Skip to main content
21 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 28, 2019 at 0:36 comment added Ashutosh @GabrielC.Although I believe you are right about the cost, I believe in the near future a stationary orbit over the poles is certainly possible. See physics.stackexchange.com/a/71585/198125 for the explanation.
Jan 25, 2019 at 19:31 comment added Gabriel @Ashutosh Geostationary orbit is physically impossible anywhere else than over a point directly above the equator. For a satellite to never move relatively to a pole, it would need to be immobile, which is unfeasible. There's a difference between geostationary and geosynchronous. Polar orbits are possible though, many earth imaging satellites follow polar orbits. There are no GNSS satellites on these orbits, but the particulars of this choice are unknown to me except in assumptions that it is not cost effective as almost no one ever needs it at the poles.
Jan 25, 2019 at 19:18 comment added Ashutosh @GabrielC. Since we don't yet have a geostationary orbit over the poles,this explanation makes more sense!
Jan 24, 2019 at 19:07 comment added Gabriel @Ashutosh, Jasper's comments make no sense. Multilateration can work in any terrain and the usual errors are due to poor line of sight to satellites, multipath signal reflections, and poor satellite distribution at time of measurement. The problem with GNSS near the poles is that satellite orbits are between 55-65° inclination, which means satellites will always be low on the horizon. No satellite will ever pass directly above a pole. Positions are a bit lower accuracy than at lower latitudes because of this.
Jan 21, 2019 at 9:51 comment added Stian For the north pole, look at the angle of Polaris. (should be 90°). You might want to have a sextant with a spirit level. For polar conditions, don't buy one with water containing liquid as spirit level.
Jan 16, 2019 at 0:32 comment added Charlie Brumbaugh Related question outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/21467/…
Jan 15, 2019 at 21:28 comment added Jasper @Ashutosh -- A quick search for nad-84 geoid errors gravity anomaly gives ngs.noaa.gov/GEOID/PRESENTATIONS/2007_02_24_CCPS/… . Note that the angular (slope) difference between the ellipsoidal reference geoid and the "actual" mean-sea-level geoid is a latitude or longitude error. A difference of a minute of arc in this slope corresponds to a difference of about a mile.
Jan 15, 2019 at 19:21 comment added Jon Custer @DavidRicherby - I thought you just looked for where all those latitude lines come together...
Jan 15, 2019 at 19:19 comment added Ashutosh I thought that the only reason for wrong readings is when GPS is not able to get signals from three satellites which it needs to triangulate. @Jasper any reference for this fact?
S Jan 15, 2019 at 8:08 history suggested CommunityBot CC BY-SA 4.0
typos, language
Jan 15, 2019 at 6:10 review Suggested edits
S Jan 15, 2019 at 8:08
Jan 14, 2019 at 22:43 comment added Jasper GPS only tells you your location with respect to a reference geoid, which is just an approximation of the shape of the earth. GPS locations can be up to a mile off in very mountainous areas.
Jan 14, 2019 at 9:00 history tweeted twitter.com/StackOutdoors/status/1084737035812945920
Jan 14, 2019 at 8:45 comment added dotancohen Same question on Astronomy.SE: How would I measure that I'm at a pole?
Jan 13, 2019 at 19:40 vote accept Benedikt Bauer
Jan 13, 2019 at 11:52 answer added jpa timeline score: 51
Jan 13, 2019 at 6:15 answer added Bruce timeline score: 7
Jan 13, 2019 at 0:29 comment added James Jenkins Related How much distance is there between True North and Magnetic North Poles? & When is the best time of year to find the North Pole? & Calculate true north with a compass and map
Jan 12, 2019 at 20:03 history edited Charlie Brumbaugh CC BY-SA 4.0
added 5 characters in body; edited tags
Jan 12, 2019 at 20:01 answer added Charlie Brumbaugh timeline score: 51
Jan 12, 2019 at 19:37 history asked Benedikt Bauer CC BY-SA 4.0