I How Do Moons Influence the James Webb Telescope's Position at Lagrange Point L2?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter zuz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    L2
AI Thread Summary
The James Webb Telescope (JWST) operates at Lagrange Point 2 (L2), where the Moon's gravitational influence is minimal compared to Earth's mass. While the Moon's gravity is factored into calculations, it does not significantly affect the telescope's position or require frequent course corrections. The JWST maintains a slightly offset orbit from L2 to facilitate consistent correction maneuvers without needing to reorient the spacecraft. Small adjustments are necessary due to the inherent instability of L2 orbits. Overall, the Moon's impact on JWST's positioning is negligible, and the telescope's trajectory is carefully managed.
zuz
Messages
93
Reaction score
36
The James Webb Telescope is in one of Earths Lagrange points, (I believe it's in L2) How does the moons gravity affect this? Do they have to make course corrections?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
L2 is a million miles from Earth and the Earth's mass is about 80 time more than the Moon's. So the Moon does not have much effect on JWST that is different from just having a heavier Earth. That being said, I'm sure that the Moon is accounted for in their calculations. L2 orbits are not completely stable so small corrections would always be needed. The orbit of JWST is not exactly at L2. By staying slightly away from L2, the corrections are always in the same general direction so they don't require reorienting the spacecraft.
 
Last edited:
If you typed your question into Google verbatim, you would get an answer. Presumably you did that, and there was something you didn't understand. What would you like us to explain?
 
No I didn't post my question anywhere else. You guys always have an answer so that's why I came here. Thank you.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
If you typed your question into Google verbatim, you would get an answer. Presumably you did that, and there was something you didn't understand. What would you like us to explain?
zuz said:
No I didn't post my question anywhere else. You guys always have an answer so that's why I came here. Thank you.
Please always try a simple Google search first; I certainly do for my questions. At the very least, it helps you to post better questions here. Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50
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...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top