Satellites : general discussion and musings

[hoi.polloi]

On a clear night I can watch half a dozen of these objects go by. I will do my best to video record them. I don't have any way of proving what they are - only that it's clear there are some things way up there that move extremely quickly and are bright enough for their dimmer-than-starlight lights to shine to where I am standing/laying.

[simonshack]

On a clear night I can watch half a dozen of these objects go by.

Hoi,

When I was a kid, spending my summers in Norway, we (my cousins and I) used to spend nights lying in rucksacks on the lawn in front of my grandfather's house (we are talking about the mid-70's). Of course, up in Norway the star-studded sky is particularly spectacular. Well, we would see bright dots flying across the firmament maybe every 15 minutes or so - and that's a conservative estimate... actually, maybe it was more like every 7/10 minutes or so. We were told (by our parents and uncles) that they were satellites. Now, I don't know how many satellites were supposed to be operative in the mid-seventies, but there must have been an awful lot of them up there for us to see so many of them - with such reliable frequency. I was fascinated by these moving dots of light and kept picking them out all night long, actually keeping awake just to watch more and more of them - long after my cousins had fallen asleep (And no, they were'nt airplanes. Can I be absolutely sure that they were satellites? Hell, no.)

In later years and lately, I must say, I haven't seen many such fly-by dots in the sky at night (but then again I now live above Rome, and the city lights keep me from seeing many stars at all).

Man, to photograph those things would require equipment and knowledge I don't have.

Nonho,
I have recently contacted my local astronomy club and asked them to participate in their next observations of the International Space Station fly-by. I will expect to see no less than this sort of shape in their powerful optical equipment:



After all, the ISS is supposed to drift above us - only about 200 miles away or so...
I'll let you know.

[Dcopymope]

On a clear night I can watch half a dozen of these objects go by.

Hoi,

When I was a kid, spending my summers in Norway, we (my cousins and I) used to spend nights lying in rucksacks on the lawn in front of my grandfather's house (we are talking about the mid-70's). Of course, up in Norway the star-studded sky is particularly spectacular. Well, we would see bright dots flying across the firmament maybe every 15 minutes or so - and that's a conservative estimate... actually, maybe it was more like every 7/10 minutes or so. We were told (by our parents and uncles) that they were satellites. Now, I don't know how many satellites were supposed to be operative in the mid-seventies, but there must have been an awful lot of them up there for us to see so many of them - with such reliable frequency. I was fascinated by these moving dots of light and kept picking them out all night long, actually keeping awake just to watch more and more of them - long after my cousins had fallen asleep (And no, they were'nt airplanes!)

In later years and lately, I must say, I haven't seen many such fly-by dots in the sky at night (but then again I now live above Rome, and the city lights keep me from seeing many stars at all).

If the perps weren't dumping their shit in the skies so much it would be easier to see these shooting stars like you could in the 70's, like we're supposed to. There is very low visibility now because of these damn chemtrails that create an overcast all day & night, even though on some days we're not even supposed to have an overcast at all according to the news.

[Terence.drew]

Sorry lads I still don't get this'
Put 'Madonna' into google images and guess who appears?
Put 'Satellite in the night sky' into google images and guess what doesn't appear?
Put 'Satellite trails in the night sky' and what do you get? Very very little. Spiral star trails over long exposures. The odd and infrequent line through an image.
For a seemingly easily spotted with naked eye phenomenon you would expect a multitude of good quality shots placed on the web, especially because of the mysterious nature of the lights and people wanting answers to their questions.

For a comparison put 'jupiter moons camera lens' into google images. I have taken the same photo myself several times over the last few weeks and there they are...the moons of jupiter which are NOT visible to the naked eye but are capturable with a semi decent camera and zoom lens and then cropped.

One strange phenomenon easily spotted with the naked eye and there are virtually no real looking shots of it? Something not visible with the naked eye and many people go for it?

Is the Yeti in the house?

(I am not saying here that I don't believe what the entire mod team of this forum is saying. I am saying that my experience of this phenomenon is very different and that the image trail of this phenomenon matches my experience and not that of other people.)

[hoi.polloi]

Sorry lads I still don't get this'
Put 'Madonna' into google images and guess who appears?
Put 'Satellite in the night sky' into google images and guess what doesn't appear?
Put 'Satellite trails in the night sky' and what do you get? Very very little. Spiral star trails over long exposures. The odd and infrequent line through an image.
For a seemingly easily spotted with naked eye phenomenon you would expect a multitude of good quality shots placed on the web, especially because of the mysterious nature of the lights and people wanting answers to their questions.

Point taken. That's definitely a clue of ... something, but I don't know what. Looking forward to Simon's study's results.

[Jonathan]

Pull out your own telescope and you'll be able to confirm that there are no satellites. Radio waves run the show with encryption plus triangulation in conjunction for GPS. All such proprietary systems are set up for streams of income.

I do not need a telescope to see those quite fast but steady moving lights.
There are many sound reasons to believe that those are - just as we are told - satellites.
I gave a few...

Just yesterday I observed one particularly bright one traveling from west to east.
A few days earlier I witnessed what probably was a meteorite - a quite distinct appearence to satellites in orbit and a beautiful and special one too, because it was not just bright white, it was orange and it broke in two pieces which then both vaporized. Lasted maybe half a second.

Again you make the general announcement to the non-existence of satellites but do not give one shred of the reasoning behind it.
That way yours is just an odd opinion to me.

Of course proprietary systems are set up to generate income.
It's a non sequitur (does not follow logically) to state that as a reason for a scam.

I work to generate income.
What does that prove?
That I'm not rich at this moment in time?
Not even that.

[Terence.drew]

I do not need a telescope to see those quite fast but steady moving lights.
There are many sound reasons to believe that those are - just as we are told - satellites.
I gave a few...

Just yesterday I observed one particularly bright one traveling from west to east.

Johathan. How can a Satellite be a bright light when it is supposed to be traveling through and in the shadow of the Earth?
What is illuminating it? The sun?

[Maat]

How can a Satellite be a bright light when it is supposed to be traveling through and in the shadow of the Earth?
What is illuminating it? The sun?

Yes Terence, from what I understand, they do reflect the sunlight since they are high enough to catch the rays when we are already in darkness. Depending on the season and your latitude, they are visible as long as the sun is not too far below the horizon, otherwise the satellites are then also in earth's shadow — i.e. they can be seen for a few hours after sunset or before sunrise. In Summer though, if you're latitude is far north or south, the sun isn't too low down and you can see satellites all night long.

When I was a little kid (in 1962 or '63) on a farm in western NSW — where the skies were crystal clear at night — my father showed me a satellite moving across the sky, looking like a little star. I do remember his saying it was Sputnik (not sure which one, there were apparently a few from '57 on), but it was definitely the only "star" moving across the night sky Very vivid memory!

I guess the best way to verify it for yourself is to see which satellites are supposed to be visible from your location at a given time: http://www.heavens-above.com/

[hoi.polloi]

Turns out, like Simon, I also have access to an astronomy club and I will be visiting it shortly to ascertain the strength of the "no satellites" claims.

My guess is that satellites are real and bright, as we've been told, but I am prepared to learn anything.

[Jonathan]

Johathan. How can a Satellite be a bright light when it is supposed to be traveling through and in the shadow of the Earth?
What is illuminating it? The sun?

Maat already said it all.

Satellites are seen by the reflection of sunlight off of them.
Consider their altitude and path - they are in sunlight much longer than we are in daylight down here.
This can also be observed: they are often seen as appearing suddenly already high up above the horizon - that is when they come out of earths shadow (or it is when their reflecting surfaces are at the right angle to mirror sunlight at your location).
They also disappear like that - often not by going below the horizon but by going into shadow or by not reflecting the sun to your location any longer - then they are observable elsewhere.

These things are easily observable and at least one big question would arise which was already stated:
never in the history of astronomy where these things described though they seem to behave so strangely.
Has nobody speculated or even asked what those would be?

If taking into account that these objects did not exist until about 50 years ago you have one very good reason as to why such things where never described...

[lux]

Sorry lads I still don't get this'
Put 'Madonna' into google images and guess who appears?

A number of different individuals all purported to be the same woman?

[chuck22]

There is no explanation for the satcom transmissions I picked up on non-satcom antenna. It is impossible unless the transmissions were coming over standard radio waves utilizing encryption. In fact this is the one and only explanation. GPS utilizes triangulation and encrypted radio waves as well. I pray some day humanity will discard this farce and start teaching real science.

[simonshack]

*

I certainly have extremely limited knowledge in this field - but I do keep wondering why the satellite dishes I see around my area (I don't have one myself) are all oriented a bit like this...



Or like this...


The above pictures are from random locations I found on the web - but the satellite dishes in my area are all similarly, very slightly tilted upwards (as if they were pointing towards only a slightly more elevated point). In fact, their orientation would appear to point towards Monte Cavo - which is a nearby hill known (for decades) to host all sorts of radio/tv antennas :

(Monte Cavo is seen on top right):


I am only posting this for the record - and for possible future reference - as I humbly admit to have very little knowledge of these matters. What strikes me as curious, however, is all those satellite dishes being tilted at a very slight upward angle (approx 10°/15° upwards of the horizontal line - and certainly not up towards the sky...)

[nonhocapito]

The way I understand it, satellite dishes in the upper hemisphere are pointed south, towards the equator, because TV satellites orbit the earth around the equator.

For the little tilting that they might seem to have, if you follow and ideal line from the dish you pretty soon figure out that there are no antennas in the world that could transmit a signal from that high (especially in flat territories like the one where I live). This is why it has been proposed by someone that they pick up a signal bouncing off the stratosphere, and not coming from satellites. Although it seems pretty difficult to imagine that such signal could be so precisely directed like --we can imagine-- robotized satellites can. Imagine a guy making a satellite phone call from his boat in the middle of the pacific, having to rely on a signal that bounces off before reaching its target.

In any case, the closer you get to the equator, theoretically the higher the dishes should be pointing at. This seems like something that should be easy to verify.

[simonshack]

In any case, the closer you get to the equator, theoretically the higher the dishes should be pointing at. This seems like something that should be easy to verify.

Yes Nonho,

If Wickedpedia is anything to go by - the geostationary orbit of a given communication satellite should be something between 35790km and 42168km away from the Earth's surface (please correct me if I have got that wrong) : http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbita_geostazionaria



I therefore find it hard to conceive that two satellite dishes, say, one in Canada and one in Ecuador - should have to be aimed at very much different angles.



That's all for now - I'm off to bed, space can wait!