Hunting Unicorns: The Ellairb SJ-B b42-10 collision

<minirant>
So I used to keep my findings in their own thread but a while back it looks like someone turned on auto-locking of threads deemed "old", and so that thread has been locked for a good couple of months. It looks like if there's no updates for 3-4 months then the threads get locked. For the other forums, that's probably fine and dandy. But 3-4 months in the life of an explorer is depressingly short. Ho hum. I guess I'll just post new stuff each in their own thread :rolleyes:. Expect more unicorns.
</minirant>

Some time back, I came up with a list of potentially colliding planets. Some of them were bogus, but a couple were legit. Welcome to Ellairb SJ-B b42-10. A few days ago, this happened:


Sadly, the timing wasn't great for me so I missed the initial collision, and didn't get too long to "play". I did still manage to get my ship trapped inside one of the bodies though.
[video=youtube_share;yjJJGa-JtQA]https://youtu.be/yjJJGa-JtQA[/video]
[video=youtube_share;QO-9wrz_-Wk]https://youtu.be/QO-9wrz_-Wk[/video]

I also took a timelapse of the collision from a distance (once I rescued my ship in non-Horizons mode). This is more-or-less 1 second = 1 minute
[video=youtube_share;8SlMHgFiueo]https://youtu.be/8SlMHgFiueo[/video]

You can see there's far less contact than the other collider, and as such the collision duration is a lot shorter, maybe just a few hours worth. But the good thing about this one is the cycle - I've worked out the "mean time between collisions" to be ~22d 17h 15m. This happened a few days ago, so it's likely to happen again in under 3 weeks time.




 
I tried - unsuccessfully - on the other one (Kyloasly). But I’m definitely going to try again at some point :)
 
Excellent Find. I wish I could rep you again.
Following this thread and posting to keep it alive.

What's the expected Date+Time of the next collision?
 
Been through my records, and it looks like I went there at 3rd April at 16:50 - at which point the collision had already started but only just. I calculated the "mean time between collisions" as 22.71882837 days, so I think the collision schedule looks something like this:

3/4/18 16:5026/4/18 10:0519/5/18 03:2010/6/18 20:353/7/18 13:5026/7/18 07:0518/8/18 00:20


If you plan to visit, I'd definitely get there earlier than time above as we can't be sure on the variation between collision cycles, and because of the speed of this one and the fact there is less contact than other collisions, the duration is shorter.
 
This is a lot closer. Ah so it will occur at least more or less once a month.

When might be the next one in Q1 3305?

Might you be able to suggest a basecamp for this one?
 
I tried - unsuccessfully - on the other one (Kyloasly). But I’m definitely going to try again at some point :)
When you say unsuccessfully do you mean like you couldn’t get enough thrust/the right angle or unsuccessfully like trying to leave the map in an fps and you were just being guided away by invisible walls?

If you made it do you think your ship will recall ok?
 
Last edited:
When you say unsuccessfully do you mean like you couldn’t get enough thrust/the right angle or unsuccessfully like trying to leave the map in an fps and you were just being guided away by invisible walls?
Check out the 2nd and 4th vides here. Skip to ~3mins on both. 2 different attempts from 2 very different angles. The biggest problem is clipping into the terrain. I'm not even convinced it's possible, but it won't stop me trying - just not while I'm carrying a lot of data like I have for the last couple of collisions.

If you made it do you think your ship will recall ok?
Hmm. Hadn't thought that far ahead. I guess if the client can be "convinced" that the local body has changed, then maybe. If not... well who knows. Need a successful transfer first, then can worry about the details :)
 
This is a lot closer. Ah so it will occur at least more or less once a month.

When might be the next one in Q1 3305?

Might you be able to suggest a basecamp for this one?
Bear in mind these projections are based off 1 collision viewing so may need tweaking, and they are also in BST - so take an hour off for non-summer dates, and they are from when I last arrived in the system based on in-game time at which point the collision was already in full swing. I'd definitely suggest trying to get some corroborating evidence before taking these as gospel, but they should be useful as a very rough guide.
03-04-18 15:50
26-04-18 9:05
19-05-18 2:20
10-06-18 19:35
03-07-18 12:50
26-07-18 6:05
17-08-18 23:20
09-09-18 16:35
02-10-18 9:50
25-10-18 3:06
16-11-18 20:21
09-12-18 13:36
01-01-19 6:51
24-01-19 0:06
15-02-19 17:21
10-03-19 10:36
02-04-19 3:51
24-04-19 21:06
17-05-19 14:22
09-06-19 7:37
02-07-19 0:52
24-07-19 18:07
16-08-19 11:22
08-09-19 4:37
30-09-19 21:52
23-10-19 15:07
15-11-19 8:22
08-12-19 1:38
30-12-19 18:53
22-01-20 12:08
14-02-20 5:23

As for basecamp, I've not really surveyed the local area so not sure (I also don't really know what makes a good basecamp!)
 
Last edited:
Hmm. Hadn't thought that far ahead. I guess if the client can be "convinced" that the local body has changed, then maybe. If not... well who knows. Need a successful transfer first, then can worry about the details :)
You could always do a mon-Horizons reload for that.
 
..., and they are also in BST - so take an hour off for non-summer dates, ...
I always use In Game Time when recording events to avoid this confusion. Your video shows the cockpit clock at 15:49

Olivia, the farther out you try to predict, the less accurate it will be. I wouldn't give any real credence to more than the next couple of predictions. We'll know more about Q1 3305 after the collision in Q4 3304.

My thoughts on base-camps...
In the days or hours waiting before the collision, geysers or any scenic areas with open ground for landing are good.
I like the outside moon where the gas giant is overhead and the inside moon will pass over between the gas giant and you.
During collision, people will probably split up depending on what their goals are. Some want to "try something" and some want to take videos and screenshots.
Those in an SRV will want to be close to the contact point, preferably where it's moving laterally and not directly towards you. Though depending on your goals, you might want to be in the path.
Others will want to be in the air and mobile so they can observe from different positions or altitudes.
There should be plenty of time to re position in the minutes leading up to contact.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if you could jump from one to the other in the srv.
When you say unsuccessfully do you mean like you couldn’t get enough thrust/the right angle or unsuccessfully like trying to leave the map in an fps and you were just being guided away by invisible walls? ...
From what I have seen and heard about from other commanders at the Sword of Damocles collisions...
Objects on the ground, such as the SRV and landed ships will clip through the other moon like it isn't there. Those that have tried this just ended up inside the other moon and still on the ground of the moon they started on. Ships down and locked did the same thing.

Ships in the air can collide with the other moon and several ships have been destroyed this way. Other ships ended up clipping through one moon or the other when they get squeezed between the two at the contact point.
 
Last edited:
I always use In Game Time when recording events to avoid this confusion. Your video shows the cockpit clock at 15:49
Yep, simpler is better, I've edited the post accordingly.

Olivia, the farther out you try to predict, the less accurate it will be. I wouldn't give any real credence to more than the next couple of predictions. We'll know more about Q1 3305 after the collision in Q4 3304.
Assuming I at least worked out the mean-time between collisions right, there should only be 2 things that affect accuracy - 1) The fact I missed the start and 2) the maximum deviation from the mean. If we can witness a couple of collisions starting, we should have a good idea about when future ones will happen, and the error margin too. Maybe :).
 
... Assuming I at least worked out the mean-time between collisions right, there should only be 2 things that affect accuracy - 1) The fact I missed the start and 2) the maximum deviation from the mean. If we can witness a couple of collisions starting, we should have a good idea about when future ones will happen, and the error margin too. Maybe :).
Agreed. I believe your mean time between collisions is probably highly accurate and those predictions should be accurate.
Unfortunately, The game doesn't always provide accurate numbers (rounding errors) and very minor inaccuracies can compound over multiple iterations.
In this case though I doubt it would be off more than a few minutes.
 
Last edited:
... I calculated the "mean time between collisions" as 22.71882837 days, so I think the collision schedule looks something like this:

3/4/18 16:5026/4/18 10:0519/5/18 03:2010/6/18 20:353/7/18 13:5026/7/18 07:0518/8/18 00:20
I missed the collision this month but planning to be there in July. Then on to Sword of Damocles for the collision there on the 11th
 
<minirant>
So I used to keep my findings in their own thread but a while back it looks like someone turned on auto-locking of threads deemed "old", and so that thread has been locked for a good couple of months. It looks like if there's no updates for 3-4 months then the threads get locked. For the other forums, that's probably fine and dandy. But 3-4 months in the life of an explorer is depressingly short. Ho hum. I guess I'll just post new stuff each in their own thread :rolleyes:. Expect more unicorns.
</minirant>
MattG if this ever happens to another of your threads that you'd have liked to remain open, you can just click "report post" on your OP in the locked thread. Then politely ask the mods to reopen your thread.

In my experience they reopen threads very quickly, if requested.
 
Top Bottom