Re: [GZG] Orbital mechanics (was List-iquette (was Ping))

[Doug Evans <devans@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Crap, prolly over my head, but using the example of Earth to Mars, where we
accept that there's a close-enough-for-government-work ratio of one to two
for respective years, how would it be best to visualize the possible paths?
Assuming constant, handwavium-amounts of thrust, of course.

The concept I was working with was move the distance of the Earth orbit,
then perpendicular up to the Mars orbit. Do the same in reverse, which, of
course, is only half the chord size of the other direction.

Also,  I was considering allowing prograde or 'standing still' movement in
orbit, with the image of the ship 'standing on it's head or tail' with
relation to the center of the orbit. How much handwavium is necessary to do
so compared to changing orbits?

Shaking your head and walking away from the whole thing is acceptable,
perhaps even wise. ;->=

Now if you're REALLY crazed, try to suggest comparisons to combat burns.

The_Beast

Mr. Burton West wrote on 05/29/2006 11:19:25 AM:

> On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 11:09:30AM -0500, Doug Evans wrote:
>
> >does
> >anybody have suggestions of good, simple reading of orbital mechanics,
and
> >spaceship travel thereupon?
>
> No, but I'm working on writing one. What sorts of problem are you trying
> to solve? I've got reasonably decent solutions for the high
> constant-thrust model and for Hohmann and other transfers, but the
> multi-body slingshots and long-low-thrust systems (e.g. ion drives) are
> proving more troublesome.

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l