New answers tagged delta-v
2
What you are seeing here is the result of the inefficiencies in the orbital transfer strategy employed, in the transition region between direct transfers and bi-elliptic transfers.
When transferring between two circular orbits with some inclination, eventually the "degenerate" bi-elliptic transfer (with infinite apoapsis) will become optimal, ...
answered Jan 12 at 21:21
SE - stop firing the good guys
35k2 gold badges108 silver badges203 bronze badges
10
(mostly recycled from What are the benefits of supersynchronous transfer orbits?)
Excuse the wall of plots but I really do think they describe it better than my words ever could :)
The total $\Delta V$ costs for the standard (Hohmann like) method (inclined 250 km parking orbit to geostationary orbit) are:
While the total $\Delta V$ costs for the ...
20
This is a partially copied answer from this closely-related question:
The other answerer focuses on the straight-up dV savings which occur when you're launching from a very inclined launched site. I'm going to focus on a second reason you might want to do a supersynchronous (new-to-me term) transfer, but first, let me detail how a traditional GTO is used ...
8
As the comments discuss, inclination is the missing variable in the equation.
The standard geostationary launch that you are thinking of looks something like this:
geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) injection burn:
perigee @ parking orbit height (e.g. 250 km)
apogee @ geosynchronous height (35786 km)
inclination is ~launch site latitude (i.e., ~28.5° for ...
Top 50 recent answers are included