24
0

## 24 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Recently, I heard the term posigrade for the first time. I personally use prograde, but what do you guys think? Is there a difference beyond spelling?

##### Share on other sites

Prograde is shorter. That's enough for me.

4 people like this

Very true.

##### Share on other sites

Prograde, because it's standard among KSP players.

2 people like this

##### Share on other sites

I prefer prograde, though apparently we are using it wrong - a satellite is moving prograde if it orbits a body in the same direction as the parent body is rotating. Retrograde means it is orbiting in the opposite direction. Usually, "thrusting prograde" means the same as "thrusting posigrade" because we usually launch rockets prograde, but in theory we could launch a satellite retrograde (east to west), in which case "thrusting prograde" would be ambiguous - do we mean in the direction the satellite is orbiting, or do we mean thrusting to take it from west to east?

Regardless, I voted "prograde" because I am used to it.

##### Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, softweir said:

I prefer prograde, though apparently we are using it wrong - a satellite is moving prograde if it orbits a body in the same direction as the parent body is rotating. Retrograde means it is orbiting in the opposite direction. Usually, "thrusting prograde" means the same as "thrusting posigrade" because we usually launch rockets prograde, but in theory we could launch a satellite retrograde (east to west), in which case "thrusting prograde" would be ambiguous - do we mean in the direction the satellite is orbiting, or do we mean thrusting to take it from west to east?

I thought prograde just meant with the direction of movement

##### Share on other sites

How about tangential? It would work well with normal and radial (antitangential, antinormal, antiradial), as well as relating graphically to the orbit. Or parallel/antiparallel, which is an actual descriptor of vector relationships (parallel to the velocity) and would work well with that conception of the orbit.

As it is,  is called "prograde" in my mind. But CoaDE has begun to change that, favoring "tangential."

1 person likes this

##### Share on other sites

One sounds more positive while the other more professional.  Darn, now I'm flummoxed...

2 people like this

##### Share on other sites

6 people like this

##### Share on other sites

I prefer "turnwards" (plus other directions noted by "widdershins", "hubwards" and "rimwards").

3 people like this

##### Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ElWanderer said:

I prefer "turnwards" (plus other directions noted by "widdershins", "hubwards" and "rimwards").

Been hangin out on the Disk, have you?

3 people like this

##### Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Dafni said:

Been hangin out on the Disk, have you?

The Turtle moves, though I'm not sure in which direction!

2 people like this

##### Share on other sites

I get the idea of why you'd want to use "posigrade", since "prograde" and "retrograde" do double duty in identifying orbits which match or oppose the angular momentum of basically everything else in the system. Ideally, we would use "posigrade" and "antigrade" for thrust vectors while leaving "prograde" and "retrograde" to identify orbital directions. But "retrothrusters" would then make no sense, so it's probably better to just use context and be done with it.

##### Share on other sites

Rather than inventing or repurposing portmanteaus, we need a set of fresh new words to represent these directions.

I'll get the ball rolling with:

Lorp - Normal

Zorp - Anti-Normal

"Burn 25m/s Gorp"

4 people like this

##### Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Rather than inventing or repurposing portmanteaus, we need a set of fresh new words to represent these directions.

I'll get the ball rolling with:

Lorp - Normal

Zorp - Anti-Normal

"Prepare for worp speed!"

"Warp speed?"

"No, not warp; worp. We need to change the argument of our periapse."

4 people like this

##### Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

"Prepare for worp speed!"

Now I'm all for calling it worp

##### Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

13 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

"Prepare for worp speed!"

"Warp speed?"

"No, not warp; worp. We need to change the argument of our periapse."

Funnily enough, I almost went with "Worf" to start with but I didnt want to confuse my Klingon tactical officer.

ENGAGE GORPDRIVE

Edited by p1t1o
4 people like this

##### Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

"Oops, there goes the maneuver-node ..." - Tardigrade (from spanish tarde = late)

:-)

Edited by Green Baron
6 people like this

##### Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Green Baron said:

"Oops, there goes the maneuver-node ..." - Tardigrade (from spanish tarde = late)

2 people like this

##### Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Steel said:

Methinks that was the joke.

2 people like this

##### Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yeah, a joke on their expense. Not that long ago we talked about the little animals in another thread :-)

Edited by Green Baron
2 people like this

##### Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Green Baron said:

"Oops, there goes the maneuver-node ..." - Tardigrade (from spanish tarde = late)

:-)

I first read that as "tardisgrade..." which is usually synonymous with late anyway.

But then antinormal should be "delete" instead.

2 people like this

##### Share on other sites

We need a pirate version!

##### Share on other sites
10 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

I get the idea of why you'd want to use "posigrade", since "prograde" and "retrograde" do double duty in identifying orbits which match or oppose the angular momentum of basically everything else in the system. Ideally, we would use "posigrade" and "antigrade" for thrust vectors while leaving "prograde" and "retrograde" to identify orbital directions. But "retrothrusters" would then make no sense, so it's probably better to just use context and be done with it.

Well, then they'd be antithrusters, which the media would confuse with antimatter thrusters.

I can imagine the headlines now:

NASA tests Antimatter propulsion! Andromeda flight coming soon, one man says...