Mark deactivating @ 50'

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Moo

Whilst some of the errors/corrections are atmospheric most not; they are to do with errors in the clocks on the birds, errors in the almanac, gravity, solar winds, etc... Add all that up and you can see where the N/S comes into it. It has F all to do with weather.

You may see how N/S comes in, I doubt that anyone else does.

No one said "weather", he said "atmospheric conditions".

The ionosphere is part of the atmosphere! and ionospheric conditions are part of "atmospheric conditions"

Ionospheric conditions between the GNSS satellite and the receiver is the largest error factor. Add tropospheric conditions (weather) to that and it is certainly significant.

Clock and ephemeris errors are the next largest.
All of the above have F all directional bias.

[Moo]

Originally Posted by StuM

You show your ignorance more with every post regardless of your claimed expertise. For anyone to claim to be a "satellite communications engineer" and not know the difference between geostationary and geosynchronous is laughable.


Even more so to confuse the concept of geostationary and stationary.



"to a spot over Sri Lanka"? ROTFL. Guess that must be because Arthur C Clarke lived there does that mean that all of those old geosynchronous satellites that have used all of there fuel are now hanging around over Sri Lanka?

You are the one showing your ignorance... You are using google to bring up quotes that you don't understand and misinterpreting to try and support you inane arguments.

Find me one of your so called "geostationary" satellites that has zero inclination... You won't find one.

Now when you have picked yourself up from your hysterics.. go and look up "precession"... Arthur C Clarke did indeed know this fact and one of his books uses it. "Elevator to the gods or somethings similar". Go educate yourself you might just learn something that will help you understand something not invented inside the head of StuM...

For everybody else. There are actually two relatively stable nodes, 75E and 105W. One near the longitude of Sri Lanka and the other circa the Galapagos. The Sri Lankan one is the more stable of the two.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Moo

Find me one of your so called "geostationary" satellites that has zero inclination... You won't find one.

OK, this will be the last time I call you on your BS. I can't be bothered any further.


In case you are confused about this too, NASA explains the term for you:
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/fe.../OrbitsCatalog
"Inclination is the angle of the orbit in relation to Earth’s equator. A satellite that orbits directly above the equator has zero inclination."

Here's three geostationary satellites with zero inclination picked at random from
https://www.n2yo.com/satellites/?c=10

[StuM]

Moo, thank you for an interesting challenge.

"or the would precess to a spot over Sri Lanka..."

I've learnt something new about the four (not one) "Satellite Stable Points" and "semi-stable points" to which unpowered geostationary satellites tend to drift, one of then is at Lat 0 and Lon 75E above a point about 500NM from Sri Lanka.

It's the result of the gravitational effects and the equatorial bulge making the equator an ellipsoid.

(nothing to do with "precessing" which is the "wobbling" of a rotating body )

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Moo

Now when you have picked yourself up from your hysterics.. go and look up "precession"... Arthur C Clarke did indeed know this fact and one of his books uses it. "Elevator to the gods or somethings similar"..

You mean 'The Fountains of Paradise"?

Geostationary orbit? Yes.
Stable points?Yes
Precession? No

(Two out three ain't bad)

[requiem]

Originally Posted by StuM

(nothing to do with "precessing" which is the "wobbling" of a rotating body )

You'll get better results if you search for "nodal precession".

(Today has been way too busy; must dig into the other details mentioned in this thread later....)

[StuM]

Originally Posted by requiem

You'll get better results if you search for "nodal precession".

(Today has been way too busy; must dig into the other details mentioned in this thread later....)

Thank you, this now makes more sense.

On further reading, someone has confused precession with longitudinal drift.

Precession is a geostationary satellite drifting away from the equator and then back towards it over a multi-decadal period

It is longitudinal drift, which is a different effect with different causes that results in geostationary satellites moving towards the stable points.

[rooiedirk]

As for the feature request, would setting a negative distance do?? (Not allowed now)

[Moo]

Originally Posted by StuM

OK, this will be the last time I call you on your BS. I can't be bothered any further.


In case you are confused about this too, NASA explains the term for you:
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/fe.../OrbitsCatalog
"Inclination is the angle of the orbit in relation to Earth’s equator. A satellite that orbits directly above the equator has zero inclination."

Here's three geostationary satellites with zero inclination picked at random from
https://www.n2yo.com/satellites/?c=10

There is no such thing as a satellite with zero inclination. Feck I have entered the inclination into the tracking computers of enough ground stations every week to know that. you are really stuck aren't you mate.. ignorant and can't accept it

[Moo]

Originally Posted by StuM

Moo, thank you for an interesting challenge.

"or the would precess to a spot over Sri Lanka..."

I've learnt something new about the four (not one) "Satellite Stable Points" and "semi-stable points" to which unpowered geostationary satellites tend to drift, one of then is at Lat 0 and Lon 75E above a point about 500NM from Sri Lanka.

It's the result of the gravitational effects and the equatorial bulge making the equator an ellipsoid.

(nothing to do with "precessing" which is the "wobbling" of a rotating body )

It's called precession pal.. grow up! Correcting for it is the biggest consumer of fuel in the satellite thrusters. Correcting inclination (that factor you think doesn't exist) is done more frequently but uses a lot less fuel.