My space travel
- Thread starter vinny5000
- Start date
Hi, Keatah!
It took me about 5 months to get to the distance of 2,605,800,000,000 kilometers or 17,419 AU away from the sun and the speed of 401,692 kilometers per second which the spacecraft would get to the moon in 1 second!! i'm using real time (no time acceleration at all! Like I said in my previous posts, my goal is to get to the distance of about 200,000 AU or about 30,000,000,000,000 kilometers or about 18,000,000,000,000 miles away from the sun by the new year of 2015!
Cheers,
Vincent
It took me about 5 months to get to the distance of 2,605,800,000,000 kilometers or 17,419 AU away from the sun and the speed of 401,692 kilometers per second which the spacecraft would get to the moon in 1 second!! i'm using real time (no time acceleration at all! Like I said in my previous posts, my goal is to get to the distance of about 200,000 AU or about 30,000,000,000,000 kilometers or about 18,000,000,000,000 miles away from the sun by the new year of 2015!
Cheers,
Vincent
Last edited:
JonnyBGoode
Sky Marshal
By my calculations, that's a radius of about 15812.5 light years. That seems a bit much - or I figured wrong.
garyw
O-F Administrator
- Joined
- May 14, 2008
- Messages
- 10,548
- Reaction score
- 347
- Points
- 173
- Location
- East Sussex
- Website
- blog.gdwnet.com
- Preferred Pronouns
- He/Him
Except that once you're out past Pluto there isn't anything in the orbiter universe. no other planets, nothing to do and you can't even dock with anything.
JonnyBGoode
Sky Marshal
Well there are the various Kuiper belt add-ons. But some of the MFDs stop working correctly out that far.
JonnyBGoode
Sky Marshal
Last time I was out that far, I recall having serious difficulty plotting a course to Sedna, and the Orbit MFD only showing a part of its orbit.
JonnyBGoode
Sky Marshal
I think I plotted the transit from Earth. Everything seemed to be going well until I got out past Neptune's orbit, as I recall. It's been a few years. As for Sedna, it's out past Pluto. http://orbithangar.com/advsearch.php?text=sedna&search=everything&category=0&subcat=0&OrbVer=default
Hi, JonnyBGoode!
I don't understand why orbiter starts to get inaccurate when got out past Neptune's orbit. I think the orbiter needs to be fix so it can be accurate when as far out as past Neptune's orbit, since the universe in orbiter is 999,999,999 AU from the sun to the edge of the universe in orbiter.
Cheers,
Vincent
I don't understand why orbiter starts to get inaccurate when got out past Neptune's orbit. I think the orbiter needs to be fix so it can be accurate when as far out as past Neptune's orbit, since the universe in orbiter is 999,999,999 AU from the sun to the edge of the universe in orbiter.
Cheers,
Vincent
Ghostrider
Donator
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2008
- Messages
- 3,606
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 78
- Location
- Right behind you - don't look!
garyw
O-F Administrator
- Joined
- May 14, 2008
- Messages
- 10,548
- Reaction score
- 347
- Points
- 173
- Location
- East Sussex
- Website
- blog.gdwnet.com
- Preferred Pronouns
- He/Him
Because of the distances involved. Remember that Orbiter simulates the solar system with some decent accuracy - including distances - so when ranges out to Neptune start to get involved the simulation has a few issues handling the huge numbers involved. Essentially, the sun is 0,0,0 in terms of co-ords. Your ship is still bound to the sun so check out the RPOS in your scenario.
I have a probe that's just out past Earth which shows this: RPOS 124800241358.647 -4105180826.724 31978803327.806 and that's a large set of numbers for the simulation to cope with.
For me, having all the planets to explore plus a bunch of asteroids is more than enough entertainment, once you're out past pluto that is it. There is nothing else to see.
orb
New member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 14,019
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 0
Floating point numbers used by Orbiter and FPUs have a limited precision. The precision for 'double' variable is 53 bits or around 15-16 decimal digits.
It isn't broken or bugged. It was designed this way, and nowadays PC processors don't support quadruple precision floating point numbers yet, only double (and 11 bits more precise 'extended', but only if you write in assembly).
A "fix" could be changing arithmetics used by Orbiter to arbitrary precision (or somehow faster double-double / triple-double / quad-double), but it would make all add-ons incompatible, and it would be much slower than operating on numbers purely native to hardware.
And then somebody can say: "Orbiter needs a fix because it's too slow".
Face
Well-known member
I always wondered what happens with gbody-relative coordinates (as in VESSELSTATUS) vs. "global" coordinates in the numerical error regions. Of course the gbody ones are much more precise due to being closer to the origin, while the global ones have to deal with the huge offset.
If I set a vessel to a fine-tuned position around a far-out gbody, would Orbiter round it to the less precise global position before calculating the new positions? I guess physics calculation can be done gbody-relative, while rendering will suffer from the need of a global coordinate system due to the way DX works.
If I set a vessel to a fine-tuned position around a far-out gbody, would Orbiter round it to the less precise global position before calculating the new positions? I guess physics calculation can be done gbody-relative, while rendering will suffer from the need of a global coordinate system due to the way DX works.
Similar threads
