[Sandwich]

I was wondering - has anyone ever taken into account the passage of time in relation to planets in the background? In other words, if you have a bunch of missions around a certain installation (which is NOT in orbit of a planet), has anyone ever made a planet in the background larger or smaller in concurrent missions, because of it's motion in orbit?

------------------
"He who laughs last thinks slowest."
"Just becase you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
"To err is human; to really screw up you need a computer."
Creator of the Sandvich Bar, the CapShip Turret Upgrade, the Complete FS2 Ship List and the System Backgrounds List (all available from the site)

[Shrike]

bahh, if you're close enough to a planet to see it, you'll probably be in orbit anyhow.  

[Snipes]

Well... if you wanna talk for that matter, when Ace said the Sol node was by the moon, wouldn't that be stationary? And depend completely on the location of the earth? Or not... You'll probably prove me wrong, you find so much fun in it...  

[morris13]

not nessecarily. The nodes don't have to occupy a specific static position within a system. Its actually a lot MORE likely that the nodes themselves would be in orbit around the star just as the planets are, as the wormholes that they connect to can be anchored by gravitational forces. This could, in fact, be what the Knossos gates do, by creating intense gravitational fields they lock a node more firmly in place that might otherwise be drifting around erratically, meaning that a ship might not be all the way through it before it was 'somewhere else' with rather catastrophic results.
In this instance, the node would probably have been anchored at one of the Lagrange points where the earth and moon's gravitational fields are perfectly balanced. This would probably be one of the most stable locations in the Sol system, gravitationally.

[Snipes]

See? I knew this would happen...

[Sandwich]

 

Originally posted by Shrike:
bahh, if you're close enough to a planet to see it, you'll probably be in orbit anyhow.    

Good point... hmm.... ok, so it was a stupid question - so sue me!  


------------------
"He who laughs last thinks slowest."
"Just becase you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
"To err is human; to really screw up you need a computer."
Creator of the Sandvich Bar, the CapShip Turret Upgrade, the Complete FS2 Ship List and the System Backgrounds List (all available from the site)

[Kazan]

 

Originally posted by Shrike:
bahh, if you're close enough to a planet to see it, you'll probably be in orbit anyhow.    

that's a stupid statement

so you're saying since we could clrealy see jupiter from the asteroid belt we must be in orbit of jupiter?

------------------
FreeSpace 2: The Babylon Project Effects Nerd and Programmer.
http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/babylon

Alliance Productions
http://alliance.sourceforge.net

Did you say you wanted your head used as a soccer ball?
The Klooges are coming! RUN! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

[Raven2001]

Kazan's right... you can see the moon, and you're not in orbit around her...

[Setekh]

 

Originally posted by Kazan:
that's a stupid statement

Kazan, King of Tact  

[Shrike]

 

Originally posted by Kazan:
that's a stupid statement

so you're saying since we could clrealy see jupiter from the asteroid belt we must be in orbit of jupiter?

Is it big enough to be recognizably a planet, especially on a screen?  I think not, not unless you're pretty close, ie within orbital distance.  It probably would depend what type of planet, but you don't see that many gas giants in FS do you?

Having an installation in orbit in say the asteroid belt would be fine and dandy.  You can just recognize Jupiter with your naked eye.  Now think how long it would take for a measurable change to occur.  You must be reasonably close, so that means you're going to be in an orbit that's fairly similar as well, so you won't see big changes unless you're talking about weeks or probably months of time.  But over a few days?  Unlikely.

[Kazan]

I wasn't saying _anything_ about the time change

------------------
FreeSpace 2: The Babylon Project Effects Nerd and Programmer.
http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/babylon

Alliance Productions
http://alliance.sourceforge.net

Did you say you wanted your head used as a soccer ball?
The Klooges are coming! RUN! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

[Sandwich]

 

Originally posted by Raven2001:
Kazan's right... you can see the moon, and you're not in orbit around her...

Ummm... no, the moon is in orbit around the earth...  



------------------
"He who laughs last thinks slowest."
"Just becase you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
"To err is human; to really screw up you need a computer."
Creator of the Sandvich Bar, the CapShip Turret Upgrade, the Complete FS2 Ship List and the System Backgrounds List (all available from the site)

[Unidan]

 

Originally posted by morris13:

In this instance, the node would probably have been anchored at one of the Lagrange points where the earth and moon's gravitational fields are perfectly balanced. This would probably be one of the most stable locations in the Sol system, gravitationally.

Kind of like the colonies on Gundam Wing, hey has anyone thought of a Gundam MOD?



------------------
Website manager and beta tester of the GTVA VS. EMPIRE campaign.
GTVA VS. EMPIRE homepage

My E-Mail=   [email protected]  

-------------------------
If Indiana Jones and Han Solo were in a fight... who would win?

If you figure out what this numbermeans you win a prize
26724 2337

[morris13]

That might be cool. some of the ships from Stardust Memories would be VERY neat.

[YodaSean]

 

Originally posted by sandwich:
Ummm... no, the moon is in orbit around the earth...  

Ravens right.  We are not orbiting around the moon, it is orbiting around us.  

[Sandwich]

 

Originally posted by YodaSean:
Ravens right.  We are not orbiting around the moon, it is orbiting around us.    

*sigh* This is what happens when you don't read the whole topic.  

He was saying that even though we are not orbiting the moon (and therefore implying that we are not nessecarily very close to the moon), we are able to see the moon (If you don't see why or how he meant that, read it and refer to Kazan's post before that.)

Now, as most people know, the moon is in orbit around the earth. Therefore, since a difference which makes no difference IS no difference, his point of the moon being both visible and yet not being orbited by us is moot.


------------------
"He who laughs last thinks slowest."
"Just becase you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
"To err is human; to really screw up you need a computer."
Creator of the Sandvich Bar, the CapShip Turret Upgrade, the Complete FS2 Ship List and the System Backgrounds List (all available from the site)

[Snakeseyes]

 

Originally posted by morris13:
not nessecarily. The nodes don't have to occupy a specific static position within a system. Its actually a lot MORE likely that the nodes themselves would be in orbit around the star just as the planets are, as the wormholes that they connect to can be anchored by gravitational forces. This could, in fact, be what the Knossos gates do, by creating intense gravitational fields they lock a node more firmly in place that might otherwise be drifting around erratically, meaning that a ship might not be all the way through it before it was 'somewhere else' with rather catastrophic results.
In this instance, the node would probably have been anchored at one of the Lagrange points where the earth and moon's gravitational fields are perfectly balanced. This would probably be one of the most stable locations in the Sol system, gravitationally.

Actually, they must orbit around the star, or else they would drift in the interstellar space

[Ace]

On nodes: Yes they follow orbits due to their being connected to the gravitational bodies.

Despite this, in cases such as the Earth-Moon system which orbit around a common center of gravity in a region between the two objects, nodes appear to "move."

------------------
Ace
Staff member FreeSpace Watch
 http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/

[Shrike]

 

Originally posted by Kazan:
I wasn't saying _anything_ about the time change

Yes, but the original post did.  

[joek]

I was about to argue my opinion that nodes don't orbit stars (they have no mass), but that they stay in a fixed relative position between the two star-systems they connect (and over that thousands of years that stars move, old nodes would collapse and new ones form as the stars change their positions relative to each other).

But now I'm thinking that they could "orbit", not because they have mass, but because they are tied to the gravitational force of the star-system--which rotates as the star does (similar to the Great Red spot on Jupiter--or something like that).

I'm figuring, for the game-play/game-story, they would have to "orbit" the star-system so that you can place such things as Arcadias and Mjolnirs around them and they would be stationary relative to the node, but not falling in toward the star (because they are in orbit).

Joe.