Inclination of smaller objects vs bigger ones..

[DenisineD]

Hello all!
Hope you are having good holidays!

I m having a suggestion....about the inclination of orbiting object vs a planet or a star.

Could it be possible to make the equator of the planet or star or etc...as the 0 degree? Like if i have a planet with an axial tilt of,  let say 23 degree, then when you add an object, it would go at the equator plane (0 degree) of this planet. After this we could play with the angles. It would be the same for stars, planets and etc...

Sure the object would need to be in orbit of the primary object.

Because right now i need to play with the node...

And the habitable zone could follow that rule too

thx

[Angel Armageddon]

Are you saying that you want to add an object in a system at an angle? If so, just add the body at the distance you want the object to be at and then drag up or down.

[DenisineD]

This is what i mean

[DenisineD]

its about on the orbiting objects around an object...making the equator line as the 0 degree for the moons asteroids and etc orbiting that object.

I know we can already make it...but it would go a lot faster sure it wouldn't affect if you want a polar orbit for an orbiting object...just would make everything way much more easier

[DenisineD]

ah and on my drawing the little circles are orbiting objects....they are at the equator line.

[DenisineD]

so let say you have a binary star system with a distance of 73 au between the 2 stars. one star have 0 degree (like most of the system we see or creat in US2. When you place the planets around it they are at the equator of the star+ when you wanna see the habitable zone...its at the equator...

But for star B you decide to give it an angle of 28 degrees. when you place the planets at the current system...they will be at the same angle as the star A...you will need to manually set them at 28 degrees and play with the node to orient them at the equator of Star B + when you ll check the habitable zone...it will appear like Star A...so it harder to see if a planet is in the habitable zone.

But with what i suggest, the new 0 degree would be the equator of star B for stuff orbiting star B + the habitable zone would click at is equator....

And it would be the same for any objects that orbit an object, no matter what is the tilt of this object.


Well in space there s no orientation....we use objects to set an orientation of a different object.

[Angel Armageddon]

Ah, I see what you mean.
I'm not sure if such a thing exist's in the simulation at this time.
But dragging the planets at the habital zone up should still be in the habitat zone, if I'm not mistaken.
But if you wish, you could contact Dan.

[DenisineD]

well it should follow the axial tilt...because in space there s no real up and down or angle...its all base on objects vs an other one...

So if Primary object avec an axial tilt of 35 degree...then the 0 degree should be at is equator for all bodies orbiting it...

So let say you want to have a body at 15 degree vs is main planet that have an axial tilt of 30 degree...instead of putting 45 degree...you only put 15 degrees and you don t need to play with the node to orient the orbit a the equator line.

Then we could devellop way much more realistic systems and orbit.

Here is a system i did made...i did try to orient all the moons around the equator with some little angle...let me know what you think.

Did this system via an accretion disk method i ve been updating since 4 yrs now...now it work pretty well to make realistic systems ...did use it too for the planets-moons systems

[DenisineD]

For habitable zone

The planet will still be in the habitable zone BUT since the habitable zone is only show at the absolute 0 degree...a star with a different axial tilt (let say 80 degrees vs the main star), it will be harder to show the planet vs the habitable zone (if the planets are on the equator plane of the B star with a 80 degrees axial tilt (with the current system). That mean if you wanna show it on a print screen...you ll need to recreate that star in a different simulation and put it with an axial tilt of 0 degrees...so you see that it take a little bit more time.

Finally...
In fact the 0 degree should follow the object equator just like when you place a ring. then after you could play with the inclination, argument of periapsis, longitude of ascending node and mean anomaly at epoch. Because the equator would be the 0 degree for object orbiting that more massive object...and etc...

[Dan Dixon]

So in short... you want to be able to adjust the plane that you use to place planets around a star and the ability to select and rotate a solar system (or moons and their planet)?

Better controls for creating solar systems is something we're working toward.

[DenisineD]

Well in fact...the angle 0 would follow the axial tilt of the planet or star. Because right now...when i have a planet with a axial tilt of let say...23 degrees...i need to play with the longitude of the ascending node and + the inclination of the orbit to fit the equator of the planet or star. And its pretty hard to make a realistic system with many dwarf planets + planets when the star have a different axial tilt than 0

Because i think that stars in binary system (or more) aren't all at 0 degrees.
 And i can't wait to see that kind of update ...having a few systems in the waiting line...

[Angel Armageddon]

Yeah. I believe some like this will be implemented later on.

[Physics_Hacker]

Yeah, honestly this and making circumbinary planets possible are two things that would make making realistic systems MUCH easier. (I can already do both but it is difficult...)

[DenisineD]

Yes it would make system way much more realistic...specially binary stars systems