2021-11-03, 06:31 PM
Hello,
There isn't normally a good reason to do such a thing. The basic idea is to ensure that you have the a good set of orbital elements and then use those to make your observations. Under typical circumstances, there wouldn't be any reason to plot positions based on different sets of elements. The only automated sources for elements are the MPC and ASTORB. SkyTools 4 does allow import of Horizons elements, they just aren't automated. Regardless, SkyTools doesn't care (nor really should it) what the source of the elements is. It keeps sets of elements for multiple epochs, so it can plot accurate positions over a wider range of dates. If you add elements from another source at the same epoch, it will simply overwrite them.
Lets say you logged a close pass of an asteroid. When you returned to this observation years later, if you used the orbital elements from that future date, as all other commercial software would, it would not provide an accurate re-creation of what you saw, because the elements on hand would be for a date in the future. SkyTools keeps the original set of elements for you so you can continue to calculate accurate positions for that date, and it even embeds the set of elements in the log entry for safe keeping. The source of those elements is of little concern.
There probably isn't any more complex part of SkyTools than the minor planet orbital elements database. This is because of all of the tricks used to allow so many objects to be calculated, searched for, and especially plotted, without long waits for the intense calculations for so many objects. I honestly don't know how I would change things in a way that would allow you to manually choose one set of elements over another based on the source alone, especially since it will always select the one with the closest epoch for the orbit, which means you would have trouble controlling which set it used any any given moment of time.
There isn't normally a good reason to do such a thing. The basic idea is to ensure that you have the a good set of orbital elements and then use those to make your observations. Under typical circumstances, there wouldn't be any reason to plot positions based on different sets of elements. The only automated sources for elements are the MPC and ASTORB. SkyTools 4 does allow import of Horizons elements, they just aren't automated. Regardless, SkyTools doesn't care (nor really should it) what the source of the elements is. It keeps sets of elements for multiple epochs, so it can plot accurate positions over a wider range of dates. If you add elements from another source at the same epoch, it will simply overwrite them.
Lets say you logged a close pass of an asteroid. When you returned to this observation years later, if you used the orbital elements from that future date, as all other commercial software would, it would not provide an accurate re-creation of what you saw, because the elements on hand would be for a date in the future. SkyTools keeps the original set of elements for you so you can continue to calculate accurate positions for that date, and it even embeds the set of elements in the log entry for safe keeping. The source of those elements is of little concern.
There probably isn't any more complex part of SkyTools than the minor planet orbital elements database. This is because of all of the tricks used to allow so many objects to be calculated, searched for, and especially plotted, without long waits for the intense calculations for so many objects. I honestly don't know how I would change things in a way that would allow you to manually choose one set of elements over another based on the source alone, especially since it will always select the one with the closest epoch for the orbit, which means you would have trouble controlling which set it used any any given moment of time.
Clear skies,
Greg
Head Dude at Skyhound
Greg
Head Dude at Skyhound