Celestial mechanics is a brain teaser...but most of what has been said here is more or less correct. The trick is to realize that the ONLY orbit where the velocities (and "energy") are "constant" is a perfectly circular one...and that really doesnt happen but in theory (although some come very close)...a retrograde manuever will remove ARISSsat from the proximity of ISS very very quickly. Robert G. Oler WB5MZO
> From: ko6th_g...@hotmail.com > To: g0...@aol.com; clintbradf...@mac.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org > Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 21:12:28 -0800 > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ARISSat-1 - Dumb Question > > > > > > From: g0...@aol.com > > Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 15:45:36 -0500 > > To: clintbradf...@mac.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org > > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ARISSat-1 - Dumb Question > > > > > > In a message dated 09/02/2011 06:08:45 GMT Standard Time, > > clintbradf...@mac.com writes: > > > > >> ... Clint. When ARISSAT is released it will stay in the "Plane" of ISS > > orbit...they will toss it retrograde meaning in the opposite direction of > > the velocity vector and with its slightly lower velocity the orbit will > > start to decrease...this is done so that very quickly the orbits will stop > > being "prox ops" reasonably fast. > > > > Great, succinct info - MANY thanks! > > > > Clint, K6LCS > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm. This is a bit of a brain teaser... > > > > So if the satellite is deployed towards the rear of the ISS, it's velocity > > will be slightly lower. > > So does that mean it will go to a lower orbit- (Same as firing retros to > > reenter)? > > > > If so, then I believe as the orbit altitude is reduced, the apparent > > velocity increases.....(??) which will cause ARISsat-1 to 'move ahead' of > > the > > ISS over a few hours > > > > But didn't we say the velocity would be less than the ISS due to the method > > of deploying it against the velocity vector ? > > > > Time for me to have a Tuna sandwich. We all know it's probably full of > > Dolphin...and they are really clever. > > > > David G0MRF > > > > > Interesting puzzler, eh? From what I have read in the past, I think this > their logic. > > What they are trying to do is to separate the orbits of the ISS and ARISSat > as quickly as possible, to avoid the potential for a collision. Consider the > options: > > 1. Throw it sideways to the ISS orbit. The result is that twice per orbit > the two spacecraft's paths will cross, side to side. Bad idea. > > 2. Throw it ahead of the ISS (faster orbit speed). This will raise the > orbit, slightly, and also make it a bit elliptical (up and down). The higher > orbit makes the satellite go behind the ISS, but the elliptical shape also > means that the orbits will cross every orbit (but out of phase, so they won't > be at the same place when they do). But, then as the ARISSat orbit decays, > they will get closer and closer, potentially getting back to the same place. > Not good, either. > > 3. Throw it behind the ISS (slower orbit). As you note, this will lower the > orbit (and make it a bit elliptical), and initially the apogee of the orbit > will intersect that of the ISS. Being in a lower orbit, ARISSat will move > ahead of the ISS, and over time, as the ARISSat orbit decays, the two will > diverge even farther. So, this is the safest. > > At least, I think that's the logic. If not, pass me some of that tuna... > > Greg KO6TH > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
