Initially I did not understand your question, but the interpretation of your question by WillO makes sense, so I will go with the same interpretation.
while you do not state so, it appears what you have in mind is the case of orbital motion at constant altitude. I will discuss that case.
In your description you added a starting point in time, an instanteous launch, horizontally, at orbital level. However, such elaborate history obscures the point you are trying to make. It is not necessary to describe how the orbital motion started. It is sufficient to state that it is a case of orbital motion.
So, we have a celestial body, with two satellites in orbit, counter-orbiting. That is, the two satellites are in the same orbital plane, very close in orbital altitude. The two satellites pass each other twice every orbit. We can designate one such pass as $t = 0$
This case does not change when each orbit is filled with many satellites. I increase the number of satellites to help with a comparison that will come later.
The two fleets of satellites can set up a procedure using only the exact moment of passing each other to iterate to a synchronized fleet time that is common to all the satellites.
Let me use an arbitrary number of satellites in each orbit, let's say 12 in each orbit. Let the clocks initially be unsynchronized. Each time two satellites pass each other by they transmit the time readout of their own clock to the other satellite. On reception each satellite adjusts its own time towards the middle of the two readouts. Iterated over multiple orbits that procedure will bring all the clocks of that fleet to a synchronized fleet time. That is, at every passing the time readout received will be the same as the time on their own clock.
The above case is one where the motion is arranged in a loop. In special relativity, when you close a loop things get very interesting.
It's time now to contrast the above case - motion along a loop - with the case where the motion is linear.
Let there be two fleets of spaceships, I will arbitrarily call them the 'red fleet' and the 'green fleet'. Each fleet is arranged in a single line. The two fleets pass by each other, like trains moving in opposite direction over parallel tracks.
In this case, the linear motion case, there are far less means available to arrive at a synchonized fleet time. The ships of the red fleet can use pulses of light to establish a synchronized fleet time for the ships of the red fleet (using Einstein synchronization procedure ), and similarly the ships of the green fleet can established a synchronized fleet time.
However, the synchronized red fleet time will not have the same simultaneity as the synchronized green fleet time. That is: in the case of linear motion there is no escape from relativity of simultaneity.
That raises the question: how does the escape from relativity of simultaneity come about in the case of closing-a-loop?
To see that we look at what we need to remove to prevent the escape from relativity of simultaneity.
Consider a fleet of satellites, all in the same orbital plane, at the same orbital altitude. Let these satellites arrive at a synchonized fleet time (using pulses of light), but disallow them from closing the loop. Let's say there are 12 satellites, numbered 1 to 12. Each satellite exchanges pulses with its orbital neighbour only. Satellite 12 and satellite 1 are neighbours, but now we disallow sending or receiving between 12 and 1. Without closing the loop the procedure is once again the same as Einstein synchronization procedure.
This is a profound difference between Newtonian space and time on one hand and Minkowski spacetime on the other hand. In Newtonian space and time: being able to close a loop makes no difference. But in Minkowski spacetime it does make a difference.