orbital elements

"U. N. McGregor" writes:

Ok group thanks. As someone who wants to make observations of at least
NEO's , I understand that
carefully determining the changes in RA and DEC relative to known star
positions is the first step. What is the least
quality of CCD or CMOS digital camera is needed to take photos of orbits?

That depends on how faint objects you will be studying.

What is the best what is the best way
to determine good RA and DEC measures?

Astrometrica: http://www.astrometrica.at/

Before spending too much effort into this project, you should realize
that asteroids are presently discovered almost exclusively by
automated search programs, such as LINEAR, Catalina, Spacewatch, etc.
Orbits are automatically calculated from positions received from these
surveys and others (incl. amateurs) on a daily basis by the Minor
Planet Center (MPC) and by Lowell observatory. Orbital elements for
all known object can be downloaded from their web-sites.

If you are interested in recently discovered NEOs, still with highly
uncertain orbits, you may consult the NEO Confirmation Page and join
the Minor Planet Mailing List http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/mpml/.

pej
--
Per Erik Jorde

Check out this site for more information:
http://minorplanetproject.com/

Matt Mills


"Per Erik Jorde" wrote in message
...
"U. N. McGregor" writes:

Ok group thanks. As someone who wants to make observations of at least
NEO's , I understand that
carefully determining the changes in RA and DEC relative to known star
positions is the first step. What is the least
quality of CCD or CMOS digital camera is needed to take photos of orbits?

That depends on how faint objects you will be studying.

What is the best what is the best way
to determine good RA and DEC measures?

Astrometrica: http://www.astrometrica.at/

Before spending too much effort into this project, you should realize
that asteroids are presently discovered almost exclusively by
automated search programs, such as LINEAR, Catalina, Spacewatch, etc.
Orbits are automatically calculated from positions received from these
surveys and others (incl. amateurs) on a daily basis by the Minor
Planet Center (MPC) and by Lowell observatory. Orbital elements for
all known object can be downloaded from their web-sites.

If you are interested in recently discovered NEOs, still with highly
uncertain orbits, you may consult the NEO Confirmation Page and join
the Minor Planet Mailing List http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/mpml/.

pej
--
Per Erik Jorde

This all sure gives a good start . Thanks

In article xPGol.13308$Db2.361@edtnps83,
U. N. McGregor wrote:
Where can I find concise directions on how to determine orbital elements.
All I ever see on the internet is description about what they are and mean
but never the way to actually do that type of calculation.

Check out: http://www.willbell.com/math/mc10.htm




--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stjarnhimlen dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

In article ODIol.13323$Db2.3340@edtnps83,
U. N. McGregor wrote:

"Greg Neill" wrote in message
om...
U. N. McGregor wrote:
Where can I find concise directions on how to determine orbital elements.
All I ever see on the internet is description about what they are and
mean
but never the way to actually do that type of calculation.

See if you can get hold of a copy of Fundamentals of Astrodynamics
by Bate, Mueller, and White. $12.89 at amazon -- a good deal for
an excellent book. Lot's of examples and exercises.

http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-A.../dp/0486600610


How difficult is it to read this and understand it? Is it written for
engineers and scientists etc.?
Remember , I am an amateur with limited math skills.

You must know some calculus to be able to do this. If you don't have
enough math skills, you must be willing to acquire those skills.




--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stjarnhimlen dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

In article ,
Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 03:30:14 GMT, Golden California Girls
wrote:

It can't be calculated without calculus math skills.

I do orbital analysis all the time, and I never use calculus. You only
need that if you want to derive the equations. Just determining orbital
elements from observations requires nothing more than vector algebra.

In principle true, but I find it helpful to have some idea of what
I'm actually doing...... :-)




--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stjarnhimlen dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

In article ZWXol.13385$Db2.7322@edtnps83,
U. N. McGregor wrote:

Ok group thanks. As someone who wants to make observations of at least
NEO's , I understand that
carefully determining the changes in RA and DEC relative to known star
positions is the first step. What is the least
quality of CCD or CMOS digital camera is needed to take photos of orbits?
What is the best what is the best way
to determine good RA and DEC measures?

Check out: http://astrometry.net/




"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:03:41 GMT, "U. N. McGregor"
wrote:

Where can I find concise directions on how to determine orbital elements.
All I ever see on the internet is description about what they are and mean
but never the way to actually do that type of calculation.

I've found _Methods of Orbit Determination for the Micro Computer_, by
Dan Boulet, to be the best _practical_ book on orbital dynamics (by
far). It briefly covers history and derivations, but is strongly focused
on practical math and algorithms. It's available at
http://www.willbell.com/math/mc10.htm .
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com




--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stjarnhimlen dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:13:34 GMT, (Paul Schlyter) wrote:

I do orbital analysis all the time, and I never use calculus. You only
need that if you want to derive the equations. Just determining orbital
elements from observations requires nothing more than vector algebra.

In principle true, but I find it helpful to have some idea of what
I'm actually doing...... :-)

Actually, even the derivations of most of the equations used for orbital
analysis don't require much calculus. And what little there is can be
understood conceptually without needing to actually know the
methodology. There's no reason the OP can't understand the concepts
behind the analysis, and then actually perform the analysis, without
having much in the way of practical calculus skills.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Mar 5, 2:25*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:13:34 GMT, (Paul Schlyter) wrote:
I do orbital analysis all the time, and I never use calculus. You only
need that if you want to derive the equations. Just determining orbital
elements from observations requires nothing more than vector algebra.

In principle true, but I find it helpful to have some idea of what
I'm actually doing...... :-)

Actually, even the derivations of most of the equations used for orbital
analysis don't require much calculus. And what little there is can be
understood conceptually without needing to actually know the
methodology. There's no reason the OP can't understand the concepts
behind the analysis, and then actually perform the analysis, without
having much in the way of practical calculus skills.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatoryhttp://www.cloudbait.com

Allow me to give him the first Ra/Dec lesson-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTTDWhky9HY

http://www.opencourse.info/astronomy...phere_anim.gif

A rotating celestial celestial sphere does not equate to a stationary
Earth

A rotating Earth does not equate to stationary celestial sphere.

Repeat after me 100 times - the Ra/Dec system is a wonderful
observational convenience built on the average 24 hour day and the
equable 365/366 day calendar system therefore it is not good to
organise the orbital motion of the Earth or the external celestial
framework around the 'predictive' qualities of Ra/Dec.You probably can
convince yourself through calculus that Isaac didn't spot the
nondescript celestial sphere bubble at the core of Flamsteed's false
premise and conclusion but I guess,neither did nayone else until now.

I wish people would grow up and accept that there is an incredible
amount of observational data to interpret for climate,geological and
other purposes such as past history of the planet,internal and
celestial dynamics ect.