Talk:Skylab II

Spaceflight: Space stations Low‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the space stations working group.

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Usefulness at L2?[edit]

As I understand it, at the L2 point, the station would constantly stay above the far side of the Moon (180 deg. longitude), so it would be constantly out of touch with the Earth, unless a network of lunar communications satellites could be figured out. And would such satellites disturb the stability of the Lagrangian point? JustinTime55 (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussing the feasibility of a proposal is probably off-topic for a talk page, but... The L2 point isn't gravitationally stable. A facility "at L2" would actually need to "orbit" around the actual L2 point. Hence should be visible to at least GEO satellites as relays. Try Lissajous orbit and Lagrangian_point#Stability -- 118.210.193.19 (talk) 15:17, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Date it was proposed[edit]

I assume this was first proposed some time in 2013. Shouldn't that be in the introduction? -- 118.210.193.19 (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why not pursued[edit]

What criticism was made of this proposal, or why was it not proceeded with ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:15, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]