[amsat-bb] More on the Greyline theory.
archie.hackett at hotmail.com
Thu Oct 11 16:21:19 PDT 2007
Don't give up on my "hare-brained" Greyline theory just yet. Remember ... it's not just a "flat" line on the globe we're talking discussing here.
For all intents and purposes "space" is 3 dimensional.
Thomas's point is IMPORTANT ... regarding illumination.
Half of the satellite may be illuminated while the other half isn't, much depends on the attitude in relation to the sun ... but some tracking software doesn't always predict these parameters and those that do hardly ever agree with eachother.
So which is correct? ... don't ask me !!!.
As long as the signals have been "booming" in nobody has bothered much about minor details and possible small perbutations. Now may be the time for a bit more study.
The following is a mail from Ken GW1FKY, with a *VERY* good suggestion for a beacon. I think we should support it ... coupled with my previous suggestion for a redundancy back-up system for a beacon ... it's a great idea.
We are now seeing now just how important the beacon is.
Interestingly, IMHO, AO-7 has taught more people more things about satellite operating than AO-51 ever will.
73 John. <la2qaa at amsat.org>
From: GW1FKY at aol.com
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:10:38 -0400
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] The laws of physics.
To: la2qaa at amsat.org
Many thanks for your interesting observations and experiences with the
operation of AO-7.
I was wondering whether what you stated about the "Footprint " & the
"Greyline" information is perhaps the key factor. As we are using software
to predict the relative position against what might be the real
point that the satellite sees illumination, is it perhaps a
factor of error in the modelling that is used?
Just a thought and it would be useful if could confirm the accuracy with
future satellites if they had a
beacon which did switch on as a result of solar illumination and not
as a function of software or a timer.
More information about the AMSAT-BB