#49 Moon's shadow progresses in wrong direction

Graphics (12)

I just downloaded and installed Astro Info 2.5.1.
I live in Sydney, Australia and have input my latitude
and longitude data (33 deg. 53 min East, 151 deg. 13
min South) and the local time (GMT + 10 hours).

As I looked out at the waning gibbous moon tonight I
saw it did not look like the Moon Detail graphic in Astro
Info; from my location, the shadow is actually on the
top left of the moon, whereas the program's graphic
shows it as being on the right.

Furthermore, as one advances the date the shadow
moves across the program's graphic in what seems to be
the wrong direction, i.e. from right to left instead of
from top left to bottom right as it will actually appear
looking from here.

I compared the above with another program I
downloaded this evening, Moon Info 2.0.0, by M. Edward
Wilborne III. That program shows more correctly the
shadow and its progression across the face of the moon
as the date changes. It is only a simple left-to-right
progression, but at least goes in the right direction.

I'd like you to revise Astro Info so the Moon Detail
graphic's appearance corresponds to the actual
appearance of the Moon, taking into account the view
from different latitudes.

Yours sincerely,
David McMurray



  • Jochen Hoenicke

    Jochen Hoenicke - 2004-10-04
    • assigned_to: nobody --> hoenicke
    • status: open --> closed-duplicate
  • Jochen Hoenicke

    Jochen Hoenicke - 2004-10-04

    Logged In: YES

    Same as bugs #1019277 and #531305, see comments there.

    The planet and moon detail graphics all have "north" at the top,
    which doesn't reflect the view for the southern hemisphere. A
    quick fix would be to display the graphic upside-down, but this
    isn't correct for locations near the equator.

    Current CVS contains code that displays the moon in the sky
    map with the correct rotation. Though this code isn't very stable
    at the moment.


Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:

No, thanks