01:04 <discord-> e​gg. — @Marsu @Acer_Saccharum I have no interest in the osculating elements, and neither should you;

01:04 <discord-> e​gg. — what you care about is mean elements, and that's what the analyser is for.

01:07 <discord-> e​gg. — As for

01:07 <discord-> e​gg. — > adding a line when you hover the AP of the flight plan that show what will be the inclination

01:07 <discord-> e​gg. — a line going through the apsides cannot show the inclination; that's not how the geometry works, setting aside for a moment the fact that the map view apsis markers are local extrema of distance, which can be very different from mean apsides and thus irrelevant to the properties of your orbit (not that they would ever have much to do with your inclination anyway).

01:07 <discord-> e​gg. — > which can be very different from mean apsides

01:07 <discord-> e​gg. — Those who play with RSS and launch low-eccentricity satellites should be familiar with the fact that these have four apsides per revolution in map view.

01:09 <discord-> e​gg. — Having an analysis of the end-of-flight-plan trajectory makes sense though; as I said, we could add that someday.

01:18 <discord-> n​eph. — Line as in line of text

01:19 <discord-> n​eph. — I personally think it's both a reasonable and really useful request

01:19 <discord-> A​cer_Saccharum. — I never meant to suggest drawing the osculating ellipse at a given point, but I definitely see your points @ egg

01:21 <discord-> n​eph. — But also your "someday" analysis would cover the purpose of knowing the mean inclination of your post burn orbit so

05:17 <discord-> R​urouniDonut. — For Lunar launch windows, how effective is switching to Earth Moon Aligned and launching when close to the gray line? It works for this launch but I was just wondering if there's more efficient windoes.

12:49 <discord-> e​gg. — @Acer_Saccharum no but you mentioned the osculating elements; those are of no interest, only the mean elements have some stability

12:50 <discord-> e​gg. — (it was @Marsu who suggested drawing a line, I'm not sure what the idea was behind that but I don't see how it can show an inclination)

12:50 <discord-> e​gg. — @neph yes, that's my point.

12:50 <discord-> e​gg. — you want the final mean elements (and the thing that computes mean elements is the analyser)

12:51 <discord-> e​gg. — the osculating elements are very messy

12:51 <discord-> e​gg. — full of high-amplitude short-period variations

13:07 <discord-> n​eph. — As a stopgap measure, rather than applying the analyser to the end trajectory for the mean elements, could we display the instantaneous elements at a given point in the future?

13:41 <discord-> e​gg. — No

13:42 <discord-> e​gg. — That's just as much work.

13:42 <discord-> e​gg. — Probably more, since you'd need a way to specify the "given point".

13:48 <discord-> l​pg. — we've lived without such a feature so far; a "stopgap measure" hardly seems necessary

13:50 <discord-> n​eph. — @egg slider from 0s to end of flight plan seconds?

13:51 <discord-> e​gg. — Yes, that's work

13:52 <discord-> n​eph. — @egg time slider as otherwise used for flight planning? (edited)

13:52 <discord-> e​gg. — Needs to be crammed into the UI, the data needs to be sent all the way down to the flight plan, I need to write messy code to compute osculating elements directly, and new data structures to bring them back, and something to display them

13:54 <discord-> e​gg. — That's more work than using the analyser, and work that makes things harder to maintain until it is thrown in the bin and replaced by the right thing, having helped development of the right thing in no way

13:54 <discord-> e​gg. — So, as previously said,

13:54 <discord-> e​gg. — No

15:20 <discord-> M​arsu. — @egg nop sorry for the missunderstanding I was talking about a line of text. Sorry again

15:20 <discord-> e​gg. — Ah

15:21 <discord-> e​gg. — The apogee is a strange place to write that but this makes more sense

15:22 <discord-> e​gg. — (tbh putting mean elements at a node is generally a mess because they're precisely not instantaneous properties, but I see where that's coming from; KSP does it because its elements are constants)

15:42 <discord-> M​arsu. — Yeah i understand that it’s complicated no problem. Don’t worry with this 😉

17:21 <discord-> D​amien. — https://youtu.be/LpX3Z6sasQ0

17:21 <kmath> YouTube - Jungis VS Principia

17:21 <discord-> D​amien. — o_O