Minmus Rotational/Equatorial Plane

[Speijker]

Good day everyone!

I suddenly had I question to which I couldn't find the answer.

How does Minmus rotate relative to Kerbin? Is it in the same plane as it's orbit around kerbin, or in the same plane as Kerbin's equator?

I've added an image to clarify what I mean, i.e. is it like minmus A or minmus B? (maybe it helps, maybe not, I just wanted to make art )

And is it easily possible to identify a landing spot exactly on it's rotational equator? (At least, as exact as Kerbals can be bothered to care about).

Edited September 25, 2014 by Speijker
Solved: option B!

[Alshain]

I think it's option B, I'm not 100% on that. It's easy to land on or near the equator, most the flats even intersect it at some point making it easier. Just make sure your inclination is 0 degrees and burn retrograde to deorbit.

Edited September 25, 2014 by Alshain

[Taki117]

It is Minmus B. While it orbits at an angle, it does not have a tilted axis meaning that it always rotates to the horizontal.

[Epthelyn]

Option B. Nothing in KSP has an axial tilt.

As for identifying an equatorial landing spot, if you focus on a planet or moon in map view the map will default to an equatorial view. Land in the middle of the screen

[Speijker]

Thank you for the reactions! I just wondered, and hoped it'd be option B. That means an observatory station on minmus' equator has a view of the entire kerbol system in this plane, from above ánd below kerbin.

A space station works just as well, but you need some excuse to spend all those funds on a moonbase...

It's weird though, you'd expect it (in the real world) to be option A. But, I'm no astrologer so what do I know, and Kerbal Science is so much better than mine...

[cakepie]

But, I'm no astrologer

You mean, astronomer.

[Speijker]

You mean' date=' astronomer.

Judging from the way I've conducted my Space Programs, I don't think it makes any difference... the Sciences and Mission-Planning staff might as well be composed entirely of astrologers.

I knew I made a mistake there, forgot to correct it. Apologies

Edited September 25, 2014 by Speijker

[cantab]

Well I'll be darned, seems like Epthelyn is right. I always assumed A was the case - that the "no axial tilt" meant relative to the body's orbit round its primary, not relative to Kerbin's orbit round the Sun.

[cakepie]

the Sciences and Mission-Planning staff might as well be composed entirely of astrologers.

I can imagine how this might turn out:

"As Jool transits the third house, there will be increased opportunities to advance SCIENCE. In this cycle, your missions are more likely to encounter new combinations of activity, situation, and biome for EXPERIMENTS. You are able to accrue more SCIENCE POINTS, and it is a propitious time to unlock new TECHNOLOGY. Your SCIENTISTS will be more productive. Additionally, opportunities to explore deep and far may present themselves in the form of TRANSFER WINDOWS to distant destinations, or more powerful or efficient PROPULSION SYSTEMS may become available to you. In career mode, returns on CONTRACTS may be especially lucrative."

[Mesons]

Well I'll be darned, seems like Epthelyn is right. I always assumed A was the case - that the "no axial tilt" meant relative to the body's orbit round its primary, not relative to Kerbin's orbit round the Sun.

Because what you describe is the way that makes physical sense in our universe. The observed rotation axes wouldn't result from kerbolar system formation, so every body must be captured from another system. Or kerbolar system formation was mucked about with before, during, or after by kerbals...

[metaphor]

All objects in the kerbal system have the same rotation axis (which is perpendicular to the plane of the "galaxy"), the inclination of their orbits doesn't matter. It's also kinda impossible to give an object axial tilt, even with mods, since that's hardcoded into the game.

[Srpadget]

Well dang. The amount of time I've spent in orbit around Minmus, and I *never noticed* that its equator didn't line up with its orbital plane... I feel stupid...

[Speijker]

and I *never noticed* that its equator didn't line up with its orbital plane...

That's one of the reasons why I asked. I always seem to have trouble rendez-vous-ing with the orbiter (in apollo-style landings) if I've spend too much time on the surface. After a while the orbits just shift too far apart. . .

[GigaG]

So Minmus has no tilt relative to Kerbins plane. But it technically seems tilted relative to its orbit. Would this configuration be possible IRL? For Minmus to always have an equatorial orbit inclination equal to the ecliptic plane?

[cantab]

Possible, yes. Overwhelmingly unlikely that ALL the bodies in the system would be that way though.