We are also pulling Body data from EDSM into our Data Sheet which will allow you to easily see the comparisons of each site/planet with the others.
https://goo.gl/suqz7A
https://goo.gl/suqz7A
MWSOG: Milky Way Society of Organics and Geology
- Thread starter CMDR MadRaptor
- Start date
Awesome. Yeah, I love using EDDiscovery while playing. It's a helpful tool for finding volcanism info. I am planning on updating the FP with some more information and best ways to catalog things. As well as come up with some standards that will be required for anybody posting on the actual spreadsheets. I've got discord up and running again so I'll be able to communicate with you as request in your PM. I'm going to spend the next few days till 2.4 drops around the US areas to see if maybe some organics might pop up there.
Excellent work! You are very methodical and detail oriented! It takes a lot of stamina to these kinds of surveys, so congrats.
It's interesting that the number of volcanic sites is strongly correlated to the orbital period. I think another parameter that is relevant here is the mass of the planet that the volcanic body orbits. A massive planet like Jupiter can torture a moon like Io, which has a lot of volcanic activity (in real life, of course. I don't know if you can land on Io in the game). Anyway, maybe main planet mass is a parameter worth considering.
It certainly is, although the difference between the two orbital periods for these bodies is really quite small, I have seen bodies with larger orbital periods with major vulcanism, usually bodies under around 2 days orbital period will be major vulcanism, while further out, around 4 to 6 days they will be minor. More than that and there is very little chance of vulcanism. If we can get enough samples of major and minor vulcanism around the same parent together it should be possible to work out the relationship and predict major and minor very accurately, I think there is sharp distance cut off that separates the two, and this probably varies with the parent mass and density.
With these two, 1.2 days and 1.9 days, the cut off point may for instance be -1.8 day orbital period for major and anything outside that being minor. Of course my original scanned moon, Coltan may not be a good example, with an orbital period of 0.4 days around a gas giant I would really expect major vulcanism, but as I said in that original report, that appears to be a hand made system so the procedural rules that apply to other system may not work with that one.
Oh yes I also use EDDiscovery and EDDI to log all my activity, couldn't really manage without it.
I look forward to reading your report on scanning methodology. One question I have is at what altitude do you typically fly when you search for sites?
I see you like to fly what looks like a Keelback or Type-6. How do you like it? I'm always curious about other commanders' exploration rigs. I like using a Python because of the large number of internal compartments and, of course, the look. Anacondas bore me. I just wish my Python was capable of having a fighter hangar.
Just realized that it's almost been a year since we started this thread and my how it's grown. I was thinking of doing something special...perhaps we can all get together and a volcanic site and take a nice little anniversary picture. Anniversary date is 9/25. What are yours guys thoughts
Right. That is going to be a challenge. I figured something sort of early evening BST mid afternoon US. I figure most reside over seas. So my timing was 8pm BST/2pm Central Time(USA)
!!!!MWSOG ANNIVERSARY EVENT!!!!
Location 1: System: Pencil Sector OC-U A3-2
Body: A 2 A
Body: A 2 A
COORD: 26.9764° / -177.0129°
Location 2: System: Pencil Sector OC-U A3-2
Body: A 2 A
Location 2: System: Pencil Sector OC-U A3-2
Body: A 2 A
Time: 2pm (CST)/8pm (BST)
I am fairly new to the game and I thought this might be the best place to ask my question. I cant seem to find anything about what I came across.
Anyway, I was deep down a canyon chasing an abandoned cargo rack. Out in the SRV I noticed the ground was very slippery and appeared to be covered in green sludge. Tyre tracks were left in it and it was often difficult to get traction. Sorry, even though I thought I took screenshots, I cant seem to find them. Perhaps this is some sort of moss growing down in the moisture?
Anyway, I was deep down a canyon chasing an abandoned cargo rack. Out in the SRV I noticed the ground was very slippery and appeared to be covered in green sludge. Tyre tracks were left in it and it was often difficult to get traction. Sorry, even though I thought I took screenshots, I cant seem to find them. Perhaps this is some sort of moss growing down in the moisture?
You quite often find different coloured layers of surface material, whether it's organic or not I couldn't say in your case, but on low g worlds the ground can seem very slippery all the time. Do you have system data and coordinates so we can check it out?
Alright, ladies and germs. Today and Tomorrow before 2.4 I'll be on site at the anniversary meet up, studying trees. Feel free to come say Hi, take a picture and celebrate our first year of finding geysers, fumaroles and organics
We have a discord now: https://discord.gg/gjyFRXM
What's a discord?
A way to chat online. I figure this could be a nice way to communicate to each other instead of the forums or in addition to
I used to teamspeak when I was playing Desert Combat competitively, was in the Australian league, haven't done it for a long time.
Anyway, it appears that FDEV has out out a mini update that's just not working on my PC, either that or it's because I am on the worlds slowest internet connection, at my parents house. Sometimes it feel like I could write the one's and zero's to the disk faster by hand than they come through the wires here, oh well, gives me a chance to finalise my survey project.
Planetary survey project part four.
Parts one to three here;
Part 1- Survey of Coltan
part 2 - Survey of Hyadum I 2 a
Part 3 - Survey of Hyadum I 2 b
Now part of this project has always been to test different survey methodologies to work out the quickest and/or easiest way to survey a body given the tools we have. Essentially this is only applicable to small bodies, probably sub 500km radius for a team, sub 200km radius for an individual. Two primary methods come to mind given a spherical spinning body with a coordinate system centered on the poles.
The first is a polar orbital method where one follows a longitude north from zero at the equator, across the north pole at 90% then south down the equator at 0%, across the equator to the south pole at -90% then north back up to the starting point at zero. Move across a few degrees, calculated from the radius and width of surface scan and repeat until finished.
The second is of course the equatorial orbit where you follow a latitude 90% east starting a couple of degrees latitude away from the south pole at 0% longitude, again the distance to move calculated from the radius of the body and follow that latitude around the body back to 0% lon.
Both of these methods have advantages and disadvantages I will go through here, the third method is a hybrid of method one and two which has some advantages over each but it's own disadvantages. Before doing that, however, there are a few interesting things to note. I don't know if it is related to the size of these bodies, being quite small, but your ship doesn't follow the surface of the planet, they don't respond to the virtual gravitational pull and will continue in a straight line through space and ignore the curve of the body. This is not a big issue on the polar survey, but it becomes significant on the equatorial survey. Traveling in a straight line across the surface you will find if you keep the virtual horizon on zero your nose will appear to be rising although it's actually the surface of the body falling away below you. For the equatorial survey not only will you nose appear to be rising, but it will continually pull to the left or right depending on your direction of travel. The faster you travel across the surface the more often you need to adjust your course to account for this anomaly.
The disadvantages of the Polar survey is that it you end up passing over the same area multiple times when crossing the north and south pole, it adds a significant amount of time for the survey. The lines of longitude come to a point at the north and south pole so a small overlap allowed near the equator for the scanner becomes a very large overlap near the poles. The advantage of the polar survey is it is much more relaxing than either of the other two methods, for the most part you can relax and just keep an eye on the height above the surface while watching for POI's.
The equatorial survey is, then, significantly shorter. Not just because you aren't overlapping the same area many times, for the polar survey every leg is the same length, and that length is the diameter of the body, this is only true for one lap of the equatorial survey, exactly at the equator. In fact the difference is so large the polar survey just doesn't make sense, for two bodies of equal radius you will make the same number of passes around the body, but for the equatorial survey 2 passes, exactly at the north and south pole, are essentially zero length. I am sure there is some sort of calculation that will tell me the exact difference but at a guess I would say between 25% to 50% shorter than the polar survey. The problem with the equatorial survey is this, if you are flying manually you can never take your hands away from the keyboard, due to the fact that you ship flies in a straight line and the surface of the planet is curved the closer you are to the poles the harder you have to turn the nose to stay on the correct latitude. While it gets better near the equator it never really goes away except exactly on the equator.
Due to the disadvantages of the equatorial survey I used a hybrid of the two on my third survey, surveying the poles and around 25% away from the poles using the equatorial survey method and then changing over to the polar survey to cover the middle area across the equator. While this is fairly demanding as I said close to the poles, it eliminates the overlap from the polar survey and the continuous course adjustments required by the equatorial survey. of course you need to follow a zigzag path across the middle of the body which makes this method slightly slower than the equatorial due to the time needed to make these adjustments, but it's still far quicker than the polar method.
If you are going to survey a stellar body use the hybrid method as outlined above, with one more thing to watch out for. While you may strive to keep your artificial horizon level this doesn't mean you will maintain a fixed height above the ground. Strangely enough your artificial horizon and the ground appear to follow two different planes. The ships artificial horizon appears to be calculated using a perfect sphere from the center point of the body whereas the planet surface is not spherical, the mesh that creates the body can be distorted so much that keeping your artificial horizon at zero can easily end up with you crashing into the surface so sometimes you need to climb to keep above the 2km height of the POI appearance, and sometimes you need to drop down to avoid climbing to high. I recommend staying four and seven kilometers above the surface, on some of the small bodies the max height at which the POI's disappear can be as low as 12 kilometers, so watch your height, watch your heading and have fun is all I can say now!
Deleted member 38366
D
Iron Magma
EOL PROU HR-U D3-294 3 A
Coordinates : 34.03 | -16.82
Silicate Vapour Geysers
EOL PROU EG-X E1-5235 2 A A
Coordinates : -61.95 | -154.77
EOL PROU HR-U D3-294 3 A
Coordinates : 34.03 | -16.82
Silicate Vapour Geysers
EOL PROU EG-X E1-5235 2 A A
Coordinates : -61.95 | -154.77
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice. For now until we get instruments that we can point at something like a geyser and fumarole that will tell us exactly what they are we can only assume they are what the body description says. There may be different types on some planets and moons but we just can't tell.
A nice big Silicate Magma fumarole site with polonium Needle crystals and niobium Crystalline Clusters.
MEL 22 SECTOR vp-w b2-1
0.56/-112.40
Iron magma campfires
Hip 16374 1 C
48.17/-62.18
MEL 22 SECTOR vp-w b2-1
0.56/-112.40
Iron magma campfires
Hip 16374 1 C
48.17/-62.18