DOCSLIB.ORG

A New Collision in Space? a 30-Year-Old Spacecraft Was Apparently 539 (1972-102A, U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A New Collision in Space? a 30-Year-Old Spacecraft Was Apparently 539 (1972-102A, U.S A publication of The Orbital Debris Program Office NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 July 2002 Volume 7, Issue 3. NEWS A New Collision in Space? A 30-year-old spacecraft was apparently 539 (1972-102A, U.S. Satellite Number 6319) radiation environment of outer space and to struck in April by a small piece of orbital debris and calculated that the fragment was ejected sub-millimeter particle impacts. or a meteoroid. The event, which occurred at from the spacecraft on 21 April at a relative Also immediately obvious was the high an altitude of approximately 1370 km, was velocity of 19 m/s. The newly created debris susceptibility of the fragment to solar radiation sufficient to alter the orbit of the spacecraft and was cataloged as U.S. Satellite Number 27423 pressure, demonstrated by rapid and dramatic to produce a new piece of debris which was on 6 May. changes in its orbit. From an initial orbit of large enough to be tracked by several sensors in The magnitude of the ejection velocity was about 1365 km by 1445 km with an inclination the U.S. Space Surveillance Network (SSN). far greater than is customary for what are of 74 degrees, the fragment’s perigee began to Radar returns suggest the fragment diameter known as anomalous events, i.e., infrequent decrease while its apogee increased. Within was between 20 and 50 centimeters. piece separations from older spacecraft and four weeks the orbit had been perturbed into Analysts of Air Force Space Command’s upper stages of launch vehicles. The causes of one of 750 km by 1895 km. At this point, 1st Space Control Squadron in Cheyenne these debris-producing events are thought to be atmospheric drag became the dominant factor, Mountain near Colorado Springs, Colorado, related to the degradation of satellite surface causing the object to reenter the atmosphere a noticed a new object in the vicinity of Cosmos materials under the harsh temperature and little more than two weeks later on 3 June (see figure). Thus, the fragment existed for only 43 2000 days, despite originating in an orbit from which decay normally requires thousands of years. Of equal interest was the behavior of the 1600 parent satellite, Cosmos 539. At the time of the event the spacecraft was in an orbit of approximately 1340 km by 1380 km. Satellite 1200 tracking data indicated that a small but permanent change in the orbit of Cosmos 539 coincided with the creation of the piece of Altitude (km) Altitude 800 debris. Such an orbital perturbation would be a natural result of a collision with a small object. The orbital period of the spacecraft was Apogee 400 reduced by nearly a second. Taking into Perigee account the mass of the spacecraft, this change in orbit could have been caused by a collision 0 with a meteoroid or orbital debris only a few 2002.3 2002.32 2002.34 2002.36 2002.38 2002.4 2002.42 centimeters in diameter. Orbital debris are Epoch typically more dense than meteoroids, but their collision velocities are lower. The probability Orbital history of the fragment released from Cosmos 539 (April-June 2002). (Continued on page 2) Inside... Tools for Rule-of-Thumb Calculations for Orbital Debris .....................................................2 Optical Observations of GEO Debris ....................................................................................... 4 Satellite Breakups Remain a Problem After 40 Years .............................................................5 1 The Orbital Debris Quarterly News NEWS A New Collision in Space?, Continued (Continued from page 1) August 1997, more than seven years after being higher orbit. of collision with any object of this size, which is decommissioned, the NOAA 7 spacecraft Although it remains possible that on-board below the detection threshold of the SSN, is (1981-059A, U.S. Satellite Number 12553) also energy releases from the two long-dead low; however, at this altitude the flux of demonstrated an abrupt 1 second change in its spacecraft could have caused these events, the centimeter-size orbital debris is approximately orbital period, accompanied by the release of circumstantial evidence points toward collisions 10 times that of meteoroids. three debris. Although two of the new debris with unseen objects. This event is reminiscent of an anomaly were released with low relative velocities, one experienced by the NOAA 7 spacecraft. In of the fragments was thrown into a noticeably Publication of the FY99 CDT Report K. S. Jarvis Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO). The CDT operation are computer controlled to automati- The report (JSC-29712) “CCD Debris is equipped with a SITe 512 X 512 CCD cally collect data for an entire night. The CDT Telescope Observations of the Geosynchronous camera. The pixels are 24 microns square (12.5 has collected more than 1500 hrs of data since Orbital Debris Environment, Observing Year arcseconds) resulting in a 1.7 by 1.7 degree November 1997. This report describes the 1999” has been published. NASA has been field-of-view. The CDT system is capable of collection and analysis of 81 nights (~530 using the Charged Coupled Device (CCD) detecting 17th magnitude objects in a 20 second hours) of data collected in 1999. It is available Debris Telescope (CDT), a transportable 32-cm integration which corresponds to a ~0.6-meter upon request. Schmidt telescope located near Cloudcroft, NM, diameter, 0.20 albedo object at 36,000 km to help characterize the debris environment in altitude. The telescope pointing and CCD Second Identified Satellite Breakup of 2002 The second satellite breakup of 2002 has Ariane geosynchronous transfer missions in vehicle. been belatedly identified. Tracking data from September 1993. No Ariane launch vehicle A two-year-old Chinese Long March 4B the U.S. Space Surveillance Network now launched since that time is known to have upper stage (2000-050B, U.S. Satellite Number indicates that an Ariane 4 upper stage (1992- experienced an on-orbit fragmentation. 26482) was the source of at least two new 041C, U.S. Satellite Number 22032) generated During the second quarter of 2002, three debris in mid June. The event occurred after at least nine pieces of debris in February. At minor debris-producing occurrences also took the stage had fallen to 30 km below the the time of the event the upper stage was in an place. In May, SSN analysts detected an International Space Station. This was only the orbit of approximately 250 km by 26,550 km anomalous event involving a 16-year-old Soviet fifth Long March 4B upper stage to be placed in with an inclination of 7.0 degrees. Due to low rocket body. The Vostok (also known as SL-3) low Earth orbit, and two of the previous four perigees, all debris are in steadily decaying upper stage (1985-090B, U.S. Satellite Number stages have suffered severe breakups after being orbits and will not present a long-term hazard to 16111) was in an orbit of 510 km by 565 km abandoned, producing hundreds of new debris other resident space objects. with an inclination of 97.7 degrees when a piece large enough to be tracked. This marks the sixth known fragmentation separated on 5 May. Through June the decay Finally, yet another anomalous event of an Ariane 4 third stage. Interestingly, the last rate of the new debris was lower than that of the occurred during the second quarter of 2002, this three vehicles involved in such events (1988- rocket body, which is atypical for debris of this time involving a 30-year-old spacecraft. See 109C, 1991-075C, and 1992-041C) had been in type. Six other Vostok upper stages, aged 8-26 “A New Collision in Space?” in this issue for a orbit 9-10 years at the time of their respective years, have been associated with similar complete description of this unusual breakups. All flights were conducted prior to anomalous events since 1987. These releases of incident. the implementation of passivation measures for debris are probably linked to the design of the Project Reviews Tools for Rule-of-Thumb Calculations for Orbital Debris D. J. Kessler empty envelopes, but I actually used them computer calculations. However, to do this Bob Naumann, who was responsible for frequently for this purpose. Unfortunately, requires insight and some tools. In the past, I some of the best meteoroid measurements and envelopes eventually get lost, along with the have published ways of integrating over various analysis during the 1960’s, once said, “If you documentation of the solutions to those distributions in order to obtain a “properly cannot get an approximate answer to a problems. weighted” average for that distribution. In this problem using the back of an envelope, then I have become a strong believer in the idea article, I will describe one of the tools that I you don't know what you are doing". My desk that one should know the approximate answer have used to understand the relative importance at NASA may have looked like I collected to a problem before tackling it with detailed (Continued on page 3) 2 The Orbital Debris Quarterly News Project Reviews Tools for Rule-of-Thumb Calculations for Orbital Debris, Cont’d (Continued from page 2) approximated by the 1. E+0 8 of various sources of orbital debris. product of the flux at 200 r Meteoroid Flux 1. E+0 7 The cumulative number N of orbital debris µm times the mass of a 200- 1. E+0 6 constant mass or meteoroid particles of mass m or diameter s µm meteoroid. However, 1. E+0 5 1. E+0 4 constant area and greater can be approximated over some this calculation will 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 10. Collisions • Use Conservation of Momentum and Energy and The
    10. Collisions • Use conservation of momentum and energy and the center of mass to understand collisions between two objects. • During a collision, two or more objects exert a force on one another for a short time: -F(t) F(t) Before During After • It is not necessary for the objects to touch during a collision, e.g. an asteroid flied by the earth is considered a collision because its path is changed due to the gravitational attraction of the earth. One can still use conservation of momentum and energy to analyze the collision. Impulse: During a collision, the objects exert a force on one another. This force may be complicated and change with time. However, from Newton's 3rd Law, the two objects must exert an equal and opposite force on one another. F(t) t ti tf Dt From Newton'sr 2nd Law: dp r = F (t) dt r r dp = F (t)dt r r r r tf p f - pi = Dp = ò F (t)dt ti The change in the momentum is defined as the impulse of the collision. • Impulse is a vector quantity. Impulse-Linear Momentum Theorem: In a collision, the impulse on an object is equal to the change in momentum: r r J = Dp Conservation of Linear Momentum: In a system of two or more particles that are colliding, the forces that these objects exert on one another are internal forces. These internal forces cannot change the momentum of the system. Only an external force can change the momentum. The linear momentum of a closed isolated system is conserved during a collision of objects within the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Assessment, Vol 16, No 1
    Volume 16 | No. 1 | April 2013 Leading from Behind: The “Obama Doctrine” and US Policy in the Middle East | Sanford Lakoff Eleven Years to the Arab Peace Initiative: Time for an Israeli Regional Strategy | Ilai Alon and Gilead Sher The Emergence of the Sunni Axis in the Middle East | Yoel Guzansky and Gallia Lindenstrauss Islam and Democracy: Can the Two Walk Together? | Yoav Rosenberg The US and Israel on Iran: Whither the (Dis)Agreement? | Ephraim Kam Walking a Fine Line: Israel, India, and Iran | Yiftah S. Shapir Response Essays Civilian Casualties of a Military Strike in Iran | Ephraim Asculai If it Comes to Force: A Credible Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Military Option against Iran | Amos Yadlin, Emily B. Landau, and Avner Golov המכון למחקרי ביטחון לאומי THE INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURcITY STUDIES INCORPORATING THE JAFFEE bd CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES Strategic ASSESSMENT Volume 16 | No. 1 | April 2013 CONTENTS Abstracts | 3 Leading from Behind: The “Obama Doctrine” and US Policy in the Middle East | 7 Sanford Lakoff Eleven Years to the Arab Peace Initiative: Time for an Israeli Regional Strategy | 21 Ilai Alon and Gilead Sher The Emergence of the Sunni Axis in the Middle East | 37 Yoel Guzansky and Gallia Lindenstrauss Islam and Democracy: Can the Two Walk Together? | 49 Yoav Rosenberg The US and Israel on Iran: Whither the (Dis)Agreement? | 61 Ephraim Kam Walking a Fine Line: Israel, India, and Iran | 75 Yiftah S. Shapir Response Essays Civilian Casualties of a Military Strike in Iran | 87 Ephraim Asculai If it Comes to Force: A Credible Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Military Option against Iran | 95 Amos Yadlin, Emily B.
    [Show full text]
  • Rafael Space Propulsion
    Rafael Space Propulsion CATALOGUE A B C D E F G Proprietary Notice This document includes data proprietary to Rafael Ltd. and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed, in whole or in part, for any purpose without written authorization from Rafael Ltd. Rafael Space Propulsion INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW PART A: HERITAGE PART B: SATELLITE PROPULSION SYSTEMS PART C: PROPELLANT TANKS PART D: PROPULSION THRUSTERS Satellites Launchers PART E: PROPULSION SYSTEM VALVES PART F: SPACE PRODUCTION CAPABILITIES PART G: QUALITY MANAGEMENT CATALOGUE – Version 2 | 2019 Heritage PART A Heritage 0 Heritage PART A Rafael Introduction and Overview Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd. designs, develops, manufactures and supplies a wide range of high-tech systems for air, land, sea and space applications. Rafael was established as part of the Ministry of Defense more than 70 years ago and was incorporated in 2002. Currently, 7% of its sales are re-invested in R&D. Rafael’s know-how is embedded in almost every operational Israel Defense Forces (IDF) system; the company has a special relationship with the IDF. Rafael has formed partnerships with companies with leading aerospace and defense companies worldwide to develop applications based on its proprietary technologies. Offset activities and industrial co-operations have been set-up with more than 20 countries world-wide. Over the last decade, international business activities have been steadily expanding across the globe, with Rafael acting as either prime-contractor or subcontractor, capitalizing on its strengths at both system and sub-system levels. Rafael’s highly skilled and dedicated workforce tackles complex projects, from initial development phases, through prototype, production and acceptance tests.
    [Show full text]
  • The Physics of a Car Collision by Andrew Zimmerman Jones, Thoughtco.Com on 09.10.19 Word Count 947 Level MAX
    The physics of a car collision By Andrew Zimmerman Jones, ThoughtCo.com on 09.10.19 Word Count 947 Level MAX Image 1. A crash test dummy sits inside a Toyota Corolla during the 2017 North American International Auto Show in Detroit, Michigan. Crash test dummies are used to predict the injuries that a human might sustain in a car crash. Photo by: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images During a car crash, energy is transferred from the vehicle to whatever it hits, be it another vehicle or a stationary object. This transfer of energy, depending on variables that alter states of motion, can cause injuries and damage cars and property. The object that was struck will either absorb the energy thrust upon it or possibly transfer that energy back to the vehicle that struck it. Focusing on the distinction between force and energy can help explain the physics involved. Force: Colliding With A Wall Car crashes are clear examples of how Newton's Laws of Motion work. His first law of motion, also referred to as the law of inertia, asserts that an object in motion will stay in motion unless an external force acts upon it. Conversely, if an object is at rest, it will remain at rest until an unbalanced force acts upon it. Consider a situation in which car A collides with a static, unbreakable wall. The situation begins with car A traveling at a velocity (v) and, upon colliding with the wall, ending with a velocity of 0. The force of this situation is defined by Newton's second law of motion, which uses the equation of This article is available at 5 reading levels at https://newsela.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Satellite Characterization, Classification, and Operational Assessment Via the Exploitation of Remote Photoacoustic Signatures
    Satellite Characterization, Classification, and Operational Assessment Via the Exploitation of Remote Photoacoustic Signatures Justin Spurbeck1 The University of Texas at Austin Moriba K. Jah, Ph.D.2 The University of Texas at Austin Daniel Kucharski, Ph.D.3 Space Environment Research Centre & The University of Texas at Austin James C. S. Bennett, Ph.D.4 EOS Space Systems & Space Environment Research Centre James G. Webb, Ph.D.5 EOS Space Systems ABSTRACT Current active satellite maneuver detection techniques have the ability to detect maneuvers as quickly as fifteen minutes post maneuver for large delta-v when using angles only optical tracking. Medium to small magnitude burn detection times range from 6-24 hours or more. Small magnitude burns may be indistinguishable from natural perturbative effects if passive techniques are employed. Utilizing a photoacoustic signature detection scheme would allow for near real time maneuver detection and spacecraft parameter estimation. We define the acquisition of high rate photometry data as photoacoustic sensing because the data can be played back as an acoustic signal. Studying the operational frequency spectra, profile, and aural perception of an active satellite event such as a thruster fire or any on-board component activation will provide unique signature identifiers that support Resident Space Object (RSO) characterization efforts. A thruster fire induces vibrations in a satellite body which then modulate incident rays of light. If the reflected photon flux is sampled at a sufficient rate, the change in light intensity due to the propulsive event can be detected. Sensing vibrational mode changes allows for a direct timestamp of thruster fire events and thus makes possible the near real time estimation of spacecraft delta-v and maneuver type if coupled with active observations immediately post maneuver.
    [Show full text]
  • Synthetic Aperture Radar
    Synthetic Aperture Radar Subjects: Information Technology & Data Management Submitted by: Sung Wook Paek Definition SAR constellations Table of Contents [Hide] 1. Introduction Space-based radar observation has growing potentials for monitoring the global biospheric diversity subject to anthropogenic drivers at geological scales [1]. The performance of radar is less affected by weather and sunlight conditions than that of optical sensors. Satellites with onboard sensors can provide comprehensive coverage of remote areas or vast regions that may be too costly for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or ground-based platforms, provided that all platforms provide congruent results via calibrations [2][3][4]. Therefore, it was Seasat, the first satellite dedicated to remote sensing of the Earth’s oceans, that carried the first synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and other radar instruments operable in space. Despite these advantages, miniaturization of radar-carrying satellites was rather slow compared to satellites carrying optical devices due to the lack of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components as well as challenging design requirements for the satellite platform [5][6]. Representative use cases of space-based radar include altimetry, sounding, scatterometry, and so forth in the studies of land, cryosphere, and oceans. Biospheric monitoring is another useful application because radar has high sensitivity in detecting surface changes in a target area and discriminating mobile targets against a background [7]. This paper will consider mainly SAR because of its three-dimensional mapping capability through interferometry. The heritage of Seasat has influenced many of later SAR missions for decades, as listed in Table 1 [8][9][10][11][12][13]; for instance, Shuttle Image Radar (SIR) missions used spare parts of the previous Seasat mission onboard Space Shuttles to test SAR image applications in land use, geology, hydrology, and forestry [14][15].
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts
    2010 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts May 2010 FAA Commercial Space Transportation (AST) and the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) HQ-101151.INDD 2010 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts About the Office of Commercial Space Transportation The Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST) licenses and regulates U.S. commercial space launch and reentry activity, as well as the operation of non-federal launch and reentry sites, as authorized by Executive Order 12465 and Title 49 United States Code, Subtitle IX, Chapter 701 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act). FAA/AST’s mission is to ensure public health and safety and the safety of property while protecting the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry operations. In addition, FAA/AST is directed to encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries. Additional information concerning commercial space transportation can be found on FAA/AST’s web site at http://ast.faa.gov. Cover: Art by John Sloan (2010) NOTICE Use of trade names or names of manufacturers in this document does not constitute an official endorsement of such products or manufacturers, either expressed or implied, by the Federal Aviation Administration. • i • Federal Aviation Administration / Commercial Space Transportation Table of Contents Executive Summary . 1 Introduction . 4 About the CoMStAC GSo Forecast . .4 About the FAA NGSo Forecast . .4 ChAracteriStics oF the CommerCiAl Space transportAtioN MArket . .5 Demand ForecastS . .5 COMSTAC 2010 Commercial Geosynchronous Orbit (GSO) Launch Demand Forecast . 7 exeCutive Summary . .7 BackGround . .9 Forecast MethoDoloGy . .9 CoMStAC CommerCiAl GSo Launch Demand Forecast reSultS .
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Profile 4
    Technical Profile 4 General Specifications • Orbital location 65° East Scheduled for launch in 2013, Spacecom’s AMOS-4 satellite will establish a new orbital position at 65°E, providing a full range of • Frequency band Ku, Ka satellite services for India, Southeast Asia, Russia, the Middle East • Number of available and other additional service areas. Ku-band Transponders 8 x 108MHz • Number of available AMOS-4's multiple Ku and Ka transponders create a powerful platform, Ka-band Transponders 4 x 216MHz enabling a wide range of cross-band, cross-beam connectivity options. For our customers, this means extensive broadcast and broadband • Service areas reach into the vast urban and rural areas of these regions. Available - Ku-band beams: satellite services for customers include Direct-To-Home (DTH), video two shaped steerable beams covering Russia distribution, VSAT communications and broadband Internet. and India with optional steering to: Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Central Asia, India, South Africa and Central East Europe With its new orbital slot, additional capacity, expanded coverage areas and cross-region connectivity, AMOS-4 positions Spacecom at the - Ka-band beam: one shaped steerable beam covering the Middle forefront of international satellite operators delivering comprehensive East. Optional steering to: Russia, India, China, satellite solutions. Our constellation, which provides comprehensive Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and South Africa coverage for Europe, Africa and the Middle East, also includes our AMOS-2 and AMOS-3 satellites, co-located at the 4°W orbital "Hot • Full cross beam connectivity Ku to Ku Spot”, and AMOS-5 located at 17°E. • Full cross band connectivity Ka to Ku – U/L in Ka beam and D/L in any Ku beam • Expected Launch date .............................................2013 space to expand 44 47 49 51 53 India Beam (Ku-1) Parameters Number of Transponders ..............
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Monoxide in Jupiter After Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9
    ICARUS 126, 324±335 (1997) ARTICLE NO. IS965655 Carbon Monoxide in Jupiter after Comet Shoemaker±Levy 9 1 1 KEITH S. NOLL AND DIANE GILMORE Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive, Baltimore, Maryland 21218 E-mail: [email protected] 1 ROGER F. KNACKE AND MARIA WOMACK Pennsylvania State University, Erie, Pennsylvania 16563 1 CAITLIN A. GRIFFITH Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011 AND 1 GLENN ORTON Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California 91109 Received February 5, 1996; revised November 5, 1996 for roughly half the mass. In high-temperature shocks, Observations of the carbon monoxide fundamental vibra- most of the O is converted to CO (Zahnle and MacLow tion±rotation band near 4.7 mm before and after the impacts 1995), making CO one of the more abundant products of of the fragments of Comet Shoemaker±Levy 9 showed no de- a large impact. tectable changes in the R5 and R7 lines, with one possible By contrast, oxygen is a rare element in Jupiter's upper exception. Observations of the G-impact site 21 hr after impact atmosphere. The principal reservoir of oxygen in Jupiter's do not show CO emission, indicating that the heated portions atmosphere is water. The Galileo Probe Mass Spectrome- of the stratosphere had cooled by that time. The large abun- ter found a mixing ratio of H OtoH of X(H O) # 3.7 3 dances of CO detected at the millibar pressure level by millime- 2 2 2 24 P et al. ter wave observations did not extend deeper in Jupiter's atmo- 10 at P 11 bars (Niemann 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • 59864 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 185/Wednesday, September 23
    59864 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS C. Congressional Review Act II. Report and Order COMMISSION 2. The Commission has determined, A. Allocating FTEs 47 CFR Part 1 and the Administrator of the Office of 5. In the FY 2020 NPRM, the Information and Regulatory Affairs, Commission proposed that non-auctions [MD Docket No. 20–105; FCC 20–120; FRS Office of Management and Budget, funded FTEs will be classified as direct 17050] concurs that these rules are non-major only if in one of the four core bureaus, under the Congressional Review Act, 5 i.e., in the Wireline Competition Assessment and Collection of U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission will Bureau, the Wireless Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2020 send a copy of this Report & Order to Telecommunications Bureau, the Media Congress and the Government Bureau, or the International Bureau. The AGENCY: Federal Communications indirect FTEs are from the following Commission. Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). bureaus and offices: Enforcement ACTION: Final rule. Bureau, Consumer and Governmental 3. In this Report and Order, we adopt Affairs Bureau, Public Safety and SUMMARY: In this document, the a schedule to collect the $339,000,000 Homeland Security Bureau, Chairman Commission revises its Schedule of in congressionally required regulatory and Commissioners’ offices, Office of Regulatory Fees to recover an amount of fees for fiscal year (FY) 2020. The the Managing Director, Office of General $339,000,000 that Congress has required regulatory fees for all payors are due in Counsel, Office of the Inspector General, the Commission to collect for fiscal year September 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • AMOS-5 Handnook
    AMOS-4 Ku-2 Beam Technical Handbook / Version 1.3 January 2015 This document contains proprietary information of Space-Communication Ltd., and may not be reproduced, copied, disclosed or utilized in any way, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of Space-Communication Ltd. 1. INTRODUCTION Launched in 2013, Spacecom’s AMOS-4 satellite established a new orbital position at 65°E, providing a full range of satellite services for Asia, Russia, the Middle East as well as other service areas. Picture 1- AMOS-4 Deployed View AMOS-4 Technical Specifications / Space-Communications Ltd. th Gibor Sport Building, 20 fl. 7 Menachem Begin St. Ramat-Gan, 52521, Israel Page 2 of 6 Tel. +972 3 7551000 Fax + 972 3 7551001 email: [email protected] 2. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS Orbital location..........................................................65° East Launch date...............................................................August 2013 Number of available Ku-band Transponders…………..4 x 108MHz Ku-2 beam coverage……………………………………………....Steerable beam 3. FREQUENCY BANDS AND POLARIZATION Uplink frequencies...................................................... 13.00 to 13.25 GHz 13.75 to 14.00 GHz Vertical/ Horizontal Downlink frequencies................................................. 10.70 to 10.59 MHz 11.20 to 11.45 MHz Vertical/ Horizontal The channels' connectivity is fully flexible. AMOS-4 Technical Specifications / Space-Communications Ltd. th Gibor Sport Building, 20 fl. 7 Menachem Begin St. Ramat-Gan, 52521, Israel Page 3 of 6 Tel. +972 3 7551000 Fax + 972 3 7551001 email: [email protected] 4. PAYLOAD CHARACTERISTICS 4.1. EIRP at Beam Peak Band Ku-2 EIRP [dBW] 91.5 4.2. G/T at Beam Peak Band Ku-2 G/T [dB/K] 3.3 4.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C
    Federal Communications Commission DA 01-2069 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) INTELSAT LLC ) ) Application to Modify Authorizations to ) File Nos.SAT-MOD-20010509-00032 to Operate, and to Further Construct, Launch, ) SAT-MOD-20010509-00038 and Operate C-band and Ku-band Satellites ) that Form a Global Communications ) System in Geostationary Orbit ) ) Request for Special Temporary Authority to ) SAT-STA-20010815-00074 Conduct In-Orbit Testing of the ) INTELSAT 902 satellite at 58.5º E.L. ) ) Request for Special Temporary Authority to ) SAT-STA-20010717-00066 Relocate the INTELSAT 901 Satellite ) to 53º W.L. ) ORDER AND AUTHORIZATION Adopted: August 31, 2001 Released: September 4, 2001 By the Chief, Satellite and Radiocommunication Division, International Bureau: INTRODUCTION 1. By this Order, we modify the licenses of Intelsat LLC to operate in-orbit satellites, and launch and operate additional satellites in the future.1 We also grant Intelsat LLC Special Temporary Authority to conduct in-orbit testing of its previously authorized INTELSAT 902 satellite at the 58.5º E.L. orbit location, and to operate the INTELSAT 901 satellite at the 53º W.L. orbit location on a temporary basis. Grant of this authorization permits Intelsat LLC the flexibility to deploy its satellites to address operational needs and unforeseen circumstances that may affect continuity of service. 1 See Applications of Intelsat LLC for Authority to Operate, and to Further Construct, Launch, and Operate C-band and Ku-band Satellites that Form a Global Communications System in Geostationary Orbit, Memorandum Opinion Order and Authorization, 15 FCC Rcd 15460, recon.
    [Show full text]