I hope too, @Diigg
But, have you noticed a file named "bioshield.msh"? It is the part jettisoned shortly before the Lander is sent to Mars, and I think it would be great to add it too.
I will see,@ DaveBowman2001
Diigg wrote:Thanks for the model. I've tried it and it looks great. Great job! @Toutatis
It's a shame not to have orbital data for the entire mission. Hopefully someday.
Limax7 wrote:Here is orbital data for Vikings orbiters
Well done toutatis! What's your next project gonna be?
The result is the same.
Here is orbital data for Vikings orbiters
Possible, but I used the radius of the bus of VIKING orbiter...Just a rectification, the span of the solar panels was 9.75m, which makes a Radius of 0.004875
"The orbiter, octagonal in shape, was about 2.5 m in diameter, with a total launch mass of 2,328 kg, of which 1,445 was devoted to propellant and nitrogen used by the control engines. The eight sides of the structure measured 0.4572 m high and had a width of between 1 397 and 0.508 m The overall height of the orbiter and landing gear assembly was approximately 3 , 29 m from the landing gear on the launcher to the top of the orbital vehicle.
The orbiter was equipped with 16 modular compartments, 3 arranged on each of the 4 long faces of the structure, and one on each short face. Four solar panels were deployed perpendicular to the axis of the orbiter. The span of the set with deployed solar panels was 9.75 m. The energy was produced by 8 solar panels of 1.57 by 1.23 m installed in groups of two on each support. The solar panels consisted of 34,800 photovoltaic cells, capable of producing 620 watts of power when the probe was in orbit around Mars. The energy was stored in two 30 amp hour nickel cadmium batteries. "
"The landing gear14 built by Martin Marietta consists of a hexagon structure made of aluminum, these sections have an alternating length of 1.09 m and 0.56 m.They rest on the three legs of the landing gear, attached to the When viewed from above, the landing legs form the sides of an equilateral triangle of 2.21 m on one side, and the instruments were attached to the top of the undercarriage, thus overhanging the surface. from the ground, once the landing legs are deployed. "
Okay @Gironde... I understand... thanks.. but I think that everyone here can change this small thing in SSC-file...
Toutatis, concerning Rosetta, the 2 orbits are correct but seen from a different point of view.
With a Solar orbit, the observer is on the Sun and sees an object moving around the Sun. The orbit thus drawn is smoothed with respect to the Sun as being an ellipse.
With the orbit seen from the Earth, the trajectory of the satellite is more telling because it shows the movements made by the satellite in its movement especially by meeting other objects. The orbit as seen from Earth will rotate like the Earth as the Timeline unfolds as the Earth rotates. It allows to see what the engineers have planned to reach 67P.
But it remains certain that the solar orbit is less complicated on the screen.
It should not be forgotten that all satellites can be expressed in a solar orbit even those rotating around the Earth, but such an orbit will be an ellipse around the Sun merging with that of the Earth and not allowing us to understand the movement of the satellite around the Earth.