# Gateway Globe Lesson Plan: Understanding Orbits

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Recommended publications
• NTI Day 9 Astronomy Michael Feeback Go To: Teachastronomy
NTI Day 9 Astronomy Michael Feeback Go to: teachastronomy.com textbook (chapter layout) Chapter 3 The Copernican Revolution Orbits Read the article and answer the following questions. Orbits You can use Newton's laws to calculate the speed that an object must reach to go into a circular orbit around a planet. The answer depends only on the mass of the planet and the distance from the planet to the desired orbit. The more massive the planet, the faster the speed. The higher above the surface, the lower the speed. For Earth, at a height just above the atmosphere, the answer is 7.8 kilometers per second, or 17,500 mph, which is why it takes a big rocket to launch a satellite! This speed is the minimum needed to keep an object in space near Earth, and is called the circular velocity. An object with a lower velocity will fall back to the surface under Earth's gravity. The same idea applies to any object in orbit around a larger object. The circular velocity of the Moon around the Earth is 1 kilometer per second. The Earth orbits the Sun at an average circular velocity of 30 kilometers per second (the Earth's orbit is an ellipse, not a circle, but it's close enough to circular that this is a good approximation). At further distances from the Sun, planets have lower orbital velocities. Pluto only has an average circular velocity of about 5 kilometers per second. To launch a satellite, all you have to do is raise it above the Earth's atmosphere with a rocket and then accelerate it until it reaches a speed of 7.8 kilometers per second.
[Show full text]
• Up, Up, and Away by James J
www.astrosociety.org/uitc No. 34 - Spring 1996 © 1996, Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 390 Ashton Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94112. Up, Up, and Away by James J. Secosky, Bloomfield Central School and George Musser, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Want to take a tour of space? Then just flip around the channels on cable TV. Weather Channel forecasts, CNN newscasts, ESPN sportscasts: They all depend on satellites in Earth orbit. Or call your friends on Mauritius, Madagascar, or Maui: A satellite will relay your voice. Worried about the ozone hole over Antarctica or mass graves in Bosnia? Orbital outposts are keeping watch. The challenge these days is finding something that doesn't involve satellites in one way or other. And satellites are just one perk of the Space Age. Farther afield, robotic space probes have examined all the planets except Pluto, leading to a revolution in the Earth sciences -- from studies of plate tectonics to models of global warming -- now that scientists can compare our world to its planetary siblings. Over 300 people from 26 countries have gone into space, including the 24 astronauts who went on or near the Moon. Who knows how many will go in the next hundred years? In short, space travel has become a part of our lives. But what goes on behind the scenes? It turns out that satellites and spaceships depend on some of the most basic concepts of physics. So space travel isn't just fun to think about; it is a firm grounding in many of the principles that govern our world and our universe.
[Show full text]
• Multisatellite Determination of the Relativistic Electron Phase Space Density at Geosynchronous Orbit: Methodology and Results During Geomagnetically Quiet Times Y
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 110, A10210, doi:10.1029/2004JA010895, 2005 Multisatellite determination of the relativistic electron phase space density at geosynchronous orbit: Methodology and results during geomagnetically quiet times Y. Chen, R. H. W. Friedel, and G. D. Reeves Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA T. G. Onsager NOAA, Boulder, Colorado, USA M. F. Thomsen Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA Received 10 November 2004; revised 20 May 2005; accepted 8 July 2005; published 20 October 2005. [1] We develop and test a methodology to determine the relativistic electron phase space density distribution in the vicinity of geostationary orbit by making use of the pitch-angle resolved energetic electron data from three Los Alamos National Laboratory geosynchronous Synchronous Orbit Particle Analyzer instruments and magnetic field measurements from two GOES satellites. Owing to the Earth’s dipole tilt and drift shell splitting for different pitch angles, each satellite samples a different range of Roederer L* throughout its orbit. We use existing empirical magnetic field models and the measured pitch-angle resolved electron spectra to determine the phase space density as a function of the three adiabatic invariants at each spacecraft. Comparing all satellite measurements provides a determination of the global phase space density gradient over the range L* 6–7. We investigate the sensitivity of this method to the choice of the magnetic field model and the fidelity of the instrument intercalibration in order to both understand and mitigate possible error sources. Results for magnetically quiet periods show that the radial slopes of the density distribution at low energy are positive, while at high energy the slopes are negative, which confirms the results from some earlier studies of this type.
[Show full text]
• Geosynchronous Orbit Determination Using Space Surveillance Network Observations and Improved Radiative Force Modeling
[Show full text]
• Analysis of Space Elevator Technology
Analysis of Space Elevator Technology SPRING 2014, ASEN 5053 FINAL PROJECT TYSON SPARKS Contents Figures .......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Tables ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Analysis of Space Elevator Technology ........................................................................................................................ 2 Nomenclature ................................................................................................................................................................ 2 I. Introduction and Theory ....................................................................................................................................... 2 A. Modern Elevator Concept ................................................................................................................................. 2 B. Climber Concept ............................................................................................................................................... 3 C. Base Station Concept ........................................................................................................................................ 4 D. Space Elevator Astrodynamics ........................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
• Geosynchronous Satellite GF-4 Observations of Chlorophyll-A Distribution Details in the Bohai Sea, China
sensors Article Geosynchronous Satellite GF-4 Observations of Chlorophyll-a Distribution Details in the Bohai Sea, China Lina Cai 1, Juan Bu 1, Danling Tang 2,*, Minrui Zhou 1, Ru Yao 1 and Shuyi Huang 1 1 Marine Science and Technology College, Zhejiang Ocean University, Zhoushan 316004, China; [email protected] (L.C.); [email protected] (J.B.); [email protected] (M.Z.); [email protected] (R.Y.); [email protected] (S.H.) 2 Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory Guangdong Key Laboratory of Ocean Remote Sensing (LORS), South China Sea Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510301, China * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 5 August 2020; Accepted: 21 September 2020; Published: 24 September 2020 Abstract: We analyzed the distribution of chlorophyll-a (Chla) in the Bohai Sea area based on data from the geosynchronous orbit optical satellite Gaofen-4 (GF-4), which was launched in 2015, carrying a panchromatic multispectral sensor (PMS). This is the ﬁrst time the geosynchronous orbit optical satellite GF-4 remote-sensing data has been used in China to detect the Chla change details in the Bohai Sea. A new GF-4 retrieved model was established based on the relationship between in situ Chla value and the reﬂectance combination of 2 and 4 bands, with the R2 of 0.9685 and the total average relative error of 37.42%. Twenty PMS images obtained from 2017 to 2019 were applied to analyze Chla in Bohai sea. The results show that: (1) the new built Chla inversion model PMS-1 for the GF-4 PMS sensor can extract Chla distribution details in the Bohai Sea well.
[Show full text]
• Challenges for a South Texas Spaceport
[Show full text]
• Geosynchronous Patrol Orbit for Space Situational Awareness
Geosynchronous patrol orbit for space situational awareness Blair Thompson, Thomas Kelecy, Thomas Kubancik Applied Defense Solutions Tim Flora, Michael Chylla, Debra Rose Sierra Nevada Corporation ABSTRACT Applying eccentricity to a geosynchronous orbit produces both longitudinal and radial motion when viewed in Earth-ﬁxed coordinates. An interesting family of orbits emerges, useful for “neighborhood patrol” space situational awareness and other missions. The basic result is a periodic (daily), quasi- elliptical, closed path around a ﬁxed region of the geosynchronous (geo) orbit belt, keeping a sensor spacecraft in relatively close vicinity to designated geo objects. The motion is similar, in some regards, to the relative motion that may be encountered during spacecraft proximity operations, but on a much larger scale. The patrol orbit does not occupy a ﬁxed slot in the geo belt, and the east-west motion can be combined with north-south motion caused by orbital inclination, leading to even greater versatility. Some practical uses of the geo patrol orbit include space surveillance (including catalog maintenance), and general space situational awareness. The patrol orbit offers improved, diverse observation geom- etry for angles-only sensors, resulting in faster, more accurate orbit determination compared to simple inclined geo orbits. In this paper, we analyze the requirements for putting a spacecraft in a patrol orbit, the unique station keeping requirements to compensate for perturbations, repositioning the patrol orbit to a different location along the geo belt, maneuvering into, around, and out of the volume for proximity operations with objects within the volume, and safe end-of-life disposal requirements. 1. INTRODUCTION The traditional geosynchronous (“geosynch” or “geo”) orbit is designed to keep a spacecraft in a nearly ﬁxed position (longitude, latitude, and altitude) with respect to the rotating Earth.
[Show full text]
• Regulating the Void: In-Orbit Collisions and Space Debris
REGULATING THE VOID: IN-ORBIT COLLISIONS AND SPACE DEBRIS Timothy G. Nelson* Space flight has been a reality for barely fifty years, and yet there have already been several notable incidents involving de-or- biting spacecraft. In 1978, the Soviet satellite Kosmos 954 crashed in northern Canada, scattering nuclear material across parts of the Arctic and requiring an extensive cleanup operation.1 In 1979, the U.S. space station Skylab satellite landed in rural Western Aus- tralia, without causing significant damage.2 Many collisions occur within space itself. A recent example was the January 2009 collision, in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) above Siberia, of the “defunct” Russian satellite Kosmos 2251 with Irid- ium 33, a privately-owned U.S. satellite.3 The crash occurred at a relative velocity of 10 km/second, destroyed both satellites, and re- portedly created a very large field of new debris.4 As discussed be- low, there remains significant scope for debate over who if, anyone, is liable for in-orbit collisions from “space debris.” * B.A. L.L.B. (UNSW 1990), B.C.L. (Oxon. 1997). Mr. Nelson is a Partner in the International Litigation and Arbitration practice group of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and are not those of his firm or the firm's clients. This paper reflects comments delivered at the ABILA/ASIL International Law Weekend on October 27, 2012. The author thanks his fellow panelists Henry Hertzfeld and Amber Charlesworth for their comments and insights during that session. 1 See Alexander F.
[Show full text]
• Two More Satellite Breakups Detected Joseph P. Loftus Retires from NASA
A publication of The Orbital Debris Program Office NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 July 2001 Volume 6, Issue 3. NEWS Two More Satellite Breakups Detected P. Anz-Meador events. Assessed cause of the Cosmos 1701 type orbit. This lessens the spatial density in The third fragmentation event of the year fragmentation was aerodynamic loading due to low Earth orbit because of the large eccentricity 2001 occurred on or about 29 April with the the low perigee of the vehicle, rather than the and low perigee of the vehicle’s orbit. fragmentation of the Russian Cosmos 1701 deliberate destruction of the vehicle by an on- The second breakup event of the quarter spacecraft. The NASA Johnson Space Center’s board explosive system. took place about 16 June and involved a Orbital Debris Program Office was notified by Cosmos 1701 was an Oko-class vehicle. Russian Proton K Block DM ullage motor, the US Space Command’s (USSPACECOM) These vehicles perform missile launch early International Designator 1991-025G, Satellite Space Defense Operations Center (SPADOC) warning duties in orbits very similar to the Number 21226. The SSN detected as many as of the assessed fragmentation on 1 May 2001. Russian Molniya communications payloads. 100 debris in orbits similar to that of the parent Ten (10) large debris were tracked by the The three-axis stabilized vehicle is cylindrical object, which was 300 km by 18,960 km with USSPACECOM Space Surveillance Network in shape with two solar array panels and an an inclination of 64.5 degrees. (SSN) as of that date; as of 30 May 2001, no erectable sun shade for the primary on-board This was the 24th event of this type debris objects had entered the Space Control sensor system.
[Show full text]
• Launch Activity and Orbital Debris Mitigation
Second Quarter 2002 Quarterly Launch Report 1 Introduction The Second Quarter 2002 Quarterly Launch Report features launch results from the first quarter of 2002 (January-March 2002) and launch forecasts for the second quarter of 2002 (April-June 2002) and the third quarter of 2002 (July-September 2002). This report contains information on worldwide commercial, civil, and military orbital space launch events. Projected launches have been identified from open sources, including industry ref- erences, company manifests, periodicals, and government sources. Projected launches are subject to change. This report highlights commercial launch activities, classifying commercial launches as one or more of the following: • Internationally-competed launch events (i.e., launch opportunities considered available in principle to competitors in the international launch services market) • Any launches licensed by the Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation of the Federal Aviation Administration under U.S. Code Title 49, Section 701, Subsection 9 (previously known as the Commercial Space Launch Act) Contents First Quarter 2002 Highlights . .2 Vehicle Use . .3 Total Launch Events by Country . .4 Commercial Launch Events by Country . .4 Commercial vs. Non-commercial Launch Events . .5 First Quarter 2002 Launch Successes vs. Failures . .5 Payload Use . .6 Payload Mass Class . .6 Commercial Launch Trends . .7 Quarterly Report Topic: Launch Activity and Orbital Debris Mitigation . .8 Appendix A: First Quarter 2002 Orbital Launch Events . .A-1 Appendix B: Second Quarter 2002 Projected Orbital Launch Events . .B-1 Appendix C: Third Quarter 2002 Projected Orbital Launch Events . .C-1 Cover: Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., Feb. 21, 2002 - An Atlas 3B launch vehicle successfully delivers its EchoStar 7 payload into orbit for EchoStar Communications Corporation.
[Show full text]
• Florida Spaceport System Plan 2018
Florida Spaceport System Plan 2018 Florida Spaceport System Plan 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ....................................................................................................................................................................................................5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................................................................................7 1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................................................................11 1.1 Spaceport History .............................................................................................................................................................12 1.2 A Statewide Authority for the Nation’s First Spaceport System ................................................................................................................................................. 13 1.3 Emerging Space Transportation Trends Affecting the Statewide System and Spaceport Types ..14 1.4 Today’s Competition on a National and Worldwide Level ........................................................................................................................................................ 16 1.5 Competing States Spaceports and Spaceport Systems ................................................................................ 18 1.6 System Components ......................................................................................................................................................
[Show full text]