4 ms·
Interesting, thanks. I understand that the satellite needs to have some form of propulsion to keep it at L1 (it is unstable), so it must have a limited life. Ho
by gonvaled 11y ago
Interesting, thanks. I understand that the satellite needs to have some form of propulsion to keep it at L1 (it is unstable), so it must have a limited life. How long?
- Cogito 11y agoFrom a Q&A session https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/qa-on-noaas-dscovr-mission/ https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/qa-on-noaas-dscovr-miss... The mission is slated for 2 years, and they have fuel for 5. I also happen to know that they reached L1 faster than anticipated thanks to a really nice insertion from the SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle. This means that the operational life might be even longer, but I haven't found any sources for what that might be.
- TeMPOraL 11y agoIt's nost just with Lagrange points. Actually, most of the satellites need to carry some fuel for station-keeping - the combined effects of non-uniform mass distribution in the orbited body, solar radiation, gravitational pull of other bodies and even air drag will slowly alter, or even completely degrade your orbit. See [0] for more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_station-keeping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_station-keeping
- benihana 11y agoEvery satellite needs to use propulsion for station keeping, satellites at LaGrange points included. Orbits aren't as stable in real life as they are in math.