[0.17] GeoStationary orbit

[timpossible]

I'm planning on setting up a network of satellites around all the planets

Can someone please help me work out the altitudes for geostationary orbit around each planet.

Maybe some funky equation with planet, ship mass, and altitude, for variables.

That would be great

Timpossible Out

[BeefTenderloin]

As far as I know, Ike sits on a dunstationary orbit around Duna. Just match its altitude, and you should be fine.

[phoenix_ca]

I suggest you install the ISA MapSat mod. It's interface provides you will the geostationary altitude (if it exists) for every celestial body.

Also, I wrote a guide a while ago explaining a method of getting a well-spaced constellation of satellites into geostationary orbit without any fancy math (beyond addition and subtraction). See my sig.

[timpossible]

cool thanks

ill check them out

[EndlessWaves]

The wiki (link at top of page) also provides stationary orbits data for many of the bodies.

[bitbucket]

It's not possible to put satellites in (adjective)stationary orbits around some objects, as the synchronous orbital distance is outside their sphere of influence. In such cases, you'll have to settle with a constellation of at least three satellites with line of sight to each other.

[Azivegu]

actually, to cover a planet completely with 100% reach 100% of the time, you need four sats arranged in the same order that hydrogen atoms surround a carbon atom (cant remember the name of that shape)

[Ted]

actually, to cover a planet completely with 100% reach 100% of the time, you need four sats arranged in the same order that hydrogen atoms surround a carbon atom (cant remember the name of that shape)

I believe the shape is called a 'Tetrahedron' and has four Hydrogen atoms surrounding a single Carbon atom, with all H atoms being 90 degrees from each other in each direction. The name for the molecule is commonly called Methane.

It would make a very good Satellite set-up indeed, probably quite difficult to set up though, even with MechJeb.

[phoenix_ca]

Uh...impossible to set-up, more like. Have you looked at a methane atom? Bonding is in three-dimensions, not two. The only possible way to maintain such a set-up would be to use statites, and we don't have those. They're more-or-less theoretical.

That's part of the reason why we have and use Molniya orbits.

[maltesh]

Indeed, the minimum number of satellites to guarantee full coverage of a spherical object is six: Three in an orbit high enough to cover moderate latitudes, and three in a polar orbit to keep constant coverage to the polar gap of the first three. There will be significant overlap, but that can't really be helped.

[phoenix_ca]

Indeed. The huge downside there being that any location dependant on the polar satellites will need quite sofisticated tracking equipment to keep its dish aimed at the overhead satellite. (Same issue with Molniya orbits of course.)