Re: Goodbye Goonhilly
- From: Richard Lamont <richard@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 21:00:54 +0100
Paul Sherwin wrote:
Wasn't Goonhilly built because the Telstar signal was so feeble it needed
to be as far west as possible?
"The site, approximately 800 yards square, was chosen as being
particularly suitable for the transatlantic path in view of its westerly
location; also its latitude is convenient for satellites in equatorial
orbit. It is remote from the majority of microwave links in the United
Kingdom, so that frequency-sharing with such links is facilitated. The
horizon angles are predominantly negative with a maximum positive value
of about 0.5°, so that satellite orbits involving low angles of
elevation could be used." - Bray, W.J., "Satellite Communication
Systems", POEEJ, Vol. 55 Part 2, July 1962, pp 97-104.
--
Richard Lamont http://www.lamont.me.uk/
<richard@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
OpenPGP Key ID: 0x5096714C
Fingerprint: F838 740C 76B4 6EC6 9ECC 1C4D A4DE 3322 5096 714C
.
- References:
- Goodbye Goonhilly
- From: pedwards
- Re: Goodbye Goonhilly
- From: The LHC
- Re: Goodbye Goonhilly
- From: SpamTrapSeeSig
- Re: Goodbye Goonhilly
- From: The LHC
- Re: Goodbye Goonhilly
- From: Paul Sherwin
- Goodbye Goonhilly
- Prev by Date: Re: Echo and Telstar technical details.
- Next by Date: Re: Satellite on top of Crystal Palace TV mast?
- Previous by thread: Re: Goodbye Goonhilly
- Next by thread: Re: Goodbye Goonhilly
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|