[geocentrism] Re: Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness and Deception
- From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 19:09:51 +0000 (GMT)
Neville J, Bernie B, Philip M -- greetings.
A 3,000-kg satellite at the parking orbit altitude under Newton's formula for
gravitational attraction would weigh 660 N. Under my formula, the same
satellite would weigh 0.0577 N (for the "purists," this is about a quarter of
an ounce).
The 440 N control motor includes an element of orbit raising, but does not tell
us what the designed operational lifetime of this satellite is. Probably ten
years. We would need to know also the rate of burn.
However, most satellites now have an electrical thruster motor for orbit
raising, the power from which is of the correct order of magnitude for my
formula, but not for that of Newton.
I hope this gives some sort of "feel" to the figures Bernie has presented.
Neville.
============================================
Bernard Brauer <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
OrbitGeostationary (55 deg East longitude)
Dry Mass1181 kg
Lift-Off Mass2750 kg
SizeCuboid of dimensions 2.0 m x 1.77 m x 2.8 m with solar arrays on north and
south sides
Length when fully deployed 15.445 m (North-South)
Spacecraft Propulsion and Control440 N Liquid Apogee Motor with MON-3 (Mixed
Oxides of Nitrogen) and MMH (Mono Methyl Hydrazine) for orbit raising.
3-axis body stabilised in orbit using sensors, momentum and reaction wheels,
magnetictorquers and eight 10 Newton & eight 22 Newton Reaction Control
Thrusters
PowerSolar array generating 2400 W. Two 70 Ah Nickel-Hydrogen batteries to
support full payload operation during eclipse period
Mission life12 years
http://www.isro.org/insat3e/pg2.htm
====================================================
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
How much fuel do you estimate would be needed to keep a 2500kg satellite from
falling for a period of 10-12 years?[1] Paul..
Could you do the sums Paul, remembering of course that the weight of this
2,500kg mass is less than 250kg at that altitude.
Philip.
====================================
http://www.isro.org/gslv.htm
http://www.isro.org/insat3e/pg2.htm
These pages describe the insat3e and its launch vehicle. The illustration
"Mission Sequence" is a bit thin on details, but the press releases at these
addresses, which describe the launch of another insat3e on an Arianne 5 launch
vehicle give sufficient detail to get a feel for what is going on.
http://www.isro.org/recent_events.htm
http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/Sep28_2003.htm
http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/Sep29_2003.htm
http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/Sep30_2003.htm
http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/Oct02_2003.htm
This final release describes the final orbit crafting and most importantly,
gives this information -
The 440 Newton Liquid Apogee Motor (LAM), which was used to conduct INSAT-3E
orbit raising manoeuvres, has performed well. It enabled taking the satellite
from its Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO) of 649 km perigee and 36,000 km
apogee with an orbital inclination of 7° with respect to the equatorial plane
to its present near GSO orbit with zero degree inclination. The LAM was fired
for a total duration of 121 minutes in three phases on September 29, September
30 and 1st October. A total velocity of 1460 m/sec was added by LAM at the
Apogee point of the orbit to take the satellite from GTO to GSO.
INSAT-3E had 1592 kg propellant at the time of its injection into GTO by
Ariane-5 launch vehicle on September 28. After orbit raising operations, it has
510 kg of propellant remaining that is sufficient to arrest the drift and park
it at its orbital slot as well as maintain the satellite in its orbit and
controlling its orientation during its design life of more than 12 years.
Just to repeat, 510kg of fuel for 12 years operation. It uses fuel at the rate
of 8.94kg per minute so with 510kg remaining, that means it has 57 minutes of
firing time to last 12 years. This is approximately one part in 111,000.
I think you can see just how unlikely it is that this amount of fuel could
possibly suspend the weight of this satellite for this length of time even if
its weight were just 25kg. Accordingly, I won't attempt to educate myself to a
level sufficient to calculate weight at 36000km, or thruster efficiency, or
anything else. I think that myth is busted! And best of all, NASA isn't
involved, so you know it isn't lies!
Should anyone suspect that the fuel remaining could be greater than stated, one
must also remember the ratio of launch mass to final mass in orbit. For this
vehicle, it is greater than 150:1 thus if the remaining fuel were just doubled
to 114 minutes of firing time, then the launch mass would go up by more than
76,000kg. Blind Freddie would notice that.
Paul D
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
