Can an Artificial Satellite Move Opposite in a Geostationary Orbit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter luckis11
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Direction
AI Thread Summary
An artificial satellite can be placed in a geostationary orbit at approximately 35,000 km, but if it moves in the opposite direction to the Earth's rotation, it will not be geostationary. The required speed for both directions is v=√(GM/(R+h), but achieving a stable orbit is complicated by air resistance, which varies significantly with altitude and direction of motion. At geostationary height, air resistance is minimal, yet initial speed alone is insufficient for stable orbit due to differing atmospheric conditions. Rocket scientists account for these factors and typically use booster rockets to ensure satellites reach the correct orbit. Thus, while opposite-direction satellites are theoretically possible, they face practical challenges in maintaining stable orbits.
luckis11
Messages
272
Reaction score
2
Helpful notes:
The speed v=√(GM/(R+h)) which is required for an artificial satellite to be set at orbit, is one that its Δx is drawn on the reference frame (call it FR2) that does not move together with the self-rotating movement of the earth. Because whereas it has the speed v=√(GM/(R+h)), the Δx of its speed which is drawn on the reference frame (call it FR1) that moves together with the self-rotating movement of the earth, is zero.
The geostationary orbit can only happen at the height of ~35,000km above the ground (see http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970408d.html).

My question is:
Is it possible to set an artificial satellite at an orbit at the geostαtionary height (35,000), and the direction of its motion (its motion Δx that is drawn on the FR2) to be the opposite of the geostationary satellites? (It IS possible as it seems at the moving drawing at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite). If-since it is possible, then the speed that it must have is again v=√(GM/(R+h))?
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
luckis11 said:
Is it possible to set an artificial satellite at an orbit at the geostαtionary height (35,000), and the direction of its motion (its motion Δx that is drawn on the FR2) to be the opposite of the geostationary satellites?

Of course. But it won't be geostationary, since it's going in the wrong direction.
 
The answer I ended up with so far, is:
The speed required should or might be v=√(GM/(R+h) for both cases of a satellite which moves at the same direction as the self-rotation of the earth, and of a sattellite moving at the opposite direction. But providing initial speed v=√(GM/(R+h) alone, cannot result in an orbit for both cases, because the air resistence those two meet, is not the same. And that air resistence difference is not small. The motion of the air drawn on FR2 at sea level is a wind of 465metres/sec=1,674km/hour. Same speed drawn on FR2=>different speed drawn on FR1=> different speed in relation to the air. Now, at the height of the geostationaries 35,000km, the air or eather resistence might be almost zero, but the v=√(GM/(R+h) refers to all heights.
 
Last edited:
Huh? Rocket scientists do not overlook air resistance in satellite launches. They also generally include booster rockets on the payload to nudge satellites into the desired orbit.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top