Re: GPS ques
From: Myxococcus xanthus (mold-guardian_at_comcast.net)
Date: 09/13/04
- Next message: Bilge: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Previous message: Keith P Walsh: "Re: Uncle Al's "Negative Energy""
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: GPS ques"
- Next in thread: Sam Wormley: "Re: GPS ques"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 13 Sep 2004 02:39:07 -0700
Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message news:<413DF8E5.BD8368CE@hate.spam.net>...
> B Gilmour wrote:
> > The satellites are however in geosynchronous orbits,
> [snip]
>
> Bull***. They would be useless in geosynchronous orbit
Incidentally, the Chinese Beidou system uses geostationary orbits.
Unlike GPS, the coverage is not intended to be global, but is intended
to serve the mainland Chinese area. In the area that the system is
intended to serve, there is sufficient angular separation between the
satellites to perform trilateralization. The advantage is that the
system does not require a large constellation of satellites.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/world/china/beidou.htm
http://www.fact-index.com/b/be/beidou_navigation_system.html
Myxococcus xanthus
- Next message: Bilge: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Previous message: Keith P Walsh: "Re: Uncle Al's "Negative Energy""
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: GPS ques"
- Next in thread: Sam Wormley: "Re: GPS ques"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
