3D map of orbital objects in your browser!

[Sky_walker]

Admire here.

[YNM]

I guess JPL should update their small-body browser (example is 1 Ceres) with something like that... Would be cool !

Also, a real-time version !

[PakledHostage]

Also, a real-time version !

Not quite the same thing but close in that it is real time is NASA's Eyes on the Solar System application. It is basically KSP's map view of the real solar system, showing the location of spacecraft, planets and moons now or any other time you want to specify.

[K^2]

If anyone is still wondering why aliens don't visit, this is why. Who in their right mind would want to navigate that minefield without a map?

[Dodgey]

If anyone is still wondering why aliens don't visit, this is why. Who in their right mind would want to navigate that minefield without a map?

I think that a better reason would be that we created that minefield in the first place, or at least haven't bothered clean it up. It's the same logic as why would you visit a random persons house if their front lawn was strewn with broken glass.

[lajoswinkler]

This is great, but it looks like it contains only a fragment of the total number of objects.

[Mr Shifty]

Very cool. I see the equatorial ring of active satellites at geosynchronous altitude, but there's a belt of inactive satellites at the same altitude that's inclined 10-15 degrees from the equatorial ring. Anyone know why that is?

[YNM]

Not quite the same thing but close in that it is real time is NASA's Eyes on the Solar System application. It is basically KSP's map view of the real solar system, showing the location of spacecraft, planets and moons now or any other time you want to specify.

It's pretty cool, Earth orbiting scientific satellites are shown (moving), as well as comets, asteroids, and dwarf planets ! Not so precise ofc (for example, the Earth rotation isn't simulated).

If anyone is still wondering why aliens don't visit, this is why. Who in their right mind would want to navigate that minefield without a map?

Nah, instead of talking how to get rid of it, we should just say that the Kessler syndrome is "a measure taken to avoid alien invasion".

I see the equatorial ring of active satellites at geosynchronous altitude, but there's a belt of inactive satellites at the same altitude that's inclined 10-15 degrees from the equatorial ring. Anyone know why that is?

I thought that is the ecliptic... no ? Maybe an artifact from equator (and ecliptic) precession ?

[peadar1987]

Very cool. I see the equatorial ring of active satellites at geosynchronous altitude, but there's a belt of inactive satellites at the same altitude that's inclined 10-15 degrees from the equatorial ring. Anyone know why that is?

I'm pretty curious about that myself. Baikonur launches maybe? More delta-V to get into a proper equatorial Geostationary orbit, so they used a slightly inclined geosynchronous one instead?

[christok]

Very cool. I see the equatorial ring of active satellites at geosynchronous altitude, but there's a belt of inactive satellites at the same altitude that's inclined 10-15 degrees from the equatorial ring. Anyone know why that is?

The existence of the belt is deliberate. When a satellite nears the end of its useful life, it must be moved out of the most heavily populated orbits so as not to pose a threat to other satellites. Since equatorial GEO is the most coveted space but old satellites don't have enough dV to deorbit or escape completely, they are put in a nearby graveyard orbit (about 200km farther out, typically).

The satellites in these graveyard orbits suffer natural perturbations, which cause their inclination to oscillate since active stationkeeping no longer takes place. Each individual satellite has its inclination vary between 0 and 15 degrees over a period of about 55 years*. Since the positions of the sun and moon are the same for all satellites, their orbits tend to form an approximate ring structure at similar inclination.

* From J.R. Wertz, Orbits and astrodynamics. (In J.R. Wertz, D.F. Everett & J.J. Puschell, Space mission engineering: The new SMAD. 2011. Microcosm. ISBN 978-1-881883-15-9.) p. 219.

[xrayfishx]

Very cool. I see the equatorial ring of active satellites at geosynchronous altitude, but there's a belt of inactive satellites at the same altitude that's inclined 10-15 degrees from the equatorial ring. Anyone know why that is?

Considering they're all inactive there, it could be the graveyard orbit. Although I thought that was just higher, not inclined, as the transition takes only 11m/s and you could not change the inclination that much with this amount of dV. Perhaps that orbit just somehow decays there?

[DaveofDefeat]

I really like the big blank spot in the geosynch orbits where the mostly empty pacific ocean is.

[Mr Shifty]

The satellites in these graveyard orbits suffer natural perturbations, which cause their inclination to oscillate since active stationkeeping no longer takes place. Each individual satellite has its inclination vary between 0 and 15 degrees over a period of about 55 years*. Since the positions of the sun and moon are the same for all satellites, their orbits tend to form an approximate ring structure at similar inclination.

Ah thanks, I've now consumed half an hour reading about orbital stationkeeping. Wikipedia has a decent summary of North-South stationkeeping (with a nice picture), which as you've said, probably accounts for the graveyard belt's inclination. This means that the inclination must change over time, and that years in which the inclination of the graveyard belt nearly matches the equatorial plane must be especially dangerous for active satellites there.

[PakledHostage]

"Do you realize we're the only country in history to throw away not just the ability to go to the Moon but even to low Earth orbit?"

At the risk of throwing a cat among the pigeons, maybe the US is the first country in history to realise the pointlesness of manned space flight? Maybe NASA's thinking to themselves "Manned spaceflight? Been there, done that, got the t-shirt... Now, about those robotic missions!!!"

[Mr Shifty]

"EYES on the SOLAR SYSTEM

This visualization is currently only supported on Mac OS and Windows machines."

Are you feckin' kidding me? NASA can't code for Linux? <facepalm>

NASA has always had to have PR as part of its mission. It's not surprising that the lion's share of NASA's PR resources would be dedicated to reaching the 98% of (non-mobile) computer users who use Win/OSX. Can't you Linux folks use Wine or whatever?

"Do you realize we're the only country in history to . . . go to the Moon, and one of only three to low Earth orbit?"

There, ftfy.

EDIT:

At the risk of throwing a cat among the pigeons, maybe the US is the first country in history to realise the pointlesness of manned space flight? Maybe NASA's thinking to themselves "Manned spaceflight? Been there, done that, got the t-shirt... Now, about those robotic missions!!!"

Amen.

[Sky_walker]

Are you feckin' kidding me? NASA can't code for Linux?

Not enough customers to justify the expense. In US consumer market MacOS is notably more popular than Linux.

At the risk of throwing a cat among the pigeons, maybe the US is the first country in history to realise the pointlesness of manned space flight? Maybe NASA's thinking to themselves "Manned spaceflight? Been there, done that, got the t-shirt... Now, about those robotic missions!!!"

Not really. There's a constant push from NASA to get man into space - they were and are very much for sending missions back to the Moon as well as Mars. Look at the history - they always had and still have plans for "next" manned space mission, whenever it would be, and even if politicians cut their ambitions - they still push as hard as possible for a manned space flight. While Russians and... well: pretty much everyone else switched purely to automated cargo vessels supplying ISS - NASA up till recently was still toying with their manned Space Shuttles. To make the point even stronger - Russians were the first to send fully automatic space shuttle into LEO and back, not the US.

If anyone - that title goes to ESA and JAXA. They're the guys focusing almost purely on robotic missions and seeing future in that domain. Pretty much the only manned ships they were interested in are these for returning people back from NASA & RSA sponsored space stations while sending very few of their own man to space, and if they do - it's for rather specific mission and guys are so flipping busy that they don't have time to waste for sitting on a social media like the NASA/CSA astronauts do.

It's pretty cool, Earth orbiting scientific satellites are shown (moving), as well as comets, asteroids, and dwarf planets ! Not so precise ofc (for example, the Earth rotation isn't simulated).

It's not? Looks about right for me.

BTW: Click Polar satellite (highly elliptical orbit above both Earth poles) and look at the description - "Polar data goes here" - lol.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Sky_walker

[PakledHostage]

Not really. There's a constant push from NASA to get man into space - they were and are very much for sending missions back to the Moon as well as Mars. Look at the history - they always had and still have plans for "next" manned space mission, whenever it would be, and even if politicians cut their ambitions - they still push as hard as possible for a manned space flight.

I do realise that. And I even agree that the manned space program has value. To a point. But I was asking the question rhetorically in response to GeneCash's post. How manned space flight is funded vs. other scientific and "patriotic" endeavors is a complex issue. Especially so in the current financial climate that a lot of western countries find themselves in.

[Sky_walker]

I found a bug....

...but it looks pretty