Circular Orbit Puns

When I look up this question, the answer usually has something to do with Kepler's second law of planetary motion. While it is related to the question, that doesn't really satisfy me. I can understand that the orbit of a planet sweeps equal areas in equal times. To me, that just seems like the law of conservation of angular momentum in disguise.

The reason Kepler's laws don't satisfy me is because it describes what happens to a planet that is in an elliptical orbit, not how it got in that orbit.

In trying to answer this, I thought about the orbits of masses caught in the gravity of another, like a comet that was caught into an orbit around the sun. I can understand how something like that would have an elliptical orbit. The comment comes in with its own momentum and at an angle that isn't conducive to a circular orbit. It looks a lot like how when we purposefully do a gravity assist to apply a favorable acceleration to a spacecraft. Except this time, the gravity assist is not enough to achieve escape velocity, so the comet is stuck in this perpetual, gravity-assist like orbit. Hence, an elliptical orbit.

What about the planets? They formed from an accretion disk that also gave birth to the Sun. It has always been subjected to the forces of the Sun as long as the Sun has been a thing. The planets exist because of the Sun. They weren't caught in the orbit of the Sun. They came into existence in the Sun's gravity. What gave the planets their elliptical orbit?

For example, if I am in a circular LKO of 100 km and want to raise my orbit to 1,000 km, what is the general formula for how much delta-v I'll need please? I'd like to be able to do this calculation for any plane or moon.

Thanks!

What would be the maximum parameters of such an orbit, assuming F9 ASDS recovery with reasonable margin?

It's safe to say that most orbits are elliptical (I don't know if there are exceptions in this case), but over time, do they become more circular? The reason I think this would happen is that the satellite would eventually lose some of its energy from the surrounding area. I'm not saying that it would become a perfect circle, just approaching it.

If this is correct, then theoretically, if infinite time passes and no outside factors affect the orbit, does it become a perfect circle?

If another large body crashed into us and ejected a bunch of debris that created the moon, shouldn't that have thrown our orbit out of whack, how come it's still relatively circular?

Greetings!

I know that these questions have been asked to death, but as a noob I am, I am doing everything the tutorials I found online tell me and still can't get a rocket to the Mun! Forget that, I can't even get into circular orbit without wasting my fuel! Please, explain me what I'm doing wrong.

I'm playing Science Mode on stock, modless KSP. My rocket is designed as follows:

1st Stage - Orbital Ascent:

• 4 x BACC "Thumper" SRBs
• 1 x LV-T30 "Reliant" Liquid Fuel Engine
• 3 x FL-T400 Fuel Tanks

2nd Stage - Mun Transfer:

• 1 x LV-T45 "Swivel" Liquid Fuel Engine
• 2 x FL-T400 Fuel Tanks
• RCS System

3rd Stage - Mun Landing, Ascent & Return

• 4 x Mk-55 "Thud" Liquid Fuel Engines /w thrust limited to 50%
• 1 x FL-T400 Fuel Tank
• Science Jr., Thermometer, Barometer, Goo canisters, Antenna & Batteries
• Drogue and Main Parachute for Kerbin reentry
• OKTO Probe Core

https://preview.redd.it/d4bsu9ui7vg61.png?width=1366&format=png&auto=webp&s=d3e2c309f972e3e3f6b6f378130aaa56a7d55e63

This is what I do:

1. I launch at 0 throttle, letting the SRBs do the work. At 100 m/s I start turning 10 deg. due east (to the right?), maintaining HDG of 90 degrees.
2. By the time SRBs burn out, I'm ~9 km high, going 469 m/s. I throttle up to the max and detach SRBs, then turn to 45 deg. east.
3. Most of the tutorials I read claim that I should be able to reach stable circular orbit on that 1st stage alone, but by the time I'm at ~26 km high, I'm still going ~470 m/s, my fuel is half empty and AP is but ~31 km high.
4. When velocity meter switches to orbit, I'm ~35 km high, AP is at ~44 km, speed is 862 m/s, and my fuel is out, so I have to dump the 1st stage.
5. I hope that I could at least get a circular orbit with some fuel left for Mun transfer maneuver on this 2nd stage, but by the time my AP is 75 km - with most tutorials claiming I need at least 100, but whatever - I have just a fifth of fuel left and still flying at 56 km, barely at the edge of atmosphere.
6. I coast to ~30 seconds away from AP, turn prograde and burn. But then I run out of 2nd stage fuel, AP is 76 km high, PE node haven't even appeared yet, and I'm screwed on just the last stage.

I tried not to turn so much, going up aligned to 10 degrees east; tried to ascend burning both SRBs and 1st stage; tried to put Swivel instead of Reliant as 1st stage engine; tried to put Terrier as last stage engine instead of 4 Thuds, but nothing helps. What am I doing wr

Hi all. Noob KSP player here. All my launches so far keep getting into wild elliptical orbits.

Any tips for evening them out to achieve a more circular orbit? Trying to get just into a parking orbit to launch to the Mun.

My procedure is standard:

1. Launch and start pointing East
2. Be on a 45 deg angle eastward by the time you reach 10 km
3. Cut engines at desired apoapsis
4. Create maneuver node at apoapsis

This is where it goes wrong -- when I drag the prograde marker to circularize I can never get a circular orbit. I have watched countless videos and have been doing this for a while but I always get an elliptical orbit, no matter how finely I tune the prograde/retrograde markers. Am I missing anything?

Comets are generally known to have highly elliptical or even hyperbolic paths.

The current Tychosium has Halley’s Comet built in, but simply has it in the wrong part of the sky for a great potion of its path. For example, it was first visible in 1982, and was only off its predicted position by 8 arc seconds when first seen. Tychosium has the RA wrong by 11 hours.

We’re simply not even in the same order of magnitude for precision when predicting a comets path with Tychosium.

Carry the same logic over to any comet, you simply cannot draw a circular orbit that predicts a comet’s position in relation to the earth.

To expand on that, as comets leave our sky, the appear to leave in the direction of a constellation, but have a visible rotation to them, that precisely describes the rotation of the earth about the sun.

Appears to be definitive proof of a heliocentric model, but I’d like to hear your thoughts.

I'm trying to make a KOS script for a delta iv heavy with a 0.3 TWR upper stage, and I can't for the life of me get it into a non eccentric orbit. The burn always ends about 5 minutes after apoapsis and no matter how i pitch or burn the first stages it always ends up with about a 600km apoapsis with a periapsis barely clearing the atmosphere. Any ideas how they do this IRL?

I'm trying to simulate the trajectory of a spacecraft in LEO (radius = r) , and I'm starting my trying to figure out orbital elements before finding initial position and velocity vectors.

So far I have:

e = 0

a = r

i = 28.5 deg

omega (argument of periapsis) = 0

theta (true anomaly) = 0

RAAN = ?

Is it correct to say the argument of periapsis is 0 for a circular orbit?

Can true anomaly be anything since it's a circular orbit?

How can I find the RAAN? I know its taken relative to a fixed point in the stars far away, but is there a way to determine it with other info about the launch/date/orbit?

Thank you.