[aprssig] APRS Speed Spec? (plan B)

spam8mybrain spam8mybrain at yahoo.com
Wed Oct 11 15:51:32 EDT 2017

Kirby's idea sounds good. After all, there are several different orbital velocities (or at least, effective ground track speeds), depending on orbital altitude. Geosynchronous orbit will have a much slower ground track speed than LEO altitudes. And then there's the birds in elliptical orbits instead of circular....
Speaking of which, is the reported speed for satellites supposed to be the true tangential orbit velocity, or the ground track projection speed at the Earth's surface? For airplanes, that's not very different, but as the altitude increases, so does the difference.
Andrew Pavlin, KA2DDOauthor of YAAC

-------- Original message --------
From: Kirby <joekirby at gmail.com> 
Date: 10/11/17  14:34  (GMT-05:00) 
To: Greg D <ko6th.greg at gmail.com>, Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> 
Cc: TAPR APRS Mailing List <aprssig at tapr.org> 
Subject: Re: [aprssig] APRS Speed Spec? (plan B) 

How precise do you want to be. 9XX is XX mach.

space station = 924
military = 903
concord = 902

speeds below 900 are actual. works up to about 73774ish mph.


aprssig mailing list
aprssig at tapr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20171011/a3f412e8/attachment.html>

More information about the aprssig mailing list