When determining a satellites performance, what characteristics do you solve for?
971285
For a small satellite we normally consider the following parameters:\nattitude determination and control \npropulsion \nelectrical power supply \ntelemetry, tracking, and command \ncommand and data handling \nstructure, adapter \nthermal control \n added to all this is cost of satellite and cost of launching. Usually such a small satellite stay in orbit between 6 and 18 months.
723587
It depends on many factors, like the ambient temperature, is there wind or not, altitude, material of sphere and its temperature and many other factors
418258
Satellite navigation was delevoped to recover Spy Satellites and the spacecraft in the early space race. The Mercury, Genini and Apallo spacecraft landed in the ocean when they returned to earth.\n\nThe splashdown area of the spacecraft would be calculated and in most cases be fairly accurate. Once in a while it would miss and take too long for the Navy to get to them and recover the craft and astronauts. Since it was Navy Ships that did the recovery they had it first and used it to improve naval navigation.\n\nThe Army saw the value of it to pinpoint unit locations in the field. This would prevent "Friendly Fire" attacks from Artillery and Aircraft. The Army requirements for accurate locations is the reason the current GPS system exists today. For many years it was off limits to the civilian world. In the early 90's the Army declassified and released the "Old GPS Technology" to the civilian world. Now its almost impossible to get lost.
256533
I found a great article that should help you think through your proposal - it is "Measuring the Value of a Satellite Office" http://www.oandp.com/edge/issues/articles/2002-05_07.asp
519543
Call your satellite provider they can tell you.
98059
The short answer is: No one really knows, since the details are classified. Also, the current satellite performance is probably not as good as what it CAN be. \n\nI think that comparing what astronomers are able to do with what the best satellites are able to do can be a bit misleading. \n\n1. The space telescope does not have to look through the air, with the water vapor and turbulence and dust. The space telescope has only the very outer reaches of the atmosphere to look through. \n\n2. The space telescope and ground-based astronomers do not have at their disposal anywhere near the resources that governmental organizations do. For example, the space telescope was not even calibrated, because there was so little money! It was only because of heroic efforts and a few minor miracles that the space telescope was brought into focus. The space telescope is basically a toy, and has barely been able to get funded for the last few years, and might be soon decommissioned. \n\n3. Astronomers just do not have the interest, the background, the training, the knowledge, or the resources to command the type of bleeding-edge technology that governments do. Astronomers for the most part are mired in phenomenology, and do not worry much about the details of pedestrian things like optics. Optics is, in general, disparaged by astronomers and left to the "engineers" and other lesser beings like mathematicians, physicists, statisticians, computer scientists, etc. Basically, astronomers hurt themselves with their attitudes and their culture. \n\n4. No responsible government is going to announce what they are capable of seeing with their satellites. All of this material is very closely held at best, and most likely highly classified. \n\n5. It is well known (or at least often reported in the newspapers, so it might not be correct) that spy satellites are so big and so heavy because they bring a large reserve of fuel with them so that they can be lowered and raised as needed to see various features and details. Apparently, they do not always orbit at the same altitude. \n\n6. It is quite possible to combine imagery from platforms such as multiple satellites, planes, high altitude balloons, etc. to improve resolution considerably. It is hard to know the extent to which this is done, or if it is done, because of course the area is shrouded in secrecy, so we do not know. But the question was, how detailed CAN it be? Well you COULD use multiple sensors on multiple platforms, unlike the Hubble telescope (in fact, multiple sensors on the ground are able to beat Hubble now). \n \n7. As a gross upper bound on resolution limits, look at the mutually agreed upon limits on size of warheads etc by the Russians/FSU/USSR and the USA, for example (typically, the silo doors would reportedly be opened to permit treaty inspections, according to newspaper accounts anyway). These specifications in the treaties imply MUCH higher resolution than the some of the numbers given here by others. And remember, these are the mutually agreed-upon resolutions by two very suspicious adversaries, who do not want to give anything away. Both have to be able to achieve these resolutions, and probably are capable of far better resolution. \n\n8. Having looked at Dawe's limit, and knowing a bit about resolution, I can tell you that it is not particularly useful as an indicator of achievable resolution. How close we are able to come to ultimate resolutions depends on how many resources we are willing to spend, and again since it is classified, it is difficult to know.\n\nTherefore, to answer the question how detailed can satellite imagery be? The answer is, VERY. How detailed is it? We do not know, since it is classified.
550313
Communications satellites allow telephone and data conversations to be relayed through the satellite. Typical communications satellites include Telstar and Intelsat. The most important feature of a communications satellite is the transponder -- a radio that receives a conversation at one frequency and then amplifies it and retransmits it back to Earth on another frequency. A satellite normally contains hundreds or thousands of transponders. Communications satellites are usually geosynchronous.
269567
Try the site below for information and the second link for a catalog of current orbits.  It's pretty technical but it should be fun deciphering.
946504
Intensity varies as the square of the distance.\nThat should help
401262
The answer to that depends on your application, you need to decide whether you want hardness, ductility, hardness, hardenability, or any of a number of other characteristics
737399
We know that the satellite swings from 10° to 58.5° in 20'.\nWhich means 48.5° swing around the 34.25 Lat. in half period of the oscillation of a sinusoidal wave or 180°. \nIn 360° it returns to the 10° Lat.\nJust apply the formula of a sinusoidal movement. \nThe radius R is half the swing, i.e. 24.25° and the period T of a full oscillation is 40'. (I.e. 360° in 40'). The speed is 360/40=9°/min.\nRemember that an oscillation can be represented by the projection of a rotating point, i.e. a sinusoid.\nThe frequency is f=1/T = 0.025 oscillations/minute. \nThe latitude is given by the projection on the Y axis of such rotating point, i.e. y=R*Sin Alpha, being Alpha the angle of the radius with the coordinate x at a given time. The value of +- y is a function of time and the rotational speed.\nDon't forget to add the first partial oscillation from 23° to 58.5° = 35.5° which occurs in 35.5/9 = 3.944 min\n\nPlease don't take this calculations for good without checking. It is a long time I don't deal with such problems. I hope I have helped understanding the approach.
220277
A is correct, if you ignore "manmade satellites"\nB,C,D are wrong as said by carbon based
636683
i think the 2 characteristics of a vector are-\n\nit has a definite direction and it follows the vector addition. i hope thats correct!!
135532
You can either look it up or determine it experimentally.\nI cant get much more specific without additional details.
544691
Satellite will be better
36637
By giving them enough speed, depending on the altitude of orbit (the heightof elevation of an object above sea level). The higher the altitude of orbit, the higher amount of speed needed.\n\nIf satellite loses orbital speed, especially if the orbit is low, gravity steps in and the spacecraft soon plunges to Earth.
775439
Satellites are generally boosted into orbit using rockets (although several have been deployed from the payload bay of the space shuttle).  Satellites have any number of functions.  Some relay telephone and data traffic from one place on earth to another.  Others do the same for TV signals.  Others (working together) form the backbone of the Global Positioning Satellite system (GPS).  Still others take pictures of the earth for various purposes.\n\nHope that helps.