egg|laptop|egg>
UmbralRaptop: can you update the IRC /topic?
<egg|laptop|egg>
(the current version has not been Fréchet for a while, but now it is Fuchs)
UmbralRaptop changed the topic of #principia to: READ THE FAQ: http://goo.gl/gMZF9H; The current version is Fréchet. We currently target 1.5.1, 1.6.1, and 1.7.x. <scott_manley> anyone that doubts the wisdom of retrograde bop needs to get the hell out | https://xkcd.com/323/ | <egg> calculating the influence of lamont on Pluto is a bit silly… | <egg> also 4e16 m * 2^-52 is uncomfortably large
<UmbralRaptop>
TODO: which versions of KSP are currently targeted?
<egg|laptop|egg>
1.5.1 through 1.9.1, excluding some short-lived versions
<egg|laptop|egg>
1.5.1, 1.6.1, 1.7.x, 1.8.1, 1.9.1 I think
<egg|laptop|egg>
with separate builds for pre and post 1.8
<egg|laptop|egg>
Galileo will drop pre-1.8
UmbralRaptop changed the topic of #principia to: READ THE FAQ: http://goo.gl/gMZF9H; The current version is Fuchs. We currently target 1.5.1, 1.6.1, 1.7.x, 1.8.1, and 1.9.1. <scott_manley> anyone that doubts the wisdom of retrograde bop needs to get the hell out | https://xkcd.com/323/ | <egg> calculating the influence of lamont on Pluto is a bit silly… | <egg> also 4e16 m * 2^-52 is uncomfortably large
<_whitenotifier-d13c>
[Principia] pleroy synchronize pull request #2588: Add support for transmitting the status's message to the C# code - https://git.io/Jf2eq
<_whitenotifier-d13c>
[Principia] pleroy synchronize pull request #2588: Add support for transmitting the status's message to the C# code - https://git.io/Jf2eq