Scots engineers prove space pioneer's 25-year-old theory (displaced orbits for satellites)

University of Strathclyde ^ | July 26, 2010 | Unknown

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks decimon! And thanks also to KD for the additional ping (see Forward's talk about space tethers). This is one of those collateral interest topics for the String Theory ping list, and because the late Dr. Robert L. Forward wrote "Future Magic" which must be around here somewhere, and I can't remember how, but there's a catastrophism connection in that book. Somehow. :')

· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks decimon! And thanks also to KD for the additional ping.

---

· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·

---

[Eaker]

um...that is going to take a long extension cord...

Home Depot.

[patton]

Ther is a Home Depot in orbit?

Huh. Must be between the two Starbucks.

[patton]

...and are there illegal aliens in the parking orbit?

[wastedyears]

I figured we had satellites already orbiting like that.

[krb]

Are you kidding? They are going to be able to cram many times as many satellites up there if this thing works like it’s supposed to.

[Eaker]

Lord knows they are everywhere else.

[patton]

“Lord knows they are everywhere else.”

Starbucks? Yeah, I heard that their latest plan to increase revenue is to open a Starbucks within every existing Starbucks. Sort of a quantum warp Starbucks, or something.

Now, can somebody explain to me what an electric rocket drive is?

Because I have issues with suspension of disbelieve.

This thread went to Freeper Island, and nobody even noticed when the ship set sail.

Just smile and wave, boys, just smile and wave.

[Squawk 8888]

I expect they used “climate monitoring” because that’s the buzzword needed to attract funding. The pole-sitters would be extremely useful for real-time weather imagery and other forms of surveillance.

[Squawk 8888]

Thanks- I’ve just placed a hold at my library for that title.

[Squawk 8888]

Nope- a stable orbit without thrusters must be focused on the centre of the earth, so geosynchronous orbits are only possible over the equator. Satellites that orbit above or below the equator actually cross the equator at an angle twice during each orbit; the angle at which it crosses will be the same as the maximum north and south lattitude over which it will orbit.

[PA Engineer]

However it's just going to be used for/funded by more climate garbage.

It may have been the only way to get it funded. When my Wife was doing her Fellowship at the NIH everything was AIDS. If you put AIDS in the proposal it was funded. Researches began to figure that out fast. "Government Science" is indeed always corrupted now, however some real research gets though by playing the game. I think that is a possibility in this case.

[Erasmus]

Starbucks? Yeah, I heard that their latest plan to increase revenue is to open a Starbucks within every existing Starbucks. Sort of a quantum warp Starbucks, or something.

They're going to call it "Starbucks Inception."

[Erasmus]

Nope- a stable orbit without thrusters must be focused on the centre of the earth, so geosynchronous orbits are only possible over the equator. Satellites that orbit above or below the equator actually cross the equator at an angle twice during each orbit; the angle at which it crosses will be the same as the maximum north and south lattitude over which it will orbit.

Pardon, but a slight quibble with the terminology. An inclined orbit at geosynchronous altitude is still geosynchronous (although noone would call it "geostationary"). From a fixed point on the earth, as you imply, the satellite appears to wander north and south of the equatorial plane. Throw in a slight eccentricity in the orbit, and the north-south deviation becomes a figure eight.

TV stations, along with other geosync satellite users, have to use dishes that are dynamically steered through small angles in alt/azimuth (larger than their beamwidth) to track these satellites.

A friend who had to install a number of ground stations was told by the satellite people that it cost the satellite less station-keeping fuel to have an orbit like that, implying a longer satellite life.

[Publius6961]

bookmark

[Eaker]

can somebody explain to me what an electric rocket drive is?

Yes I can, but I am tied up right now writing a good rap song.

[bruin66]

I don’t think any commsats are geostationary. Station-keeping is too labor intensive, when it’s not required for operational effectiveness.