A different kind of SBSP

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "brooksn" wrote:
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "hitssquad" wrote:
> > --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "brooksn" wrote:
> > > We're at 3 times the altitude of the ISS
> > ...Which has a greater sectional density and, despite that, still needs to be boosted periodically.
> The ISS is at 420 km on average, with an atmospheric density around 2.75 E-12, while at 1000 km the atmospheric density is 5.46 E-15, so I believe that's about 1,000 times less atmosphere.

The sectional densities of these sail mirrors might be on the order of one millionth that of the ISS. That would leave you with about 1,000 times as much drag per mass.

> you will be traveling faster at the higher altitude

No. The opposite is the case. See the link I posted for you which shows orbital speeds at various altitudes:
http://www.freemars.org/jeff/speed/

> > > the thin material used is similar to that used by a japanese solar sail spacecraft.
> > Perhaps it would be better not to be in orbit at all, and simply sail at stationary latitudes.
> not in orbit so in the air from an airplane or balloon?

...No, solar sailing at or above the altitude of the ISS, stationary with respect to the Sun-Earth system.

> > The wind would still blow the sails sunward at the 6AM side of the planet, and cosmosward at the 6PM side of the planet.
> Why would the wing blow it sunward and cosmosward at those times?

...Because the earth spins (and its atmosphere with it), and does so counterclockwise from the perspective of a viewer from above the north pole, and because the sail mirrors wouldn't be moving with respect to the sun and the earth. Standing on the surface of the earth, you are traveling strait toward the sun at 6AM, and directly away from the sun at 6PM.