A few reasons: 1. There are a finite number of orbital slots at Geostationary. That is essentially like water front property. 2. The satellite's footprint is less than half the Earth, all the time; the same half of the Earth all the time. 3. Those at northern latitudes will always have low elevation angles. 4. A lot of propellant (spacecraft weight) is needed to boost from a transfer to a GEO orbit. 5. A significant amount of additional propellant would also need to be allocated for station-keeping maneuvers to maintain that fixed antenna pointing direction. 6. Because of the fixed footprint, there is less variety of stations available to communicate with (a corollary to #1).
All factors considered, the number of operators willing to contribute is severely diminished versus that of a satellite in a molyniya type orbit. These fewer contributors would need to pay for a project that is far more expensive than a Phase 3 program. The bottom line: the benefit of the fixed antenna is outweighed by the negative factors, first and foremost being cost.
I hope this helps.
73, Ken Ernandes N2WWD
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 10, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "ka9qjg" ka9qjg@wowway.com wrote:
Hello Hope Everyone is doing Well, I know people say no such thing as a dumb question So here goes What is the reason We do not have any Type of geostationary Satellites. Is it because they are for World Wide Use and If stationary one could Hit it 24/7 and Maybe park there butt on it and Run a Beam and Amp and take it over
Thanks
73 De Don KA9QJG
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb