Are satellites real?

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 06:34:25 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 18, 2018, 06:06:36 AM

Meanwhile there are satellites for broadcast and navigation used by millions of people.  Agreed?

Disagreed.

Multitudes of high altitude balloons are sent aloft everyday, for one...

Two: It is well known transmission signals can be generated and directed and bounced of the upper atmoplane of the Earth.

Satellite dishes are directional.  With the narrow band signals is my dish is off axis more than one degree I lose reception.  It's not possible for a high altitude balloon would need to be maintain it's position with the precision necessary for that kind of reception.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

You are correct.  Troposcatter does bounce signals off the upper atmosphere but it's also dependent on atmospheric conditions (temperature, moisture, etc).

All of which can be overcome via various methods, such as original broadcast point, signal strength, etc.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Those conditions greatly and again the precision necessary for small 18" dishes isn't there for consumer television.  Troposcatter dishes are a meter or more; much larger that direct broadcast satellite dishes.

You write as if these things require the precision adjustment of a surgeon and they do not.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Further, while troposcatter is capable of sending high bandwidth HD transmission, it can't handle transmitting several hundred such signals.  Even satellites can't do that.  In order to get my channels through DirecTV my dish receives signal from three different satellites with dozens of different transponders.

Mike

Last paragraph again a claim made without without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:41:04 AM

Quote from: markjo on February 18, 2018, 11:31:33 AM

Not quite.  It would be more precise to refer to the "horizontal velocity" as a "tangential velocity", but most people seem to understand "horizontal velocity" in context of discussing orbits without making a fuss.

Like this then, for any independent observer at any of the four points provided on your graphic?:

Why would an observer on the ground be relevant?  I would think that the center of the earth would be a more appropriate point of reference.

All of which can be overcome via various methods, such as original broadcast point, signal strength, etc.

You write as if these things require the precision adjustment of a surgeon and they do not.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:34:36 AM

All of which can be overcome via various methods, such as original broadcast point, signal strength, etc.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.
Summarily dismissed

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:34:36 AM

You write as if these things require the precision adjustment of a surgeon and they do not.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.
Summarily dismissed

No I am not.

I quoted the source.

There is no other "force," acting on a satellite.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 06:34:25 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 18, 2018, 06:06:36 AM

Meanwhile there are satellites for broadcast and navigation used by millions of people.  Agreed?

Disagreed.

Multitudes of high altitude balloons are sent aloft everyday, for one...

Two: It is well known transmission signals can be generated and directed and bounced of the upper atmoplane of the Earth.

Satellite dishes are directional.  With the narrow band signals is my dish is off axis more than one degree I lose reception.  It's not possible for a high altitude balloon would need to be maintain it's position with the precision necessary for that kind of reception.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

You are correct.  Troposcatter does bounce signals off the upper atmosphere but it's also dependent on atmospheric conditions (temperature, moisture, etc).

All of which can be overcome via various methods, such as original broadcast point, signal strength, etc.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Those conditions greatly and again the precision necessary for small 18" dishes isn't there for consumer television.  Troposcatter dishes are a meter or more; much larger that direct broadcast satellite dishes.

You write as if these things require the precision adjustment of a surgeon and they do not.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Further, while troposcatter is capable of sending high bandwidth HD transmission, it can't handle transmitting several hundred such signals.  Even satellites can't do that.  In order to get my channels through DirecTV my dish receives signal from three different satellites with dozens of different transponders.

Mike

Last paragraph again a claim made without without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

Satellite imagery from the Himawari series of geostationary meteorological satellites is provided every 10 minutes.

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on February 18, 2018, 10:01:17 AM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 18, 2018, 09:52:48 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on February 18, 2018, 09:47:42 AM

Reality too hard, legba no like, make legba angry...

legba throw poo

Here's you telling one of the mods you are a troll

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71550.msg1942053#msg1942053

No action was taken, ergo mods approve paedophile trolls.

Not debatable.

My intentions on this forum were put forth immediately, in fact they are stated in my username...

Right now, I'm here to admire the #dutchylegbalackey logic, and I can't wait to see them throw their poo with enough energy to achieve orbit.

Some vocabulary you've got...
Talking about a poo throwing contest and fantasising about forum members touching eachother's pee pee's.
You are a sick little pervert  ain't you ?

It is extremely telling that not a single companion calls you out for your disgusting behaviour...... says a lot about them too !

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on February 18, 2018, 10:01:17 AM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 18, 2018, 09:52:48 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on February 18, 2018, 09:47:42 AM

Reality too hard, legba no like, make legba angry...

legba throw poo

Here's you telling one of the mods you are a troll

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71550.msg1942053#msg1942053

No action was taken, ergo mods approve paedophile trolls.

Not debatable.

My intentions on this forum were put forth immediately, in fact they are stated in my username...

Right now, I'm here to admire the #dutchylegbalackey logic, and I can't wait to see them throw their poo with enough energy to achieve orbit.

Some vocabulary you've got...
Talking about a poo throwing contest and fantasising about forum members touching eachother's pee pee's.
You are a sick little pervert  ain't you ?

It is extremely telling that not a single companion calls you out for your disgusting behaviour...... says a lot about them too !

I'm not here to repeat any dogma.
Same as I don't accept pure belief in Flat earth (I need knowledge), I also
don't accept pure belief in mainstream science (I need knowledge as well).
There is NOTHING that I follow BLINDLY.

...How 449 geostationary satellites still operate from up there?
Here are some of them:

Name     Common name                Orbit inc 

04016A  DIRECTV 7S                -119.1  0.0
10010A  ECHOSTAR 14               -118.9  0.0
02006A  ECHOSTAR 7                -118.8  0.0
07009A  ANIK F3                   -118.7  0.0
16038B  EUTELSAT 117 WEST B       -117.0  0.0
13012A  EUTELSAT 117 WEST A       -116.8  0.0
13058A  SIRIUS FM-6               -116.1  0.0
06049A  XM-4 (BLUES)              -115.2  0.0
11059A  VIASAT-1                  -115.1  0.0
15010B  EUTELSAT 115 WEST B       -114.9  0.0
12075B  MEXSAT 3                  -114.8  0.0
15056A  MORELOS 3                 -113.1  6.2
06020A  EUTELSAT 113 WEST A       -113.0  0.0
06054A  WILDBLUE-1                -111.2  0.0
04027A  ANIK F2                   -111.1  0.0
09035A  TERRESTAR-1               -111.0  2.7
06003A  ECHOSTAR 10               -110.2  0.0
02023A  DIRECTV 5 (TEMPO 1)       -110.1  0.0
08035A  ECHOSTAR 11               -110.0  0.0
99059A  TELSTAR 12 (ORION 2)      -109.2  1.4
96022A  MSAT M1                   -107.5  8.1
13014A  ANIK G1                   -107.3  0.0
05036A  ANIK F1R                  -107.3  0.0
00076A  ANIK F1                   -107.3  0.0
12035A  ECHOSTAR 17               -107.1  0.0
04041A  AMC-15                    -105.1  0.0
17063A  SES-11 (ECHOSTAR 105)     -105.0  0.1
06054B  AMC-18                    -104.9  0.0
09033A  GOES 14                   -104.3  0.1
95019A  AMSC 1                    -103.3 10.3
11035A  SES-3                     -103.0  0.1
05015A  SPACEWAY 1                -102.9  0.0
07032A  DIRECTV 10                -102.8  0.0
09075A  DIRECTV 12                -102.8  0.0
15026A  DIRECTV 15                -102.8  0.0
10005A  SDO                       -101.9 29.0
10061A  SKYTERRA 1                -101.3  3.0
01052A  DIRECTV 4S                -101.2  0.0
06043A  DIRECTV 9S                -101.1  0.0
10016A  SES-1                     -101.0  0.0
05019A  DIRECTV 8                 -100.9  0.0
14078B  DIRECTV 14                 -99.2  0.0
08013A  DIRECTV 11                 -99.2  0.0
05046B  SPACEWAY 2                 -99.1  0.0
06023A  GALAXY 16 (G-16)           -99.0  0.0
08039A  INMARSAT 4-F3              -98.0  3.0
16079A  ECHOSTAR 19                -97.1  0.0
08045A  GALAXY 19 (G-19)           -97.0  0.0
00038A  ECHOSTAR 6                 -96.2  4.6
14062A  INTELSAT 30 (IS-30)        -95.0  0.0
16035A  INTELSAT 31 (IS-31)        -95.0  0.0
02030A  GALAXY 3C (G-3C)           -95.0  0.0
07036A  SPACEWAY 3                 -94.9  0.0
97026A  GALAXY 25 (G-25)           -93.1  0.0
08016A  ICO G1                     -92.8  3.8
00046A  BRASILSAT B4               -92.0  2.1
12026A  NIMIQ 6                    -91.1  0.0
07016B  GALAXY 17 (G-17)           -91.0  0.0
05022A  GALAXY 28 (G-28)           -89.0  0.0
13075A  TKSAT-1 (TUPAC KATARI)     -87.2  0.0
11049A  SES-2                      -87.0  0.0
99027A  NIMIQ 1                    -86.5  0.0
03033A  ECHOSTAR 12 (RAINBOW 1)    -86.4  0.0
09034A  SIRIUS FM-5                -86.1  0.0
10053A  XM-5                       -85.2  0.0
05008A  XM-3 (RHYTHM)              -85.1  0.0
04048A  AMC-16                     -85.0  0.0
97002A  AMC-2 (GE-2)               -84.9  4.7
16082B  STAR ONE D1                -84.0  0.0
00067A  AMC-6 (GE-6)               -83.0  0.0
08044A  NIMIQ 4                    -81.9  0.0
15054B  ARSAT 2                    -81.0  0.0
15026B  SKY MEXICO-1               -78.8  0.0
08055A  VENESAT-1                  -77.9  0.0
11054A  QUETZSAT 1                 -77.0  0.0
10006A  INTELSAT 16 (IS-16)        -76.2  0.0
16071A  GOES 16                    -75.2  0.0
12062A  STAR ONE C3                -75.0  0.0
17023B  SGDC                       -74.8  0.0
06018A  GOES 13                    -74.6  0.3
14011A  AMAZONAS 4A                -74.0  0.1
94070A  ASTRA 1D                   -73.0  7.9
09050A  NIMIQ 5                    -72.7  0.0
97050A  AMC-3 (GE-3)               -72.0  0.8
14062B  ARSAT 1                    -71.8  0.0
15034B  STAR ONE C4                -70.0  0.0
08018B  STAR ONE C2                -70.0  0.0
95016A  BRASILSAT B2               -68.0  7.5
17017A  SES-10                     -66.9  0.0
16014A  EUTELSAT 65 WEST A         -65.2  0.0
07056A  STAR ONE C1                -65.0  0.0
98006A  BRASILSAT B3               -63.2  4.4
11021A  TELSTAR 14R                -63.0  0.0
88091B  TDRS 3                     -62.5 14.4
10034A  ECHOSTAR 15                -61.7  0.0
12065A  ECHOSTAR 16                -61.5  0.0
16039B  ECHOSTAR 18                -61.3  0.0
09054A  AMAZONAS 2                 -61.0  0.0
17053A  AMAZONAS 5                 -61.0  0.0
13006A  AMAZONAS 3                 -61.0  0.0
12045A  INTELSAT 21 (IS-21)        -58.0  0.0
15039A  INTELSAT 34 (IS-34)        -55.5  0.0
15005A  INMARSAT 5-F2              -55.0  0.0
98006B  INMARSAT 3-F5              -54.0  3.0
12057A  INTELSAT 23 (IS-23)        -53.0  0.0
16004A  INTELSAT 29E (IS-29E)      -50.0  0.0

(from: http://www.satsig.net/sslist.htm)

The question I will ask you is simple enough.
We can skip other people and their examples.

According to Law of Action and Reaction ("Every force has ..." etc.),
and if gravitational force is action,
what is reaction?

(Hint: what force would tear apart helicopter propeller, or steam machine flywheel, or rotor of electric motor, if there's material flaw, or if it spins too fast?)

...acceleration BY inertia is counteracting it...

Okay, tangential velocity then.

At what single point does the "straight line path," of the satellite touch the curve of the earth?

Tangential = straight line that touches a curve at a single point.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:34:36 AM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 06:34:25 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 18, 2018, 06:06:36 AM

Meanwhile there are satellites for broadcast and navigation used by millions of people.  Agreed?

Disagreed.

Multitudes of high altitude balloons are sent aloft everyday, for one...

Two: It is well known transmission signals can be generated and directed and bounced of the upper atmoplane of the Earth.

Satellite dishes are directional.  With the narrow band signals is my dish is off axis more than one degree I lose reception.  It's not possible for a high altitude balloon would need to be maintain it's position with the precision necessary for that kind of reception.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

You made claims with empirical backing or substance and yet I didn’t “summarily dismiss” you.  Interesting that you require this of others without providing the same in return.

You certainly can’t “summarily dismiss” that a dish antenna is a line of sight device.

Again, you made a claim without any “empirical backing or substance”.  Double standard much?

The following links so the capabilities of some current commercial and military troposcatter.  These systems are very capable and high bandwidth.  However, as the links show, they have limitation on data rates that would not be able to provide hundreds of HD channels.

https://gdmissionsystems.com/-/media/General-Dynamics/Satcom/PDF/Antennas/Legacy-Products/6550066A24mHWTtropo.ashx?la=en&hash=EE2BD7AD5121EA7FC24132FC908AE1045A2BDB3A
http://www.satcomsource.com/GD-Satcom-2.4m-SM-LT-Mobile-Troposcatter-Antenna.pdf
https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/gallery/documents/digitalasset/rtn_229205.pdf

Further, troposcatter requires high power transmitters with high gain receivers. 

https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/tropospheric/troposcatter.php
http://www.qsl.net/oz1rh/troposcatter99/troposcatter99.htm

With dish antennas being direction, over twenty million households in the US with DIRECTV, and each area with dishes aimed at different directions you would have to believe there would need to be many of these systems in place.  Not to mention the dishes throughout the world that are aimed over oceans and gulfs where the nearest land is potentially thousands of kilometers away requiring the troposcatter systems to be waterborne.  That doesn't sound very practical.

Mike

Further, while troposcatter is capable of sending high bandwidth HD transmission, it can't handle transmitting several hundred such signals.  Even satellites can't do that.  In order to get my channels through DirecTV my dish receives signal from three different satellites with dozens of different transponders.

Are you saying that the horizontal velocity isn't a vital part of a satellite's orbit?

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 12:07:36 PM

Okay, tangential velocity then.

At what single point does the "straight line path," of the satellite touch the curve of the earth?

Tangential = straight line that touches a curve at a single point.

Ideally, never.  The curve that the horizontal velocity is tangential to is generally several hundred km or higher above the surface of the earth.  This is one reason why the center of the earth is generally the preferred point of reference for calculating orbital dynamics.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 12:07:36 PM

Okay, tangential velocity then.

At what single point does the "straight line path," of the satellite touch the curve of the earth?

Tangential = straight line that touches a curve at a single point.

Ideally, never.  The curve that the horizontal velocity is tangential to is generally several hundred km or higher above the surface of the earth.  This is one reason why the center of the earth is generally the preferred point of reference for calculating orbital dynamics.

Inertia still not a force!

Quote from: markjo on February 18, 2018, 11:08:47 AM

Are you saying that the horizontal velocity isn't a vital part of a satellite's orbit?

Yeah inertia's not a force, done this already markbot...

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:34:36 AM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 06:34:25 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 18, 2018, 06:06:36 AM

Meanwhile there are satellites for broadcast and navigation used by millions of people.  Agreed?

Disagreed.

Multitudes of high altitude balloons are sent aloft everyday, for one...

Two: It is well known transmission signals can be generated and directed and bounced of the upper atmoplane of the Earth.

Satellite dishes are directional.  With the narrow band signals is my dish is off axis more than one degree I lose reception.  It's not possible for a high altitude balloon would need to be maintain it's position with the precision necessary for that kind of reception.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

You made claims with empirical backing or substance and yet I didn’t “summarily dismiss” you.  Interesting that you require this of others without providing the same in return.

I posted readily accessible facts.

You did not.

You stated a balloon could not maintain a stable position while aloft.

Not only is that a claim made without supporting evidence, it is just plain false.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

You certainly can’t “summarily dismiss” that a dish antenna is a line of sight device.

I do not disagree entirely with this portion of your post.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Again, you made a claim without any “empirical backing or substance”.  Double standard much?

The following links so the capabilities of some current commercial and military troposcatter.  These systems are very capable and high bandwidth.  However, as the links show, they have limitation on data rates that would not be able to provide hundreds of HD channels.

https://gdmissionsystems.com/-/media/General-Dynamics/Satcom/PDF/Antennas/Legacy-Products/6550066A24mHWTtropo.ashx?la=en&hash=EE2BD7AD5121EA7FC24132FC908AE1045A2BDB3A
http://www.satcomsource.com/GD-Satcom-2.4m-SM-LT-Mobile-Troposcatter-Antenna.pdf
https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/gallery/documents/digitalasset/rtn_229205.pdf

Further, troposcatter requires high power transmitters with high gain receivers. 

https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/tropospheric/troposcatter.php
http://www.qsl.net/oz1rh/troposcatter99/troposcatter99.htm

With dish antennas being direction, over twenty million households in the US with DIRECTV, and each area with dishes aimed at different directions you would have to believe there would need to be many of these systems in place.  Not to mention the dishes throughout the world that are aimed over oceans and gulfs where the nearest land is potentially thousands of kilometers away requiring the troposcatter systems to be waterborne.  That doesn't sound very practical.

Mike

You posted this:

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Further, while troposcatter is capable of sending high bandwidth HD transmission, it can't handle transmitting several hundred such signals.  Even satellites can't do that.  In order to get my channels through DirecTV my dish receives signal from three different satellites with dozens of different transponders.

It has been demonstrably proven you do not even need a satellite transmitter or receiver to receive DirecTV.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 03:39:00 PM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:34:36 AM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 06:34:25 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 18, 2018, 06:06:36 AM

Meanwhile there are satellites for broadcast and navigation used by millions of people.  Agreed?

Disagreed.

Multitudes of high altitude balloons are sent aloft everyday, for one...

Two: It is well known transmission signals can be generated and directed and bounced of the upper atmoplane of the Earth.

Satellite dishes are directional.  With the narrow band signals is my dish is off axis more than one degree I lose reception.  It's not possible for a high altitude balloon would need to be maintain it's position with the precision necessary for that kind of reception.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

You made claims with empirical backing or substance and yet I didn’t “summarily dismiss” you.  Interesting that you require this of others without providing the same in return.

I posted readily accessible facts.

You did not.

You stated a balloon could not maintain a stable position while aloft.

Not only is that a claim made without supporting evidence, it is just plain false.

By readily accessible you mean I would have to look them up?  Why would that apply to me and not you?  I also posted readily accessible facts.

Unless you know of a balloon with some high-tech positioning system that the rest of don’t know about, I’m saying it’s impossible for a balloon to be station keeping.  I’ve read of proposed military LTA craft for high altitude surveillance but even that would only be able to maintain a station keeping radius of 2km at best.  IIRC, that would only apply for 50% of the time.  The proposed 95% station keeping is 150km.  I don’t know of any systems that have been implemented yet but those station keeping parameters aren’t good enough.

Where is the readily accessible facts to support your “it is just plain false” claim?

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 03:39:00 PM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

You certainly can’t “summarily dismiss” that a dish antenna is a line of sight device.

I do not disagree entirely with this portion of your post.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Again, you made a claim without any “empirical backing or substance”.  Double standard much?

The following links so the capabilities of some current commercial and military troposcatter.  These systems are very capable and high bandwidth.  However, as the links show, they have limitation on data rates that would not be able to provide hundreds of HD channels.

https://gdmissionsystems.com/-/media/General-Dynamics/Satcom/PDF/Antennas/Legacy-Products/6550066A24mHWTtropo.ashx?la=en&hash=EE2BD7AD5121EA7FC24132FC908AE1045A2BDB3A
http://www.satcomsource.com/GD-Satcom-2.4m-SM-LT-Mobile-Troposcatter-Antenna.pdf
https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/gallery/documents/digitalasset/rtn_229205.pdf

Further, troposcatter requires high power transmitters with high gain receivers. 

https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/tropospheric/troposcatter.php
http://www.qsl.net/oz1rh/troposcatter99/troposcatter99.htm

With dish antennas being direction, over twenty million households in the US with DIRECTV, and each area with dishes aimed at different directions you would have to believe there would need to be many of these systems in place.  Not to mention the dishes throughout the world that are aimed over oceans and gulfs where the nearest land is potentially thousands of kilometers away requiring the troposcatter systems to be waterborne.  That doesn't sound very practical.

Mike

You posted this:

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Further, while troposcatter is capable of sending high bandwidth HD transmission, it can't handle transmitting several hundred such signals.  Even satellites can't do that.  In order to get my channels through DirecTV my dish receives signal from three different satellites with dozens of different transponders.

It has been demonstrably proven you do not even need a satellite transmitter or receiver to receive DirecTV.

Just because you claim it’s “demonstrably proven” doesn’t mean it’s so.  The fact is it has not been “demonstrably proven”.  It’s another claim by you without readily accessible facts. 

Mike

Quote from: markjo on February 18, 2018, 03:35:44 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 12:07:36 PM

Okay, tangential velocity then.

At what single point does the "straight line path," of the satellite touch the curve of the earth?

Tangential = straight line that touches a curve at a single point.

Ideally, never.  The curve that the horizontal velocity is tangential to is generally several hundred km or higher above the surface of the earth.  This is one reason why the center of the earth is generally the preferred point of reference for calculating orbital dynamics.

Okay.

Regardless, all independent observers will witness this "horizontal," or "tangential," velocity of the object at a point parallel to their point of view from the Earth, correct?

You better sharpen up on your internet search skills Mike.

DirecTV is readily available without the need for a satellite transmitter or receiver.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 04:15:57 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 03:39:00 PM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:34:36 AM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 06:34:25 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 18, 2018, 06:06:36 AM

Meanwhile there are satellites for broadcast and navigation used by millions of people.  Agreed?

Disagreed.

Multitudes of high altitude balloons are sent aloft everyday, for one...

Two: It is well known transmission signals can be generated and directed and bounced of the upper atmoplane of the Earth.

Satellite dishes are directional.  With the narrow band signals is my dish is off axis more than one degree I lose reception.  It's not possible for a high altitude balloon would need to be maintain it's position with the precision necessary for that kind of reception.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

You made claims with empirical backing or substance and yet I didn’t “summarily dismiss” you.  Interesting that you require this of others without providing the same in return.

I posted readily accessible facts.

You did not.

You stated a balloon could not maintain a stable position while aloft.

Not only is that a claim made without supporting evidence, it is just plain false.

By readily accessible you mean I would have to look them up?  Why would that apply to me and not you?  I also posted readily accessible facts.

Unless you know of a balloon with some high-tech positioning system that the rest of don’t know about, I’m saying it’s impossible for a balloon to be station keeping.  I’ve read of proposed military LTA craft for high altitude surveillance but even that would only be able to maintain a station keeping radius of 2km at best.  IIRC, that would only apply for 50% of the time.  The proposed 95% station keeping is 150km.  I don’t know of any systems that have been implemented yet but those station keeping parameters aren’t good enough.

Where is the readily accessible facts to support your “it is just plain false” claim?

Would you like for me to show you the multitude of videos originating from high altitude balloons with relatively stationary/stable video or will you just readily acknowledge they exist?

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 04:15:57 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 03:39:00 PM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

You certainly can’t “summarily dismiss” that a dish antenna is a line of sight device.

I do not disagree entirely with this portion of your post.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Again, you made a claim without any “empirical backing or substance”.  Double standard much?

The following links so the capabilities of some current commercial and military troposcatter.  These systems are very capable and high bandwidth.  However, as the links show, they have limitation on data rates that would not be able to provide hundreds of HD channels.

https://gdmissionsystems.com/-/media/General-Dynamics/Satcom/PDF/Antennas/Legacy-Products/6550066A24mHWTtropo.ashx?la=en&hash=EE2BD7AD5121EA7FC24132FC908AE1045A2BDB3A
http://www.satcomsource.com/GD-Satcom-2.4m-SM-LT-Mobile-Troposcatter-Antenna.pdf
https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/gallery/documents/digitalasset/rtn_229205.pdf

Further, troposcatter requires high power transmitters with high gain receivers. 

https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/tropospheric/troposcatter.php
http://www.qsl.net/oz1rh/troposcatter99/troposcatter99.htm

With dish antennas being direction, over twenty million households in the US with DIRECTV, and each area with dishes aimed at different directions you would have to believe there would need to be many of these systems in place.  Not to mention the dishes throughout the world that are aimed over oceans and gulfs where the nearest land is potentially thousands of kilometers away requiring the troposcatter systems to be waterborne.  That doesn't sound very practical.

Mike

You posted this:

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Further, while troposcatter is capable of sending high bandwidth HD transmission, it can't handle transmitting several hundred such signals.  Even satellites can't do that.  In order to get my channels through DirecTV my dish receives signal from three different satellites with dozens of different transponders.

It has been demonstrably proven you do not even need a satellite transmitter or receiver to receive DirecTV.

Just because you claim it’s “demonstrably proven” doesn’t mean it’s so.  The fact is it has not been “demonstrably proven”.  It’s another claim by you without readily accessible facts. 

Mike

Horse hockey.

You better sharpen up on your internet search skills Mike.

DirecTV is readily available without the need for a satellite transmitter or receiver.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 04:24:26 PM

You better sharpen up on your internet search skills Mike.

DirecTV is readily available without the need for a satellite transmitter or receiver.

You had better brush up on your internet history totallackey.   

Satellite TV was available long before broadband internet became available.

Some of us are old enough to remember when satellite TV was only available via 3 meter dishes.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 04:24:26 PM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 04:15:57 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 03:39:00 PM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 11:34:36 AM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 06:34:25 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 18, 2018, 06:06:36 AM

Meanwhile there are satellites for broadcast and navigation used by millions of people.  Agreed?

Disagreed.

Multitudes of high altitude balloons are sent aloft everyday, for one...

Two: It is well known transmission signals can be generated and directed and bounced of the upper atmoplane of the Earth.

Satellite dishes are directional.  With the narrow band signals is my dish is off axis more than one degree I lose reception.  It's not possible for a high altitude balloon would need to be maintain it's position with the precision necessary for that kind of reception.

Noted claim made without empirical backing or substance.

Summarily dismissed.

You made claims with empirical backing or substance and yet I didn’t “summarily dismiss” you.  Interesting that you require this of others without providing the same in return.

I posted readily accessible facts.

You did not.

You stated a balloon could not maintain a stable position while aloft.

Not only is that a claim made without supporting evidence, it is just plain false.

By readily accessible you mean I would have to look them up?  Why would that apply to me and not you?  I also posted readily accessible facts.

Unless you know of a balloon with some high-tech positioning system that the rest of don’t know about, I’m saying it’s impossible for a balloon to be station keeping.  I’ve read of proposed military LTA craft for high altitude surveillance but even that would only be able to maintain a station keeping radius of 2km at best.  IIRC, that would only apply for 50% of the time.  The proposed 95% station keeping is 150km.  I don’t know of any systems that have been implemented yet but those station keeping parameters aren’t good enough.

Where is the readily accessible facts to support your “it is just plain false” claim?

Would you like for me to show you the multitude of videos originating from high altitude balloons with relatively stationary/stable video or will you just readily acknowledge they exist?

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 04:15:57 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 03:39:00 PM

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

You certainly can’t “summarily dismiss” that a dish antenna is a line of sight device.

I do not disagree entirely with this portion of your post.

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 12:53:25 PM

Again, you made a claim without any “empirical backing or substance”.  Double standard much?

The following links so the capabilities of some current commercial and military troposcatter.  These systems are very capable and high bandwidth.  However, as the links show, they have limitation on data rates that would not be able to provide hundreds of HD channels.

https://gdmissionsystems.com/-/media/General-Dynamics/Satcom/PDF/Antennas/Legacy-Products/6550066A24mHWTtropo.ashx?la=en&hash=EE2BD7AD5121EA7FC24132FC908AE1045A2BDB3A
http://www.satcomsource.com/GD-Satcom-2.4m-SM-LT-Mobile-Troposcatter-Antenna.pdf
https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/gallery/documents/digitalasset/rtn_229205.pdf

Further, troposcatter requires high power transmitters with high gain receivers. 

https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/tropospheric/troposcatter.php
http://www.qsl.net/oz1rh/troposcatter99/troposcatter99.htm

With dish antennas being direction, over twenty million households in the US with DIRECTV, and each area with dishes aimed at different directions you would have to believe there would need to be many of these systems in place.  Not to mention the dishes throughout the world that are aimed over oceans and gulfs where the nearest land is potentially thousands of kilometers away requiring the troposcatter systems to be waterborne.  That doesn't sound very practical.

Mike

You posted this:

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 18, 2018, 09:51:57 AM

Further, while troposcatter is capable of sending high bandwidth HD transmission, it can't handle transmitting several hundred such signals.  Even satellites can't do that.  In order to get my channels through DirecTV my dish receives signal from three different satellites with dozens of different transponders.

It has been demonstrably proven you do not even need a satellite transmitter or receiver to receive DirecTV.

Just because you claim it’s “demonstrably proven” doesn’t mean it’s so.  The fact is it has not been “demonstrably proven”.  It’s another claim by you without readily accessible facts. 

Mike

Horse hockey.

You better sharpen up on your internet search skills Mike.

DirecTV is readily available without the need for a satellite transmitter or receiver.

My search skills are very good.  Yet another example of you not providing readily accessible facts, empirical backing, or substance. 

There isn’t a single terrestrial or high-altitude system that can supply DirecTV to all of North America.  Don’t pretend such a system exists let alone been demonstrated that it works.  Don’t pretend otherwise.

Also, the high-altitude balloons that have been demonstrated to date aren’t for supplying DBS and again, don’t pretend they can transmit to DirecTV dishes nationwide.

Please provide any system anywhere that has been shown to supply DirecTV nationwide.  Please explain why nobody has ever seen such a system aloft.

Mike

Quote from: markjo on February 18, 2018, 04:35:56 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 04:24:26 PM

You better sharpen up on your internet search skills Mike.

DirecTV is readily available without the need for a satellite transmitter or receiver.

You had better brush up on your internet history totallackey.   

Satellite TV was available long before broadband internet became available.

Some of us are old enough to remember when satellite TV was only available via 3 meter dishes.

Look, I was around before there were any dish antennas available for home use.

That does not change the fact DirecTV is available WITHOUT the use of a satellite transmitter or receiver.

Quote from: markjo on February 18, 2018, 04:35:56 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 04:24:26 PM

You better sharpen up on your internet search skills Mike.

DirecTV is readily available without the need for a satellite transmitter or receiver.

You had better brush up on your internet history totallackey.   

Satellite TV was available long before broadband internet became available.

Some of us are old enough to remember when satellite TV was only available via 3 meter dishes.

Look, I was around before there were any dish antennas available for home use.

That does not change the fact DirecTV is available WITHOUT the use of a satellite transmitter or receiver.

Evidently you ceded the high altitude balloon argument.

Now, I suggest you utilize the words AT&T in your quest for knowledge on DirecTV...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/baig/2016/03/01/t-launch-streaming-directv-service-no-dish-required/81164070/

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 04:54:51 PM

Quote from: markjo on February 18, 2018, 04:35:56 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 04:24:26 PM

You better sharpen up on your internet search skills Mike.

DirecTV is readily available without the need for a satellite transmitter or receiver.

You had better brush up on your internet history totallackey.   

Satellite TV was available long before broadband internet became available.

Some of us are old enough to remember when satellite TV was only available via 3 meter dishes.

Look, I was around before there were any dish antennas available for home use.

That does not change the fact DirecTV is available WITHOUT the use of a satellite transmitter or receiver.

When the only thing connecting a TV is a satellite dish. How else do you propose it receives signal?

Look at the google street view, its literally just a random street view of a city close to the equator.
The satellite dish has to receive signal from somewhere does it not?
where does this point to?

Is everyone in Brazil in on the conspiracy?

Living A Dream: Locals on Lake Toba, in Sumatra, Indonesia.

Quote from: totallackey on February 18, 2018, 05:01:13 PM

Evidently you ceded the high altitude balloon argument.

Now, I suggest you utilize the words AT&T in your quest for knowledge on DirecTV...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/baig/2016/03/01/t-launch-streaming-directv-service-no-dish-required/81164070/

 
First of all, I’ve already said such systems exist but haven’t been implemented yet.  Your implication was they can be used for satellite tv and that’s just not true.

As far as DIRECTV NOW goes, it’s a basic streaming service for mobile devices.  It has nothing to do with in home TV service  DIRECTV NOW does have an in home streaming service for TV with 4k content and full on demand.  You need Apple TV STB.  So, as you can see, in order to get full DIRECTV it does need a receiver.  These are both streaming services that are currently a supplement or alternative to the current DIRECTV satellite service.  That has absolutely nothing to do with satellites so you can let that one go.

The interesting part here is this discussion is about satellites and you want to use semantics to avoid the discussion that satellites exist and currently supply tens of millions of households with DBS TV.  Yet, it seems you’ve not posted anything to show a DIRECTV dish receives a signal with hundreds full HD channels and 4k content.

Mike

Is DirecTV available without the use of a satellite transmitter or receiver? YES...or...NO?