Bzzzzz... wrong again.
I work in very remote oilfields where there isn't any cellular service. We have to rely on a service commonly known as SCATALink. It uses a combination of services, including cellular, but relies primary on satellite in the most remote areas of the globe. These systems aid us in operation of controls and general monitoring. And yes, they work in the artic regions of the world (just like GPS) where there isn't any cell towers for thousands of miles!

Man made satellites do not exist.

Navigation is an entirely different question to the one posited in the linked docuмent though. I work on airplane software for a living, and I can tell you for a fact that nav code accounts for the curvature of the earth, as do a wide variety of other airplane systems. But what do I know, I must be a NASA stooge or something.

Show us the code then please. And don't tell me you are worried about copyright, because you know you can edit bits out to ensure you are not giving trade secrets away.

It might make for an interesting and intelligent conversation for once, rather than the insult hurling we have usually.

"Google Has Its Own Fleet of Airplanes to Map the World in 3D"

https://gizmodo.com/5916290/5916290/5916290/google-has-its-own-fleet-of-airplanes-to-map-the-world-in-3d

Show us the code then please. And don't tell me you are worried about copyright, because you know you can edit bits out to ensure you are not giving trade secrets away.

It might make for an interesting and intelligent conversation for once, rather than the insult hurling we have usually.

Or, alternatively, briefly describe the math.

So, for the flat earth proponents, why couldn't satellites work even in a flat earth model?

from NASA's website:

How Do Objects Stay in Orbit?
An object in motion will stay in motion unless something pushes or pulls on it. This statement is called Newton's first law of motion. Without gravity, an Earth-orbiting satellite would go off into space along a straight line. With gravity, it is pulled back toward Earth. A constant tug-of-war takes place between the satellite's tendency to move in a straight line, or momentum, and the tug of gravity pulling the satellite back.

An object's momentum and the force of gravity have to be balanced for an orbit to happen. If the forward momentum of one object is too great, it will speed past and not enter into orbit. If momentum is too small, the object will be pulled down and crash. When these forces are balanced, the object is always falling toward the planet, but because it's moving sideways fast enough, it never hits the planet. Orbital velocity is the speed needed to stay in orbit. At an altitude of 150 miles (242 kilometers) above Earth, orbital velocity is about 17,000 miles per hour. Satellites that have higher orbits have slower orbital velocities.

So what if these satellites were moving around in circles (like the sun and moon do on a flat earth model).  According to this, it's "moving SIDEWAYS" that keeps the object from being pulled down by gravity.  That can happen even if the object is moving around in circles above a flat earth.

So, IMO, based on this, it would seem that the rejection of the existence/possibility of satellites would not be essential to flat earth theory.

Satellites in the sense of floating around in the ionosphere do not exist.

But balloon supported satellites can and do exist. Google maps uses either that or high flying aircraft.

Satellites exist... Satellites don't exist...  which is it?

Let's assume they don't for the moment, could you please demonstrate to us on how ballon supported satellites provide uninterrupted support over every square inch of the globe 24/7/365?

How do these ballon supported satellites provide repeated coordinates, on demand, down to factions of an inch, day after day, year after year, over the entirety of the globe? 

So, for the flat earth proponents, why couldn't satellites work even in a flat earth model?

from NASA's website:
So what if these satellites were moving around in circles (like the sun and moon do on a flat earth model).  According to this, it's "moving SIDEWAYS" that keeps the object from being pulled down by gravity.  That can happen even if the object is moving around in circles above a flat earth.

So, IMO, based on this, it would seem that the rejection of the existence/possibility of satellites would not be essential to flat earth theory.

Yes satellites can work in FE.
Their forward velocity exceeds their weight and so, unless slowed they will not drop back to earth due to their weight. They are NOT "pulled" back to earth by gravity. There is no gravity.