|
Posted by Brian Gaff on December 11, 2007, 3:27 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Given the poor stability of lunar orbits due to the weird gravity
fluctuations it has, it seems to me that if we want to communicate with the
far side, the only option would be very high towers which could see a long
way on the far side, while appearing above the horizon from earth.
Just a thought as with the low gravity, a very high tower would presumably
be possible, no wind loading, so it seems ideal, but someone here will no
doubt shoot down my idea.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
|
|
Posted by Damon Hill on December 11, 2007, 4:22 pm
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
> Just a thought as with the low gravity, a very high tower would
> presumably be possible, no wind loading, so it seems ideal, but
> someone here will no doubt shoot down my idea.
Bang!
Does the satellite have to be in a fixed-position orbit?
Seems to me comsats could be place in a number of high and
reasonably stable orbit, at L3 and similar stable points, etc.
A tower high enough to see at least a third of the Moon is
going to be a navigation hazard and a very major construction
project.
--Damon Target practice!
|
|
Posted by Frank Scrooby on December 12, 2007, 12:46 am
Please log in for more thread options Greetings all
show/hide quoted text
>> Just a thought as with the low gravity, a very high tower would
>> presumably be possible, no wind loading, so it seems ideal, but
>> someone here will no doubt shoot down my idea.
> Bang!
> Does the satellite have to be in a fixed-position orbit?
> Seems to me comsats could be place in a number of high and
> reasonably stable orbit, at L3 and similar stable points, etc.
> A tower high enough to see at least a third of the Moon is
> going to be a navigation hazard and a very major construction
> project.
Why not just lay a cable (3000 km of cable should do - not an unheard of
feat here on Earth)?
Alternatively just moderately tall towers evenly spaced across the taller
lunar terrain.
A swarm of mini-sats in irregular orbits but still able to cover 1/3 of the
lunar surface at any one time might be doable. Is there a problem with the
longevity of lunar-orbiting objects?
show/hide quoted text
> --Damon Target practice!
REgards
Frank Scrooby
|
|
Posted by Brian Gaff on December 12, 2007, 4:22 am
Please log in for more thread options Yes there is a problem, no doubt one of the reasons there are no mini moons
of the moon.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
show/hide quoted text
> Greetings all
>>> Just a thought as with the low gravity, a very high tower would
>>> presumably be possible, no wind loading, so it seems ideal, but
>>> someone here will no doubt shoot down my idea.
>> Bang!
>> Does the satellite have to be in a fixed-position orbit?
>> Seems to me comsats could be place in a number of high and
>> reasonably stable orbit, at L3 and similar stable points, etc.
>> A tower high enough to see at least a third of the Moon is
>> going to be a navigation hazard and a very major construction
>> project.
> Why not just lay a cable (3000 km of cable should do - not an unheard of
> feat here on Earth)?
> Alternatively just moderately tall towers evenly spaced across the taller
> lunar terrain.
> A swarm of mini-sats in irregular orbits but still able to cover 1/3 of
> the lunar surface at any one time might be doable. Is there a problem with
> the longevity of lunar-orbiting objects?
>> --Damon Target practice!
> REgards
> Frank Scrooby
>
|
|
Posted by Eagle on December 12, 2007, 7:20 am
Please log in for more thread options Brian,
show/hide quoted text
> Given the poor stability of lunar orbits due to the weird gravity
> fluctuations it has, it seems to me that if we want to communicate with the
> far side, the only option would be very high towers which could see a long
> way on the far side, while appearing above the horizon from earth.
There are any number of possible solutions. A very quick, light, and
possibly reliable method is a radio network. On Earth we have these
things called WiFi and cell phone towers. Why not just lay a few
thousand small repeater systems across the moon. They could organize
as a network and allow devices on the far side to communicate with
a link to Earth on the near side. Look up sensor and mesh networks.
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Communications channels bad sound quality | January 29, 2007, 7:14 am |
| Re: Radio Communications - What happened to "Roger?" | June 13, 2007, 6:08 pm |
| Re: Radio Communications - What happened to "Roger?" | June 14, 2007, 4:20 am |
| Why there is static noise in the astronaut communications ? | October 10, 2008, 2:59 pm |
| Re: United Nations 1979 Moon Treaty -- Prohitbiting the militarization of the Moon, Mars and asteroids. | July 31, 2008, 4:34 pm |
| Swear Not By the Moon | July 29, 2005, 2:27 am |
| D-Day: "Working on the Moon" | August 21, 2005, 10:54 am |
| Moon landing, ya RIGHT | July 9, 2006, 9:14 pm |
| It's a Confederate Moon | July 16, 2006, 1:53 pm |
| LEO vs Moon question | May 6, 2007, 12:53 am |
|
XML Sitemap
> presumably be possible, no wind loading, so it seems ideal, but
> someone here will no doubt shoot down my idea.