Is a Helicopter on a Geostationary Orbit?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A helicopter cannot be classified as being in a geostationary orbit because it does not follow the gravitationally curved path defined by orbital mechanics. Unlike a satellite, which is in free fall around the Earth, a helicopter relies on lift generated by its rotor blades to remain airborne, thus not adhering to the laws of orbital motion. The discussion emphasizes that while both a helicopter and a satellite may appear to trace circular paths, the forces acting on them differ fundamentally, with the helicopter being influenced by aerodynamic forces rather than gravity alone.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of orbital mechanics and gravitational forces
  • Knowledge of lift and aerodynamic principles
  • Familiarity with centripetal force and its role in circular motion
  • Basic physics concepts related to motion and forces
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of orbital mechanics and gravitational forces
  • Learn about the physics of lift and how helicopters generate it
  • Explore centripetal force and its applications in circular motion
  • Investigate the differences between various types of motion, including inertial and non-inertial frames
USEFUL FOR

Aerospace engineers, physics students, aviation enthusiasts, and anyone interested in understanding the principles of flight and orbital dynamics.

  • #31
A.T. said:
No, they don't always act along the same line. The gravitational force is not perpendicular to the surface (except at the poles and equator). The rest of your argument is based on this misconception.

The force from the chair includes a static friction force that opposes any component of gravity or centripetal force that is tangent to the Earth's surface. The result is that the chair does exert a force exactly opposite to all other lateral forces on your body.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
FactChecker said:
The force from the chair includes a static friction force that opposes any component of gravity or centripetal force that is tangent to the Earth's surface. The result is that the chair does exert a force exactly opposite to all other lateral forces on your body.
No matter how you decompose them into components, the vector sum of gravity and chair force on you is not zero. If it was, you would move in a straight line in the inertial frame, but you move in a circle.

So no, the component of gravity tangent to the surface is not canceled by static friction. And neither is the component of gravity normal to the surface completely canceled by the normal force. These unbalanced components provide together the centripetal force to keep you on a circular trajectory.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
A.T. said:
So no, the component of gravity tangent to the surface is not canceled by static friction. And neither is the component of gravity normal to the surface completely canceled by the normal force. These unbalanced components provide together the centripetal force to keep you on a circular trajectory.

Regarding the lateral force: The reason a person does not slide laterally is that the static friction exactly cancels any lateral force. Static friction does that. I know. I have gotten it wrong in simulations and watched as the simulated object of interest slowly started to slide laterally.

Regarding the normal force: You are right about there being some acceleration. At no point does a person come closer to the center of the earth. The chair provides the exact force necessary to make that happen. All the forces are constantly rotating except at the geographical poles.
 
  • #34
A body in orbit is in free fall.
 
  • #35
FactChecker said:
The reason a person does not slide laterally is that the static friction exactly cancels any lateral force.
No, the component of gravity tangent to the surface is not exactly canceled by static friction.
 
  • #36
A.T. said:
No, the component of gravity tangent to the surface is not exactly canceled by static friction.

In a perfect world, the surface of the Earth is an equipotential surface where both gravity and centripetal force are take into account. In that case there is no lateral force component tangent to the surface. In a realistic world, there are small lateral forces but static friction stops things from sliding around. The force from static friction is the exact amount needed to counteract other forces that are too small to overcome the static friction. But this is digressing from the OP.
 
  • #37
Can we focus on the original question, please?
 
  • #38
I am surprised that no one has used Keplers law to compute the orbital period for a orbit at the Earth's surface.
 
  • #39
Vanadium 50 said:
Can we focus on the original question, please?
Since that apparently could not be done, thread closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K