2022-07-07, 06:11 PM
Hi BMD,
Yes, the ST4v positions look great, as expected when using the same osculating elements.
I downloaded the latest version of elements from MPC's NEAs at Today's Epoch again today, but didn't make a new plot to see how much the path has changed. Given the large errors that you report, the differences should be substantial between the positions predicted using the Jul 6 vs. the Jul 7 elements. Per the MPC website the NEAs Today data file was updated at 17:02 UT today.
Here is the revised path using the 2022 Jul 7 elements: [attachment=2430]
There may not be sufficient resolution to detect the error in position at this scale. Maybe these elements don't have the effects of the close approach included yet since the epoch is for Jul 7 00:00 UT which is before the approach. Oh well, try again tomorrow.
Phil S.
Yes, the ST4v positions look great, as expected when using the same osculating elements.
I downloaded the latest version of elements from MPC's NEAs at Today's Epoch again today, but didn't make a new plot to see how much the path has changed. Given the large errors that you report, the differences should be substantial between the positions predicted using the Jul 6 vs. the Jul 7 elements. Per the MPC website the NEAs Today data file was updated at 17:02 UT today.
Here is the revised path using the 2022 Jul 7 elements: [attachment=2430]
There may not be sufficient resolution to detect the error in position at this scale. Maybe these elements don't have the effects of the close approach included yet since the epoch is for Jul 7 00:00 UT which is before the approach. Oh well, try again tomorrow.
Phil S.