Is it posible to orbit the earth in the reverse way of the rotation?

[manuelasa1999]

I know it is more difficult to launch to highly inclined orbits because you have to fight against earth rotation but: Can a spacecraft orbit the earth in reverse rotation orbit?

[FenrirWolf]

Certainly. There is just a higher delta-v requirement to it.

That, and you're going the opposite direction to most everything else put in orbit. Better make sure you're on a clear path.

[Tommygun]

Yes, it is called a retrograde orbit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrograde_and_prograde_motion

[Brotoro]

Israel has to launch its satellites into retrograde orbits…because firing missiles eastward over Arab countries is bound to cause a bad reaction.

[Legendary Emu]

It's perfectly possible to stick something in a retrograde orbit. But be careful. As fenrir said, watch out for debris. A few times in one mission I had close calls with a piece of debris that got within 400 meters of my ship.

[Red Iron Crown]

Once you are in orbit it makes no difference which direction the body is rotating. It may not cost any more dV to get into a retrograde orbit if your mission profile involves visiting another body.

[Skyler4856]

In orbits higher than GEO-sync orbit, objects appear to orbit retrograde

[Nuke]

Once you are in orbit it makes no difference which direction the body is rotating. It may not cost any more dV to get into a retrograde orbit if your mission profile involves visiting another body.

the only difference is you dont get the dv boost from planetary rotation, and in fact you need extra dv to compensate for the boost going in the other direction.

[Red Iron Crown]

the only difference is you dont get the dv boost from planetary rotation, and in fact you need extra dv to compensate for the boost going in the other direction.

If you are just launching into orbit, yes, extra dV is required to overcome the rotation. I think, though, that you can just about eliminate this extra cost if you launch prograde and slingshot to retrograde around another body, say the Mun.

[Ralathon]

If you are just launching into orbit, yes, extra dV is required to overcome the rotation. I think, though, that you can just about eliminate this extra cost if you launch prograde and slingshot to retrograde around another body, say the Mun.

Velocity of the earth's rotation at the equator: About 450 m/s.

extra dV needed to launch into a retrograde orbit: 2*450=900m/s

dV needed to transfer to the moon: 4km/s

It is 4 times cheaper in dV to just launch directly into your desired orbit. The only time you could make an argument for this kind of maneuver is when you already have an object in a very high retrograde orbit and you want to reverse directions. Then you'll be able to save a small amount of fuel with multiple lunar flybys.

[Red Iron Crown]

Velocity of the earth's rotation at the equator: About 450 m/s.

extra dV needed to launch into a retrograde orbit: 2*450=900m/s

dV needed to transfer to the moon: 4km/s

It is 4 times cheaper in dV to just launch directly into your desired orbit. The only time you could make an argument for this kind of maneuver is when you already have an object in a very high retrograde orbit and you want to reverse directions. Then you'll be able to save a small amount of fuel with multiple lunar flybys.

Well yes. In my first post I said "It may not cost any more dV to get into a retrograde orbit if your mission profile involves visiting another body." So if you're going to the Mun anyway, you could return to Kerbin in a retrograde direction for very little if any additional dV.

[cantab]

I believe that in low Earth orbit debris is no less a hazard in a prograde than in a retrograde orbit, because most stuff up there is in all sorts of inclinations anyway so closing speeds will be high, unlike around Kerbin where we tend to put everything in near-zero inclination orbits.

The delta-V penalty for launching retrograde around Earth, as a percentage of the total, is somewhat higher than for Kerbin but not by much. The Israeli launches have been covered, being constrained by geopolitics. I don't know of any satellites deliberately put into retrograde orbits because it's needed for their mission, apart from sun-synchronous orbiting satellites which have inclinations about 100 degrees (so technically retrograde, but basically polar really).

[KvickFlygarn87]

Velocity of the earth's rotation at the equator: About 450 m/s.

extra dV needed to launch into a retrograde orbit: 2*450=900m/s

dV needed to transfer to the moon: 4km/s

It is 4 times cheaper in dV to just launch directly into your desired orbit. The only time you could make an argument for this kind of maneuver is when you already have an object in a very high retrograde orbit and you want to reverse directions. Then you'll be able to save a small amount of fuel with multiple lunar flybys.

Actually, you're using RSS stats. A Munar flyby only costs you around 800m/s. While that still means that going retrograde from the pad is cheaper, it's by a slimmer margin.

[FenrirWolf]

Considering he specifically referenced Earth and the Moon, I imagine that was his intent.