Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T01:32:33.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relative Merits of Low-Earth, Eccentric, Geosynchronous, and Interplanetary Orbits and Sites in Space

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

B.G. Taylor
B.G. Taylor*
Affiliation:
Space Science Department, ESTEC, European Space Agency, P.O. Box 299, 2200 AG Noordwijk, The Netherlands

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

One criterium for the best orbit (or site) for an observatory has to be “that which is both scientifically and cost-effective”. Perhaps the worst orbits are those offered by “infrastructures”, which were not designed with astronomy as their primary driver, yet have to be used “because they are there”. The ESA astronomy programme currently tends to favour highly eccentric or geostationary orbits (e.g. COS-B, IUE, EXOSAT, HIPPARCOS, ISO), as these appear to satisfy the above criterium. However, depending on the scientific mission to be accomplished and the availability of funds, other orbits are not ruled out priori.

Type
IV. Relative Merits of Various Observatories
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 123: Observatories in Earth Orbit and Beyond , 1990 , pp. 377 - 379
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1990