Actually, it's only 15 ls but it's still ridiculously large gap (as is the ring). Have you tried to measure it to see if it's just the value on the map that is wrong?LARGEST SEPARATION BETWEEN TWO CONSECUTIVE RINGS
FLYIEDGUE MI-I D10-45 9 A TO B RING WITH 4,542,018 KM - CMDR RUKMEROT (thats 1506 ls)
----------------------------------------
I've made the next short range trip and this time I've paid full attention to the problem of UC not registering properly discovery tags. It turned out that all scanned systems with above 17 bodies (all bodies detail-surface-scanned) were affected and 136 scanned bodies didn't have any discovery tag after I sold the data. I repeat, every single system I scanned that had over 17 bodies wasn't properly updated by UC and a system with 55 bodies failed entirely, again (not a single discovery tag appeared in it). Also, I haven't received any financial discovery bonus for these 136 bodies.
Additionally, I'm pretty sure that sometimes UC doesn't register surface-scan at all - I see on the map (after relogging) a body that I'm sure I've surface-scanned. It's a single body of distant secondary star and the star has my tag (I went to the star to scan the body) and I even remember what type of body it is (it looks like Icy but it's HMC and it's unexplored now) - needs testing but I think I've seen other examples of it.
----------------------------------------
I've found out that high metal content planets can be below 30% metal - perhaps we need this category to determine where its threshold is
HIGH METAL CONTENT PLANET WITH LOWEST METAL CONTENT - ALKAID 6 WITH 29.6%
HIGH METAL CONTENT PLANET WITH HIGHEST METAL CONTENT - ORISHIS 8 WITH 36.2%
M-TYPE STAR WITH THE MOST BODIES - SOHOLIA WITH 62 BODIES
Terrestrials don't have to be high metal content planets - look at this Earth-like
