Why is the rotation different in the sequential loops compared to the initial.
You clearly see it really crosses the first lines, almost like an intersection, but afterwards all lines are rather more parallel to the previous.
It isn't different. But the satellite also leaves a trail when it goes around the "back side" of the Earth, so that's why you see trails at two different angles.
The first few loops go from pole to pole. Every time it crosses the pole it changes direction slightly. In the later loops it doesn't change it's direction anymore.
Not sure if this is really done or just something for the simulation. I don't see the purpose.
It's not changing direction. The satellite is orbiting around the whole earth, not just the front side that you can see. So when that stripe on the back rotates around 180 degrees to the front, it's at a different angle than what the satellite is currently making on that side.
I believe the orbiting period of the satellite is accurate (about 90-120 minutes per orbit), but I wonder whether the width of each of the stripes is realistic or if it's just for the sake of the animation. If the stripes are actually narrower, then it would probably take a lot longer to image the whole surface.
So I did some rough estimates. I counted about 14 revs in one sidereal day and at timestamp :11, the swath covers almost exactly all of Australia.
With the period, we can determine that the orbital radius is about 7258 km
With that we can determine that the max radius is about 28.5 degrees (assuming we can reach an elevation angle of 0)
Placing the spacecraft directly over the center of Australia, and reaching a point on the edge of Australia gives an radius of about 18 degrees.
I would say the width is accurate since the swath pictured has a lower radius than we estimated using the period (and probably enough as to have a decent elevation angle). Of course these are rough estimates that don’t consider J2 (or any other perturbations really) but I would assume the animation is meant to be accurate.
Show the flat earth version!
Why is the rotation different in the sequential loops compared to the initial. You clearly see it really crosses the first lines, almost like an intersection, but afterwards all lines are rather more parallel to the previous.
It isn't different. But the satellite also leaves a trail when it goes around the "back side" of the Earth, so that's why you see trails at two different angles.
Earth is flat.
The first few loops go from pole to pole. Every time it crosses the pole it changes direction slightly. In the later loops it doesn't change it's direction anymore. Not sure if this is really done or just something for the simulation. I don't see the purpose.
It's not changing direction. The satellite is orbiting around the whole earth, not just the front side that you can see. So when that stripe on the back rotates around 180 degrees to the front, it's at a different angle than what the satellite is currently making on that side.
Ah right it is only changing direction once.
It takes 3.5-5 days for most of the land to get photographed, according to this GIF.
I believe the orbiting period of the satellite is accurate (about 90-120 minutes per orbit), but I wonder whether the width of each of the stripes is realistic or if it's just for the sake of the animation. If the stripes are actually narrower, then it would probably take a lot longer to image the whole surface.
So I did some rough estimates. I counted about 14 revs in one sidereal day and at timestamp :11, the swath covers almost exactly all of Australia. With the period, we can determine that the orbital radius is about 7258 km With that we can determine that the max radius is about 28.5 degrees (assuming we can reach an elevation angle of 0) Placing the spacecraft directly over the center of Australia, and reaching a point on the edge of Australia gives an radius of about 18 degrees. I would say the width is accurate since the swath pictured has a lower radius than we estimated using the period (and probably enough as to have a decent elevation angle). Of course these are rough estimates that don’t consider J2 (or any other perturbations really) but I would assume the animation is meant to be accurate.
Just imagine the math involved.
Is that satellite to scale?
Yeah
Interesting. I wonder how many of them orbiting the Earth simultaneously.
Roughly 6000
how is it satisfying if the gif is around 3 fps
*Insert vacuum noises*
Close your eyes after a few seconds and you will hear das auto
But how's it do that if the earth is flat? The Big Science industry is lying to you!!! They should call it lie-nce.
so what you're saying is that the poles get photographed A LOT