On Feb 23, 4:57 pm, koobee.wub...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 23, 1:39 pm, Dave wrote:
>
> > On Feb 23, 1:57 pm, koobee.wub...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > There are two ways to synchronize t1, t2, t3, and t4.  Ground-
> > > satellite synchronization introduces much more errors than satellite-
> > > satellite synchronization.  The latter does not have the ionosphere
> > > and other atmospheric anomalies to consider.  That latter also does
> > > not have high speed to worry about since all satellites are either at
> > > rest or moving very slowly relative to each other.
>
> > Of course the last sentence above is complete nonsense. The satellites
> > lie in six orbital planes, with orbital inclinations of approximately
> > 55 degrees. The planes are separated by 60 degrees right ascension of
> > the ascending node. The four satellites in each plane are nearly at
> > rest with each other, but the relative velocity of two satellites in
> > different planes can be as high as sqrt(3) times the orbital velocity
> > of the satellites, i.e., up to approximately 6.7 km/sec.
>
> Hmmm...  I guess Dave never passed the first year physics course.
> <shrug>
>
> You want to try again?
>
> Hint:  All satellites have the same angular frequency and the same
> altitude.

But not the same trajectory. Tell me, KW, if you have one satellite on
an equatorial orbit, and another on a polar orbit over the Greenwich
meridian, and a third on a polar orbit through the 90-degree
longitudinal line, all with the same angular frequency and altitude,
do you believe that they are all at rest or moving very slowly with
respect to each other?

Weren't you an aerospace engineer at some point?

Was there a head injury or something?

>
> While you are trying that again, allow me to:
>
> Ahahaha...