# Orbital generated inertia, does it exist?

When satellites in orbit take a sharper turn is the inertial effect greater?

So objects can control their satellites orbital distance with spin, interesting...
You might want to look in to the time duration. If it takes, say, 100,000 years that might exceed practical limits.

So objects can control their satellites orbital distance with spin, interesting...

Does orbital inertia have anything to do with orbital precession?

I'd put it more in terms of the satellite's orbit with respect to the planet determines how tidal interaction effects the both of them. A satellite can only climb to a higher orbit at the expense of the Planet's rotation, and lose altitude by giving rotation to the planet. The degree of this interaction also depends on other factors. It relies on the ability of the satellite to raise tidal bulges on the planet and also the drag between planet and tidal bulge. If the planet were perfectly rigid, you would get no tidal bulge, and thus no perturbing of the satellite orbit. With the Earth, the drag between the ocean tidal bulges and the land play a role in determining the magnitude of the effect. This, in turn, is effected by the arrangement of the continents. During those periods when they were merged into a single super-continent, this drag was lower and the effect smaller than it is now with the present continental arrangement.

Orbital precession is caused by some perturbing effect that applies a torque to the plane of the orbit. With the Moon, it is caused by the fact that the Moon's orbit does not align with the ecliptic. The gravitational pull on the Moon by the Sun tries to alter this, but because of the angular momentum of the orbit causes both the plane and line of apsides for the Moon to rotate (precession). For satellites nearer the Earth, another factor comes into play. The Earth is not a perfect sphere but is an oblate spheroid. As a result any nearby satellite that doesn't orbit in the plane of the equator experiences a perturbing effect that causes its orbit to precess. (The oblateness of the Earth also has some effect on the Moon, but because the large orbital radius, it is much much smaller than that caused by the Sun.)

When satellites in orbit take a sharper turn is the inertial effect greater?
According to Newton's Universal Gravitation and Einstein's General Relativity, being in free fall is to first order like being in space free from gravitational influence, so the law of inertia holds to first order when Cartesian coordinates are established about a particular orbital trajectory as the standard of motionlessness.

So being in orbit doesn't change the law of inertia and different types of orbits are all the same with respect to inertia. In GR, all orbits are time-like geodesics which is what replaces straight-line constant-velocity trajectories when you switch from Special Relativity to General Relativity.

According to Newton's Universal Gravitation and Einstein's General Relativity, being in free fall is to first order like being in space free from gravitational influence, so the law of inertia holds to first order when Cartesian coordinates are established about a particular orbital trajectory as the standard of motionlessness.

So being in orbit doesn't change the law of inertia and different types of orbits are all the same with respect to inertia. In GR, all orbits are time-like geodesics which is what replaces straight-line constant-velocity trajectories when you switch from Special Relativity to General Relativity.
. . . . obviously! . . . .

. . . . obviously! . . . .
Sure wasn't obvious to me. That's why I read rpenner's posts with great care.

BdS