Difference between revisions of "Talk:Physicsless part"
From Kerbal Space Program Wiki
(→Isn't this more like physicsless?) |
m (XZise moved page Talk:Massless part to Talk:Physicsless part: not massless anymore) |
(No difference)
| |
Latest revision as of 14:40, 3 May 2015
Isn't this more like physicsless?
Hi, I was thinking if we should move the page to something like physic(s?)less. I mean all parts which are massless are also dragless if I understand this correctly. — xZise [talk] 03:10, 23 April 2014 (CDT)
- 2cents - both mass-less and physics-less apply (tags > hierarchy). Maybe describe them as "exception parts". Donfede (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2014 (CDT)
- Maybe both are the same, because in the drag model of KSP, no mass results in no drag, as the cross-sectional area is defined by the mass and is 0 if the mass is 0. So depending on how the game works that is intentional: A massless part has no mass so the drag “engine” calculates a drag of 0 for such a part. Now of course the game could use the mass value from the cfg if that is still available internally and is not overwritten by the masslessness. If that is the case deactivating physical significance is not only resetting the mass but actively the drag (and not passively by relying on the fact that the mass is 0). — xZise [talk] 11:26, 30 November 2014 (CST)
- 2cents - both mass-less and physics-less apply (tags > hierarchy). Maybe describe them as "exception parts". Donfede (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2014 (CDT)
Massless vs PhysicsSignificance ???
Thx UmbralRaptor for the update, differing Massless vs PhysiscSignificance parts (ex: EAS struts). However, could you elaborate a bit more on what exactly this means? Most massless parts, don't show up in the mass total seen in the Map view. How do PhysicsSignificance parts behave differently... Donfede (talk) 08:40, 27 April 2014 (CDT)
