Flight Question Acceptable warp factor while staying in orbit

[SuprunP]

I've got to stay in orbit for 9 days.
What is an optimal warp factor for this?

Thanks.

 

[Scruce]

Warp factor? :huh:

Orbiter is not Star Trek, you know. :lol:

 

[SuprunP]

Warp factor? :huh:

Orbiter is not Star Trek, you know. :lol:

"T": Time warp shortcut: Speed up simulation by factor 10 (up to a maximum warp factor of 100000).
ORBITER User Manual (c) 2000-2010 Martin Schweiger

Emphasis is mine.

 

[Napalm42]

Perhaps he's talking about eccentricity?

EDIT: :ninja:

But to answer your question, I believe 100000x is 1 day = 1 second, but when Orbiter has to constantly re-render due to the Sun and Earth, I usually use 1000x to better control the time, and as to not crash out the sim from the rapid re-rendering.

 

[Pipcard]

Up to x1000 time acceleration is good if you don't use any autopilots (e.g. prograde, retrograde, normal, anti-normal)

 

[Piper]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about time-warp, lol. I typically don't use anything higher then 10,000x when in low orbit.

 

[SuprunP]

Up to x1000 time acceleration is good if you don't use any autopilots (e.g. prograde, retrograde, normal, anti-normal)

I've tried x1000 and got thrown away somewhere in space after a while...

 

[Scruce]

Emphasis is mine.

Ah, I thought you were referring to speed of a vessel, my mistake. Any timewarp is ok really, but stay out of the atmosphere at high timewarps of you'll get spun out of the system faster than warp speed! :lol:

 

[garyw]

I've spent a few orbits at normal time just to enjoy the scenery but if I need to 'waste' a few orbits then I use 100-1,000x.

 

[SuprunP]

I was in an orbit of 260 km x 260 km (approximately) and while using x1000 my ApA and PeA began decreasing slightly until I was in the atmosphere and eventually got spun out of the system...

 

[jedidia]

I've tried x1000 and got thrown away somewhere in space after a while...

Yeah, that happens :lol:

It depends on the height of the orbit, really. A GEO shouldn't be any trouble at 1000, but in LEO I don't go over 100.

I was in an orbit of 260 km x 260 km (approximately) and while using x1000 my ApA and PeA began decreasing slightly until I was in the atmosphere and eventually got spun out of the system...

Oh, that's a completely different problem! You had too much atmospherical drag, your orbit destabilized, and you hit the surface at a few thousnad meters per second, all without noticing, because it was happening way too fast at that acceleration.

And since Orbiter usually reacts to high-velocity crashes at high timewarps by throwing you away at a significant fraction of c (or even multiples of c), you left the system...

 

[N_Molson]

x1 for autopilots to run nominally.

x10 in LEO : anything higher causes great losses in terms of precision.

x100 : can be acceptable in LEO if you can't let the simulation run while you're sleeping.

x1000 : you should wait to be several thousands km away from the planet (like after a TLI).

x10000 and more : interplanetary use only, when you are a out of planets SOI.

The lower the Warp factor, the more precise results you'll obtain (as the name says, "warp" skip simulation frames, which means that updates of the physical engine are less frequent, hence the loss of precison).

I think to remember that before Orbiter 2006, a x1000 time acceleration in LEO could easily smash you into the planet face. Correction factors based on complex calculations were introduced in later releases to avoid this. But they don't have the accuracy of the base physical engine.

 

[Napalm42]

That's never happened to me before..... If you're using peripherals, you may want to check the deadzone, sounds like some retro engines may be firing.

 

[orb]

I was in an orbit of 260 km x 260 km (approximately) and while using x1000 my ApA and PeA began decreasing slightly until I was in the atmosphere and eventually got spun out of the system...

You can change the atmospheric model of Earth to legacy model. Then the atmosphere will end at 200 km altitude, and you won't need to worry about the drag in higher time warps.

 

[N_Molson]

That's never happened to me before..... If you're using peripherals, you may want to check the deadzone, sounds like some retro engines may be firing.

Much more likely, the system has frozen for a few simulation steps, which skipped even more of those steps, to the point Orbiter can't calculate the orbit of the ship anymore. Be sure to have no background programs running.

StateSaver, while being an awesome (and essential) plugin, can cause a mini-freeze when saving. So you might want to desactivate it if you plan a lot of time acceleration.

 

[SuprunP]

Correction factors based on complex calculations were introduced in later releases to avoid this. But they don't have the accuracy of the base physical engine.

By the way, I hope FPS has no effect on the accuracy?

Thanks.

 

[orb]

By the way, I hope FPS has no effect on the accuracy?

It has. Higher FPS, higher accuracy.

 

[mojoey]

thats why orbiter has more problems with lower-end systems. If i remember, it refreshes the physics every frame. So, if your computer runs orbiter slow, and your frame rate is in the ground, the physics modeling isnt the best. The same goes for high time compression.

 

[Napalm42]

That's probably why I can run for ages at 100000x acceleration with little deviation on interplanetary runs :lol:

 

[SuprunP]

What if I change the date in 'Scenario Editor'?
How does Orbiter calculate my orbit (260x260) in this case?

Thanks.