Bill Gray Nov 1, 2015
On 10/29/2015 10:15 PM, filip fratev filipfratev@... [find_orb] wrote:
> I tried to reproduce your orbit solution for*WT1190F *using only the
> observations from 2015. However, the Find_orb don't show me any impact
> and coordinates. On the other hand the orbits are very similar to yours
> for both 25/10/2015 and 13.2/11/2015 epochs...
>
> What I am doing wrong and what is the trick here?
You didn't do anything wrong. I did.
The dialog box showing the elements was of fixed size. It turned out
that a geocentric, impacting object with uncertainties shown for the
elements came to one line too many.
I've just posted an "in development" update to Find_Orb at
http://projectpluto.com/pluto/devel/find_orb.htm
which fixes this problem, plus a few others that have been reported
since I last posted an update. (The solution to this particular problem
was to have the orbital elements box, and the observation information
box, made to resize themselves to accommodate whatever text is put
into them. Which is probably what I should have done in the first place.)
You'll see that this version's "current list of improvements" describes
a few other items that may, or may not, be interesting to you.
Probably the most important change is that Windows Find_Orb now has
a 64-bit flavor. For a lot of programs, the shift from 32 bits to
64 bits was more about marketing than anything else. But for math-intensive
operations, it makes for a nice speed improvement, and I think you
may want to try out the new version for that reason alone.
This _is_ an "in development" version, though, and I'd very much
like to hear any trouble reports.
Incidentally, the plot has thickened in the WT1190F story. The arc
of observations now runs back to 2009 :
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MPML/conversations/messages/31429
-- Bill