Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Science

caraher

(6,363 posts)

7. I'm not sure it would work

Reply to KY_EnviroGuy (Reply #6)

Tue Jan 2, 2018, 02:03 AM

Jan 2018

Sorry, I thought you meant Earth because the "geo" in "geostationary" implies Earth. More generally the term would be a "synchronous" orbit.

I think you'd want to use the Earth-Moon L2 point. That's going to be closer to the lunar surface than a satellite whose orbit matched the 27 day lunar rotation period (and I suspect the synchronous orbit would be pretty heavily perturbed by Earth!).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Chinas moon mission to boldly go a step further [View all] nitpicker Jan 2018 OP

What a fascinating endeavor! Holland/China interesting. RestoreAmerica2020 Jan 2018 #1

One would then assume the lander will be nuclear powered... KY_EnviroGuy Jan 2018 #2

Just because the lander is on the far side that does not mean it will always be in darkness VMA131Marine Jan 2018 #3

Also, you can't have a geostationary satellite orbiting on the far side of the moon caraher Jan 2018 #5

I was thinking a geostationary orbit with the moon itself. KY_EnviroGuy Jan 2018 #6

I'm not sure it would work caraher Jan 2018 #7

Godspeed. GeorgeGist Jan 2018 #4