Parking Orbit

How practical is it to tailor a parking orbit for lunar missions that
is reasonably efficent to reach from KSC and precesses at 180 degrees a
lunar month?

Will McLean

Rand Simberg wrote:
On 17 Feb 2006 10:12:33 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Will McLean"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

How practical is it to tailor a parking orbit for lunar missions that
is reasonably efficent to reach from KSC and precesses at 180 degrees a
lunar month?

What's wrong with 360?


Nothing. Any multiple of 180 will do. 180 seemed more doable, based on
the orbits I've been able to find information on.

Will McLean

Hello - I am new to this Group - but I do have some insight to this
astonishing Question?

180 Degrees Being the infra-spectrum in which we can see and operate in that
the temperature is fine for working in? - not too much?

Also the indexing of the interior is a advantage in that the interior is
really the importance of the overall in that the indexed interior is a
fundamental in that the overall importance in that the overall input pattern
is a fundamental?

Question though? With the Moon so interconnected and seemingly ineventfully
- connected to the Tide Lines on the planet - could the Moon be a poor
destination in that I believe that the Solar Winds (Geo-magnetical forces)
are the
willing and given in that the overall is very efficient as is!? Very light
craft as landed
before - (as with more propulsion) are event
full enough!?

I hope this answers your Question? I also as my Web Space below serves -
answer Questions about almost anything?

Here is my Web Space Address?

http://www.members.shaw.ca/finitesystems/index.html

Another thing - as I am an experienced Networking Cohesive newsgroup
person? - as I may have Just witnessed a simple thing as I Just read 1
Posting - please do not do that to Me if you did what you did or you will
surely see the other side?

Casper












"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On 17 Feb 2006 10:12:33 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Will McLean"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

How practical is it to tailor a parking orbit for lunar missions that
is reasonably efficent to reach from KSC and precesses at 180 degrees a
lunar month?

What's wrong with 360?

Rand Simberg wrote:
On 17 Feb 2006 12:17:26 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Will McLean"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

How practical is it to tailor a parking orbit for lunar missions that
is reasonably efficent to reach from KSC and precesses at 180 degrees a
lunar month?

What's wrong with 360?


Nothing. Any multiple of 180 will do. 180 seemed more doable, based on
the orbits I've been able to find information on.

Oh, I misunderstood. You're looking for an actual precession in an
inertial frame? I thought you meant an apparent precession from the
viewpoint of the earth. How does 180 help you? I would think that
360 would be the only one that would give you constant angle with
respect to the earth.


D'oh!. I meant to say 180 degrees in half a lunar month, or 360 a
month. Or any multiple of that, since I don't require a constant angle
with respect to to the system. I want to arrange the precession so that
every time the lauch window opens to a particular lunar orbit, the moon
is in the plane of the parking orbit.

Anyway, what's wrong with L1, other than the performance hit (a
penalty I think well worth paying)?


Performance hit, the travel time, and L1 is no longer an option with
the current plan.

Will McLean

chuckweisel

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 20:34:15 GMT, in a place far, far away, "finite
systems" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


Hello - I am new to this Group - but I do have some insight to this
astonishing Question?

180 Degrees Being the infra-spectrum in which we can see and operate in
that
the temperature is fine for working in? - not too much?

Also the indexing of the interior is a advantage in that the interior is
really the importance of the overall in that the indexed interior is a
fundamental in that the overall importance in that the overall input
pattern
is a fundamental?

Question though? With the Moon so interconnected and seemingly
ineventfully
- connected to the Tide Lines on the planet - could the Moon be a poor
destination in that I believe that the Solar Winds (Geo-magnetical
forces)
are the
willing and given in that the overall is very efficient as is!? Very
light
craft as landed
before - (as with more propulsion) are event
full enough!?

I hope this answers your Question? I also as my Web Space below serves -
answer Questions about almost anything?

Here is my Web Space Address?

http://www.members.shaw.ca/finitesystems/index.html

Another thing - as I am an experienced Networking Cohesive newsgroup
person? - as I may have Just witnessed a simple thing as I Just read 1
Posting - please do not do that to Me if you did what you did or you will
surely see the other side?

Casper

Boy, that wasn't just out of left field. It was out of a completely
different ballpark, in a different county.

In article .com,
"Will McLean" wrote:

Rand Simberg wrote:
On 17 Feb 2006 10:12:33 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Will McLean"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

How practical is it to tailor a parking orbit for lunar missions that
is reasonably efficent to reach from KSC and precesses at 180 degrees a
lunar month?

What's wrong with 360?


Nothing. Any multiple of 180 will do. 180 seemed more doable, based on
the orbits I've been able to find information on.

Will McLean

Why would anybody *want* such a long-duration parking orbit? The craft
could go stale if it is kept in orbit that long -- besides, the only
reason for an earth parking orbit is to extend the launch window from
some 3 minutes to several hours. It costs propellant to insert into park
and then inject into translunar.

On 17 Feb 2006 10:12:33 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Will McLean"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

How practical is it to tailor a parking orbit for lunar missions that
is reasonably efficent to reach from KSC and precesses at 180 degrees a
lunar month?

What's wrong with 360?

Will McLean and "finite systems",
What the sam hell is so gosh darn taboo/nondisclosure about our
utilizing the efficient though somewhat interactive LL-1/ME-L1 as per
station-keeping, that's supposedly situated at roughly 60,000 km away
from the lunar deck?

Seems the amount of auxiliary ion thrust or even conventional reaction
thruster energy as per interactively station-keeping would be the
least.

Deploying of whatever to/from the moon or Earth is simply why LL-1 is
still the one and only best ever sweet-spot for accomplishing such
efforts.
-
Brad Guth

On 17 Feb 2006 12:17:26 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Will McLean"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

How practical is it to tailor a parking orbit for lunar missions that
is reasonably efficent to reach from KSC and precesses at 180 degrees a
lunar month?

What's wrong with 360?


Nothing. Any multiple of 180 will do. 180 seemed more doable, based on
the orbits I've been able to find information on.

Oh, I misunderstood. You're looking for an actual precession in an
inertial frame? I thought you meant an apparent precession from the
viewpoint of the earth. How does 180 help you? I would think that
360 would be the only one that would give you constant angle with
respect to the earth.

Anyway, what's wrong with L1, other than the performance hit (a
penalty I think well worth paying)?

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 20:34:15 GMT, in a place far, far away, "finite
systems" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


Hello - I am new to this Group - but I do have some insight to this
astonishing Question?

180 Degrees Being the infra-spectrum in which we can see and operate in that
the temperature is fine for working in? - not too much?

Also the indexing of the interior is a advantage in that the interior is
really the importance of the overall in that the indexed interior is a
fundamental in that the overall importance in that the overall input pattern
is a fundamental?

Question though? With the Moon so interconnected and seemingly ineventfully
- connected to the Tide Lines on the planet - could the Moon be a poor
destination in that I believe that the Solar Winds (Geo-magnetical forces)
are the
willing and given in that the overall is very efficient as is!? Very light
craft as landed
before - (as with more propulsion) are event
full enough!?

I hope this answers your Question? I also as my Web Space below serves -
answer Questions about almost anything?

Here is my Web Space Address?

http://www.members.shaw.ca/finitesystems/index.html

Another thing - as I am an experienced Networking Cohesive newsgroup
person? - as I may have Just witnessed a simple thing as I Just read 1
Posting - please do not do that to Me if you did what you did or you will
surely see the other side?

Casper

Boy, that wasn't just out of left field. It was out of a completely
different ballpark, in a different county.