Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!

Chris Hogg wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!

I'm not sure I understand what I'm seeing in that last link. The
video seems to be a loop: OK (but I may be wrong). Stars apparently
whizzing by, as the earth rotates: also OK. But what puzzles me is
that I can count I think it's 17 points of light, presumably
satellites, strung out in a straight line diagonally across the field
of view, and not moving, i.e. geostationary. There are two or three
other satellites that move slightly back and forth as the loop goes
round. But what are the seventeen? Are they seventeen actual
satellites all strung out across the sky, which seems rather a lot, or
are there really a lot fewer, that re-appear in different but exactly
reproducible places, as the loop proceeds?

Taking it at face value they are 17 actual satellites. There are
satellites every few degrees in some parts of the Clarke Belt.

Bill

Bill Wright Wrote in message:
Chris Hogg wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!

I'm not sure I understand what I'm seeing in that last link. The
video seems to be a loop: OK (but I may be wrong). Stars apparently
whizzing by, as the earth rotates: also OK. But what puzzles me is
that I can count I think it's 17 points of light, presumably
satellites, strung out in a straight line diagonally across the field
of view, and not moving, i.e. geostationary. There are two or three
other satellites that move slightly back and forth as the loop goes
round. But what are the seventeen? Are they seventeen actual
satellites all strung out across the sky, which seems rather a lot, or
are there really a lot fewer, that re-appear in different but exactly
reproducible places, as the loop proceeds?

Taking it at face value they are 17 actual satellites. There are
satellites every few degrees in some parts of the Clarke Belt.

Bill


I once saw a picture with showed all the satellites in orbital
position 28.2 deg as a separate point of light.
--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 13:47:08 +0100
Bill Wright wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight
the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!

I'm not sure I understand what I'm seeing in that last link. The
video seems to be a loop: OK (but I may be wrong). Stars apparently
whizzing by, as the earth rotates: also OK. But what puzzles me is
that I can count I think it's 17 points of light, presumably
satellites, strung out in a straight line diagonally across the
field of view, and not moving, i.e. geostationary. There are two or
three other satellites that move slightly back and forth as the
loop goes round. But what are the seventeen? Are they seventeen
actual satellites all strung out across the sky, which seems rather
a lot, or are there really a lot fewer, that re-appear in different
but exactly reproducible places, as the loop proceeds?

Taking it at face value they are 17 actual satellites. There are
satellites every few degrees in some parts of the Clarke Belt.

Bill

But they might not all reflect the sun's light, at the time of the
photo strip.

--
Davey.

In article:

Graham. says...

I once saw a picture with showed all the satellites in orbital
position 28.2 deg as a separate point of light.

Who painted it?


--
Ken O'Meara

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 21:58:06 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 13:47:08 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:04 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight
the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!

I'm not sure I understand what I'm seeing in that last link. The
video seems to be a loop: OK (but I may be wrong). Stars
apparently whizzing by, as the earth rotates: also OK. But what
puzzles me is that I can count I think it's 17 points of light,
presumably satellites, strung out in a straight line diagonally
across the field of view, and not moving, i.e. geostationary.
There are two or three other satellites that move slightly back
and forth as the loop goes round. But what are the seventeen? Are
they seventeen actual satellites all strung out across the sky,
which seems rather a lot, or are there really a lot fewer, that
re-appear in different but exactly reproducible places, as the
loop proceeds?

Taking it at face value they are 17 actual satellites. There are
satellites every few degrees in some parts of the Clarke Belt.

Bill

So I see. Thanks. I hadn't appreciated how busy it was up there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...chronous_orbit


You can thank Arthur C. Clarke for the idea.

--
Davey.

UnsteadyKen Wrote in message:

In article:

Graham. says...

I once saw a picture with showed all the satellites in orbital
position 28.2 deg as a separate point of light.

Who painted it?


--
Ken O'Meara


I'm happy enough with picture vs. image but I should have said
each and not all.
--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 15:36:29 +0100, Davey
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 13:47:08 +0100
Bill Wright wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight
the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!

I'm not sure I understand what I'm seeing in that last link. The
video seems to be a loop: OK (but I may be wrong). Stars apparently
whizzing by, as the earth rotates: also OK. But what puzzles me is
that I can count I think it's 17 points of light, presumably
satellites, strung out in a straight line diagonally across the
field of view, and not moving, i.e. geostationary. There are two or
three other satellites that move slightly back and forth as the
loop goes round. But what are the seventeen? Are they seventeen
actual satellites all strung out across the sky, which seems rather
a lot, or are there really a lot fewer, that re-appear in different
but exactly reproducible places, as the loop proceeds?

Taking it at face value they are 17 actual satellites. There are
satellites every few degrees in some parts of the Clarke Belt.

Bill

But they might not all reflect the sun's light, at the time of the
photo strip.

I rather think they don't need to, and sunlight scattered from matt
surfaces will suffice.

Sunlight accidentally beamed to a point on the earth by a mirrored
surface can be seen as a flash even in broad daylight by a well placed
observer without optical aid, the best examples are "Iridium Flares".

--

Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On 07/10/2015 21:58, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 13:47:08 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!

I'm not sure I understand what I'm seeing in that last link. The
video seems to be a loop: OK (but I may be wrong). Stars apparently
whizzing by, as the earth rotates: also OK. But what puzzles me is
that I can count I think it's 17 points of light, presumably
satellites, strung out in a straight line diagonally across the field
of view, and not moving, i.e. geostationary. There are two or three
other satellites that move slightly back and forth as the loop goes
round. But what are the seventeen? Are they seventeen actual
satellites all strung out across the sky, which seems rather a lot, or
are there really a lot fewer, that re-appear in different but exactly
reproducible places, as the loop proceeds?

Taking it at face value they are 17 actual satellites. There are
satellites every few degrees in some parts of the Clarke Belt.

Bill

So I see. Thanks. I hadn't appreciated how busy it was up there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...chronous_orbit


It would be nice to see the 28.2E location, or some of the other TV
satellite locations where there are multiple satellites close together.

I really only understood the images when I saw the last one where the
geostationary satellites where highlighted.

--
Michael Chare

On 06/10/2015 20:34, wrote:
Found this picture some of you might like:

http://imgur.com/gallery/hky2HYp

via https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...ographed_last/

Then in the comments section one contributor managed to highlight the satellites:

http://i.imgur.com/TCGQX4l.gif

Rather impressive, I think!


How to the satellites below the Clarke belt stay there?

--
Michael Chare