Suggestion with Ascending/Descending Node GUI

[mpk10]

Apologies if this has been suggested before.  A basic search for the issue didn't yield anything too close...

My Issue:

When you make a maneuver node, the new Apoapsis and Periapsis as well as the new Ascending and Descending Nodes appear as new parameters along the dotted line of your new orbit.  However, while your current (pre-maneuver) Ap and Pe also continue to be displayed, your current (pre-maneuver) Ascending and Descending node markers disappear and instead your are left with only your post maneuver locations and amounts of inclination.

I assume this is intentional, but I'm not sure why.  I would love to continue to see the current (pre-maneuver) Ascending and Descending nodes as WELL as the resulting (post-maneuver) ones even after I have created a maneuver node.  I could go into detail as to why this would be useful to me, but I don't think it is super necessary.  If anyone is curious, let me know and I can elaborate.

Does anyone know why this is?  May I respectfully suggest changing it?

Thanks!

Matt

[OrbitalBuzzsaw]

Also, I'd like AN and DN w/out a target.

[Allocthonous]

This would be useful to me also. Time-to-node would also be fantastic to have, it would allow much greater precision when doing inclination changes.

[Streetwind]

16 hours ago, OrbitalBuzzsaw said:

Also, I'd like AN and DN w/out a target.

The problem is, these points only exist in reference to a different orbital plane. If you have no target, there is nothing to refer to.

It's like, you draw a line on a piece of paper, and then say "I want to know where this line intersects with other lines". Except you only drew one line, which doesn't intersect with anything. There is no solution to your query.

So you would have to specify a default reference plane for your current orbit to intersect in order for AN/DN to be always-on. This default reference would have to independently exist in every SoI in the game, because only orbital planes around the same focus point can intersect to produce AN/DN.

I suppose they could use the equatorial plane of the current celestial body. That is not an orbital plane, but you can have orbits that are coplanar with it, and therefore you can pretend that such an orbit exists as a reference. No idea how that would have to be implemented in code, though.

Edited October 27, 2016 by Streetwind

[OrbitalBuzzsaw]

Just now, Streetwind said:

The problem is, these points only exist in reference to a different orbital plane. If you have no target, there is nothing to refer to.

It's like, you draw a line on a piece of paper, and then say "I always want to know where this line intersects with other lines". Except you only drew one line, which doesn't intersect with anything. There is no solution to your query.

So you would have to specify a default reference plane for your current orbit to intersect in order for AN/D to be always-on. This default reference would have to independently exist in every SoI in the game, because only orbital planes around the same focus point can intersect to produce AN/DN.

I suppose they could use the equatorial plane of the current celestial body. That is not an orbital plane, but you can have orbits that are coplanar with it, and therefore you can pretend that such an orbit exists as a reference. No idea how that would have to be implemented in code, though.

I just meant some sort of marker of where your equatorial intersect is, and what you inclination is.

[Streetwind]

Yeah, that would pretty much be the thing you get when you implement the equatorial plane as a reference for your current orbit to intersect with

[paul23]

1 hour ago, Streetwind said:

The problem is, these points only exist in reference to a different orbital plane. If you have no target, there is nothing to refer to.

It's like, you draw a line on a piece of paper, and then say "I want to know where this line intersects with other lines". Except you only drew one line, which doesn't intersect with anything. There is no solution to your query.

So you would have to specify a default reference plane for your current orbit to intersect in order for AN/DN to be always-on. This default reference would have to independently exist in every SoI in the game, because only orbital planes around the same focus point can intersect to produce AN/DN.

I suppose they could use the equatorial plane of the current celestial body. That is not an orbital plane, but you can have orbits that are coplanar with it, and therefore you can pretend that such an orbit exists as a reference. No idea how that would have to be implemented in code, though.

Well the longitude of ascending node is one of the 6 (7 if counting mean anomaly at epoch) Orbital elements. And is thus well saved inside your safe file. So it's just a matter of creating the interface to show this data explicitly.

[Red Iron Crown]

1 hour ago, paul23 said:

Well the longitude of ascending node is one of the 6 (7 if counting mean anomaly at epoch) Orbital elements. And is thus well saved inside your safe file. So it's just a matter of creating the interface to show this data explicitly.

I thought mean anomaly was one of the six. Eccentricity, semi-major axis, inclination, argument of periapsis, longitude of ascending node, and mean anomaly. What am I missing?

[pincushionman]

9 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

I thought mean anomaly was one of the six. Eccentricity, semi-major axis, inclination, argument of periapsis, longitude of ascending node, and mean anomaly. What am I missing?

I suppose you could argue time of epoch is its own parameter, but beyond that I got nuthin'.

[paul23]

My mistake, (Though one could add 3 to create a reference frame, but a reference frames are always annoying).

 

Just wanted to indicate I normally don't consider the mean anomaly at epoch a parameter of the ORBIT, rather a parameter of the "thing following the orbit"

[Red Iron Crown]

1 hour ago, paul23 said:

Just wanted to indicate I normally don't consider the mean anomaly at epoch a parameter of the ORBIT, rather a parameter of the "thing following the orbit"

That makes sense. Mean anomaly doesn't really define the shape of the orbit at all, just where the orbiting object will be on the defined path at any given time. 

[Superfluous J]

22 hours ago, Streetwind said:

The problem is, these points only exist in reference to a different orbital plane. If you have no target, there is nothing to refer to.

While technically true, in a Universe where every single planet's equator is exactly parallel to the galactic plane, I think it's pretty safe to assume a default

[mpk10]

Guys, what about my original idea/question??

 

On 10/26/2016 at 4:10 PM, mpk10 said:

Apologies if this has been suggested before.  A basic search for the issue didn't yield anything too close...

My Issue:

.....I would love to continue to see the current (pre-maneuver) Ascending and Descending nodes as WELL as the resulting (post-maneuver) ones even after I have created a maneuver node. ....

Does anyone know why this is?  May I respectfully suggest changing it?

Thanks!

Matt