Positioning: Drift Orbit and Station Acquisition

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Positioning: Drift Orbit and Station Acquisition Orbits Supplement GEOSTATIONARY ORBIT PERTURBATIONS INFLUENCE OF ASPHERICITY OF THE EARTH: The gravitational potential of the Earth is no longer µ/r, but varies with longitude. A tangential acceleration is created, depending on the longitudinal location of the satellite, with four points of stable equilibrium: two stable equilibrium points (L 75° E, 105° W) two unstable equilibrium points ( 15° W, 162° E) This tangential acceleration causes a drift of the satellite longitude. Longitudinal drift d'/dt in terms of the longitude about a point of stable equilibrium expresses as: (d/dt)2 - k cos 2 = constant Orbits Supplement GEO PERTURBATIONS (CONT'D) INFLUENCE OF EARTH ASPHERICITY VARIATION IN THE LONGITUDINAL ACCELERATION OF A GEOSTATIONARY SATELLITE: Orbits Supplement GEO PERTURBATIONS (CONT'D) INFLUENCE OF SUN & MOON ATTRACTION Gravitational attraction by the sun and moon causes the satellite orbital inclination to change with time. The evolution of the inclination vector is mainly a combination of variations: period 13.66 days with 0.0035° amplitude period 182.65 days with 0.023° amplitude long term drift The long term drift is given by: -4 dix/dt = H = (-3.6 sin M) 10 ° /day -4 diy/dt = K = (23.4 +.2.7 cos M) 10 °/day where M is the moon ascending node longitude: M = 12.111 -0.052954 T (T: days from 1/1/1950) 2 2 2 2 cos d = H / (H + K ); i/t = (H + K ) Depending on time within the 18 year period of M d varies from 81.1° to 98.9° i/t varies from 0.75°/year to 0.95°/year Orbits Supplement GEO PERTURBATIONS (CONT'D) INFLUENCE OF SUN RADIATION PRESSURE Due to sun radiation pressure, eccentricity arises: EFFECT OF NON-ZERO ECCENTRICITY L = difference between longitude of geostationary satellite and geosynchronous satellite (24 hour period orbit with e0) With non-zero eccentricity the satellite track undergoes a periodic motion about the subsatellite point at perigee. The MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL VARIATION Lmax is given by: Lmax = 114 e = 0.1° (assuming e = 0.001) and is reached 6 HOURS BEFORE/AFTER PERIGEE Orbits Supplement EFFECT OF NON-ZERO ORBIT INCLINATION The subsatellite point describes a 'figure of eight' around the desired station. Given residual inclination i (degrees): peak longitude variation (degrees): -3 2 Lmax =4.36 10 i peak latitude variation (degrees): lmax = i -5 typical i = 0.05°, hence Lmax = 10 ° ( negligible compared to other drifts) Orbits Supplement STATION-KEEPING REQUIREMENTS The combined non-zero inclination and eccentricity keeps the satellite from being perfectly geostationary (daily movement). The East-West drift moves the satellite away from its nominal longitude (long term movement) The mission requires that the satellite which displays daily+long term movements should remain within a specific solid angle as seen from the center of the earth (window). Example of a typical window: longitude variation L= 0.1° latitude variation l = 0.1° The necessary compensation of forces which drive the satellite outside the window is obtained by accurate firing of reaction equipment (thrusters) on-board the satellite in order to keep it on if station. Orbits Supplement SATELLITE DRIFT EXAMPLE SIRIO satellite subpoint trace on June 1 and 2, 1978: Orbits Supplement ORBIT CORRECTIONS NORTH/SOUTH STATION KEEPING (CORRECTION OF ORBIT INCLINATION): Forces acting perpendicular to the orbit plane are delivered by thrusters at the nodes of the orbit. Cost is of the order of 50 m/s per year. EAST/WEST STATION KEEPING (CORRECTION OF SATELLITE DRIFT): Forces acting in the orbital plane, in the direction of satellite velocity or in opposite direction depending on the drift direction, are delivered by thrusters when the satellite is expected to reach the boundaries of the station keeping window. Note that part of the satellite drift can be induced while North/South station keeping maneuvers are performed, due to thrusters misalignment relative to the perpendicular to the orbital plane. Cost is of the order of 2-10 m/s per year depending on the satellite location with respect to the points of equilibrium. Orbits Supplement ORBIT CORRECTIONS INCLINATION CONTROL iX = VN cos S / VS ; iy = VN sin S / VS where S = satellite right ascension = + +M Required Velocity Increment to Compensate for Orbit Inclination Year Velocity increment (m/s) 1980 41.24 1981 42.58 1982 44.19 1983 45.99 1984 47.70 1985 49.16 1986 50.20 1987 50.72 1988 50.62 1989 49.96 1990 48.77 1991 47.21 1992 45.48 1993 43.71 1994 42.15 Orbits Supplement EAST-WEST STATION KEEPING Orbits Supplement EAST-WEST STATION KEEPING Longitude drift and east-west corrections (a) when the satellite is located far away from the equilibrium point, and (b) when the satellite is located near the equilibrium point. Annual velocity increment for east-west station keeping versus station longitude. Orbits Supplement EXERCISE: ORBITAL MECHANICS, LAUNCHING & POSITIONING DATA: Universal Gravitational Constant G = 6.673 x 10-11 N m2 kg-2 Mass of Earth M = 5.977 x 1024 kg 6 Equatorial Radius of Earth RE = 6.3782 x 10 m Obliquity of the Ecliptic = 23.4° 1. A communications satellite is placed in a geostationary Earth-orbit at an altitude of 35,788 km. Calculate the following: (i) the orbital period; (ii) the maximum eclipse period (from geometry alone). 2. What conditions are necessary for an orbit to be geostationary (GEO)? Explain why in practice GEO satellites depart from these conditions. 3. Sketch the trajectory of a practical GEO satellite as seen from a ground-station and explain its shape. 4. By means of a labelled diagram, describe five independent Keplerian Elements which can be used to describe the orbital trajectory of a satellite. 5. A NOAA meteorological satellite is launched into an 870 km altitude, circular, Sun- synchronous orbit, with an ascending node at 14.30 local solar time. (i) Define what is meant by a Sun-synchronous orbit, and explain how the effect occurs. (ii) Calculate the satellite's orbital velocity (iii) Calculate the orbital inclination angle (iv) Find the eclipse period at the Vernal Equinox NOTE: the period of time which an orbit spends in eclipse is given by: T x (1/180°) x cos-1 [(1 - n2)1/2 / sin β] Where cos-1 (x) is in degrees; n = R / (R + h); R = Earth's radius, h= satellite height; β = the angle between the Sun's rays and the orbit normal; T = orbital period. Provided cos β < n, otherwise the orbit is not eclipsed at all. 6. A mobile communications satellite is placed in a 'Molniya' orbit with a semi-major axis of 26,556 km and an eccentricity of 0.71. Calculate the following for the orbit: (i) perigee height; (ii) apogee radius; (iii) orbital speed at apogee. 7. Briefly describe the properties of a Molniya orbit and explain why it is most suitable for communications into high latitudes. CONT/D OVER Orbits Supplement 8. An orbit has an apogee height of 37,500 km, and inclination of 20° and an eccentricity of 0.7. Calculate: (i) perigee radius; (ii) orbital period; (iii) nodal regression rate; (iv) rate of change of the argument of perigee. 9. By means of a sketch diagram, explain what is meant by a Hohmann Transfer Ellipse. 10. Give one advantage and one disadvantage of the Hohmann Transfer over direct ascent from one orbit to another. 11. A satellite is to be deployed from the cargo bay of the STS (Space Shuttle), which is in a low-Earth circular parking orbit of 300 km altitude and 28.5° inclination. The satellite has a boost-motor which gives it an initial delta-V of 1.942 km s-1 to put the satellite into a transfer orbit. Calculate the following: (i) the orbital velocity of the satellite in the parking orbit; (ii) the maximum apogee height attainable by the transfer orbit; (iii) the additional delta-V required to circularise the orbit at apogee; (iv) the minimum delta-V required to change the inclination of the orbit to 90°. 12. Briefly explain the advantages of possessing a launch site close to the Equator. 13. A communications satellite is to be placed into a geostationary Earth orbit from the Kourou launch site with the following characteristics: Launch: Dual launch configuration with the ARIANE 3 launch vehicle Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO): perigee height 200 km apogee height 35,586 km inclination 7° Launch weight capability: 1140 kg into GTO Spacecraft Configuration: Body-fixed stabilisation with deployable solar arrays Station keeping accuracy: +/- 0.05° N-S and E-W End-of-Life satellite mass: 510 kg Propulsion: Apogee Kick motor (Solid Propellant) specific impulse (Isp): 295 seconds Attitude and Orbit control (monopropellant Hydrazine): Isp : 216 seconds Propellant provision for drift orbit control: 13 kg Propellant provision for attitude control: 2.3 kg Propellant provision for E-W station-keeping: 3.2 kg (i) Briefly describe the typical orbit transfer sequence from launch to final orbit. Calculate the velocity increment (delta-V) required for the injection of the satellite into GEO at the apogee of the GTO. (ii) Determine the apogee motor propellant mass. (iii) Estimate the required propellant mass required for station-keeping during the lifetime of the satellite (assume 10 years). State the beginning-of-life satellite mass (dry mass). Orbits Supplement EXERCISE: ORBITAL MECHANICS, LAUNCHING & POSITIONING -ANSWERS 1. (i) Orbital period of a GEO satellite: T2 = (4 2 / GM) a3 => T2 = (4 2 / 3.988 X 1014) ( [35788 + 6378] x 103)3 => T = 86148 s = 23 hrs 56 mins (ii) Maximum Eclipse period: = = R E 6378 / (35788 + 6378) RE +h => θ = 8.7° Teclipse = Torbit x (2θ / 360°) => 86164.1 x 17.4 / 360 = 69 mins (72 mins when the apparent motion of the Sun and penumbra is taken into account) 2.
Recommended publications
  • Astrodynamics
    Politecnico di Torino SEEDS SpacE Exploration and Development Systems Astrodynamics II Edition 2006 - 07 - Ver. 2.0.1 Author: Guido Colasurdo Dipartimento di Energetica Teacher: Giulio Avanzini Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aeronautica e Spaziale e-mail: [email protected] Contents 1 Two–Body Orbital Mechanics 1 1.1 BirthofAstrodynamics: Kepler’sLaws. ......... 1 1.2 Newton’sLawsofMotion ............................ ... 2 1.3 Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation . ......... 3 1.4 The n–BodyProblem ................................. 4 1.5 Equation of Motion in the Two-Body Problem . ....... 5 1.6 PotentialEnergy ................................. ... 6 1.7 ConstantsoftheMotion . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 7 1.8 TrajectoryEquation .............................. .... 8 1.9 ConicSections ................................... 8 1.10 Relating Energy and Semi-major Axis . ........ 9 2 Two-Dimensional Analysis of Motion 11 2.1 ReferenceFrames................................. 11 2.2 Velocity and acceleration components . ......... 12 2.3 First-Order Scalar Equations of Motion . ......... 12 2.4 PerifocalReferenceFrame . ...... 13 2.5 FlightPathAngle ................................. 14 2.6 EllipticalOrbits................................ ..... 15 2.6.1 Geometry of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 15 2.6.2 Period of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 16 2.7 Time–of–Flight on the Elliptical Orbit . .......... 16 2.8 Extensiontohyperbolaandparabola. ........ 18 2.9 Circular and Escape Velocity, Hyperbolic Excess Speed . .............. 18 2.10 CosmicVelocities
    [Show full text]
  • AFSPC-CO TERMINOLOGY Revised: 12 Jan 2019
    AFSPC-CO TERMINOLOGY Revised: 12 Jan 2019 Term Description AEHF Advanced Extremely High Frequency AFB / AFS Air Force Base / Air Force Station AOC Air Operations Center AOI Area of Interest The point in the orbit of a heavenly body, specifically the moon, or of a man-made satellite Apogee at which it is farthest from the earth. Even CAP rockets experience apogee. Either of two points in an eccentric orbit, one (higher apsis) farthest from the center of Apsis attraction, the other (lower apsis) nearest to the center of attraction Argument of Perigee the angle in a satellites' orbit plane that is measured from the Ascending Node to the (ω) perigee along the satellite direction of travel CGO Company Grade Officer CLV Calculated Load Value, Crew Launch Vehicle COP Common Operating Picture DCO Defensive Cyber Operations DHS Department of Homeland Security DoD Department of Defense DOP Dilution of Precision Defense Satellite Communications Systems - wideband communications spacecraft for DSCS the USAF DSP Defense Satellite Program or Defense Support Program - "Eyes in the Sky" EHF Extremely High Frequency (30-300 GHz; 1mm-1cm) ELF Extremely Low Frequency (3-30 Hz; 100,000km-10,000km) EMS Electromagnetic Spectrum Equitorial Plane the plane passing through the equator EWR Early Warning Radar and Electromagnetic Wave Resistivity GBR Ground-Based Radar and Global Broadband Roaming GBS Global Broadcast Service GEO Geosynchronous Earth Orbit or Geostationary Orbit ( ~22,300 miles above Earth) GEODSS Ground-Based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance
    [Show full text]
  • Download Paper
    Ever Wonder What’s in Molniya? We Do. John T. McGraw J. T. McGraw and Associates, LLC and University of New Mexico Peter C. Zimmer J. T. McGraw and Associates, LLC Mark R. Ackermann J. T. McGraw and Associates, LLC ABSTRACT Molniya orbits are high inclination, high eccentricity orbits which provide the utility of long apogee dwell time over northern continents, with the additional benefit of obviating the largest orbital perturbation introduced by the Earth’s nonspherical (oblate) gravitational potential. We review the few earlier surveys of the Molniya domain and evaluate results from a new, large area unbiased survey of the northern Molniya domain. We detect 120 Molniya objects in a three hour survey of ~ 1300 square degrees of the sky to a limiting magnitude of about 16.5. Future Molniya surveys will discover a significant number of objects, including debris, and monitoring these objects might provide useful data with respect to orbital perturbations including solar radiation and Earth atmosphere drag effects. 1. SPECIALIZED ORBITS Earth Orbital Space (EOS) supports many versions of specialized satellite orbits defined by a combination of satellite mission and orbital dynamics. Surely the most well-known family of specialized orbits is the geostationary orbits proposed by science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke in 1945 [1] that lie sensibly in the plane of Earth’s equator, with orbital period that matches the Earth’s rotation period. Satellites in these orbits, and the closely related geosynchronous orbits, appear from Earth to remain constantly overhead, allowing continuous communication with the majority of the hemisphere below. Constellations of three geostationary satellites equally spaced in orbit (~ 120° separation) can maintain near-global communication and terrestrial surveillance.
    [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]
  • Molniya" Type Orbits
    EXAMINATION OF THE LIFETIME, EVOLUTION AND RE-ENTRY FEATURES FOR THE "MOLNIYA" TYPE ORBITS Yu.F. Kolyuka, N.M. Ivanov, T.I. Afanasieva, T.A. Gridchina Mission Control Center, 4, Pionerskaya str., Korolev, Moscow Region, 141070, Russia, [email protected] ABSTRACT Space vehicles of the "Molniya" series, launched into the special highly elliptical orbits with a period of ~ 12 hours, are intended for solution of telecommunication problems in stretched territories of the former USSR and nowadays − Russia, and also for providing the connectivity between Russia and other countries. The inclination of standard orbits of such a kind of satellites is near to the critical value i ≈ 63.4 deg and their initial minimal altitude normally has a value Hmin ~ 500 km. As a rule, the “Molniya" satellites of a concrete series form the groups with determined disposition of orbital planes on an ascending node longitude that allows to ensure requirements of the continuous link between any points in northern hemisphere. The first satellite of the "Molniya" series has been inserted into designed orbit in 1964. Up to now it is launched over 160 space vehicles of such a kind. As well as all artificial satellites, space vehicles "Molniya" undergo the action of various perturbing forces influencing a change of their orbital parameters. However in case of space vehicles "Molniya" these changes of parameters have a specific character and in many things they differ from the perturbations which are taking place for the majority of standard orbits of the artificial satellites with rather small eccentricity. In particular, to strong enough variations (first of all, at the expense of the luni-solar attraction) it is subjected the orbit perigee distance rπ that can lead to such reduction Hmin when further flight of the satellite on its orbit becomes impossible, it re-entries and falls to the Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Rockets -Or- Never Leave Geeks Unsupervised
    An Introduction to Rockets -or- Never Leave Geeks Unsupervised Kevin Mellett 27 Apr 2006 2 What is a Rocket? • A propulsion system that contains both oxidizer and fuel • NOT a jet, which requires air for O2 3 A Brief History • 400 BC – Steam Bird • 100 BC – Hero Engine • 100 AD – Gunpowder Invented in China – Celebrations – Religious Ceremonies – Bamboo Misfires? 4 A Brief History • Chinese Invent Fire Arrows 13th c – First True Rockets •16th c Wan-Hu – 47 Rockets 5 A Brief History •13th –16th c Improvements in Technology – English Improved Gunpowder – French Improved Guidance by Shooting Through a Tube “Bazooka Style” – Germans Invented “Step Rockets” (Staging) 6 A Brief History • 1687 Newton Publishes Principia Mathematica 7 Newton’s Third Law MOMENTUM is the key concept of rocketry 8 A Brief History • 1903 KonstantineTsiolkovsky Publishes the “Rocket Equation” – Proposes Liquid Fuel ⎛ Mi ⎞ V = Ve*ln⎜ ⎟ ⎝ Mf ⎠ 9 A Brief History • Goddard Flies the First Liquid Fueled Rocket on 16 Mar 1926 – Theorized Rockets Would Work in a Vacuum – NY Times: Goddard “…lacks the basic physics ladeled out in our high schools…” 10 A Brief History • Germans at Peenemunde – Oberth and von Braun lead development of the V-2 – Amazing achievement, but too late to change the tide of WWII – After WWII, USSR and USA took German Engineers and Hardware 11 Mission Requirements • Launch On Need – No Time for Complex Pre-Launch Preps – Long Shelf Life • Commercial / Government – Risk Tolerance –R&D Costs 12 Mission Requirements • Payload Mass and Orbital Objectives – How much do you need, and where do you want it? Both drive energy requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Richard Dalbello Vice President, Legal and Government Affairs Intelsat General
    Commercial Management of the Space Environment Richard DalBello Vice President, Legal and Government Affairs Intelsat General The commercial satellite industry has billions of dollars of assets in space and relies on this unique environment for the development and growth of its business. As a result, safety and the sustainment of the space environment are two of the satellite industry‘s highest priorities. In this paper I would like to provide a quick survey of past and current industry space traffic control practices and to discuss a few key initiatives that the industry is developing in this area. Background The commercial satellite industry has been providing essential space services for almost as long as humans have been exploring space. Over the decades, this industry has played an active role in developing technology, worked collaboratively to set standards, and partnered with government to develop successful international regulatory regimes. Success in both commercial and government space programs has meant that new demands are being placed on the space environment. This has resulted in orbital crowding, an increase in space debris, and greater demand for limited frequency resources. The successful management of these issues will require a strong partnership between government and industry and the careful, experience-based expansion of international law and diplomacy. Throughout the years, the satellite industry has never taken for granted the remarkable environment in which it works. Industry has invested heavily in technology and sought out the best and brightest minds to allow the full, but sustainable exploitation of the space environment. Where problems have arisen, such as space debris or electronic interference, industry has taken 1 the initiative to deploy new technologies and adopt new practices to minimize negative consequences.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Rosen Thesis.Pdf
    THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF AEROSPACE ENGINEERING END OF LIFE DISPOSAL OF SATELLITES IN HIGHLY ELLIPTICAL ORBITS MITCHELL ROSEN SPRING 2019 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a baccalaureate degree in Aerospace Engineering with honors in Aerospace Engineering Reviewed and approved* by the following: Dr. David Spencer Professor of Aerospace Engineering Thesis Supervisor Dr. Mark Maughmer Professor of Aerospace Engineering Honors Adviser * Signatures are on file in the Schreyer Honors College. i ABSTRACT Highly elliptical orbits allow for coverage of large parts of the Earth through a single satellite, simplifying communications in the globe’s northern reaches. These orbits are able to avoid drastic changes to the argument of periapse by using a critical inclination (63.4°) that cancels out the first level of the geopotential forces. However, this allows the next level of geopotential forces to take over, quickly de-orbiting satellites. Thus, a balance between the rate of change of the argument of periapse and the lifetime of the orbit is necessitated. This thesis sets out to find that balance. It is determined that an orbit with an inclination of 62.5° strikes that balance best. While this orbit is optimal off of the critical inclination, it is still near enough that to allow for potential use of inclination changes as a deorbiting method. Satellites are deorbited when the propellant remaining is enough to perform such a maneuver, and nothing more; therefore, the less change in velocity necessary for to deorbit, the better. Following the determination of an ideal highly elliptical orbit, the different methods of inclination change is tested against the usual method for deorbiting a satellite, an apoapse burn to lower the periapse, to find the most propellant- efficient method.
    [Show full text]
  • Satellite Orbits
    Course Notes for Ocean Colour Remote Sensing Course Erdemli, Turkey September 11 - 22, 2000 Module 1: Satellite Orbits prepared by Assoc Professor Mervyn J Lynch Remote Sensing and Satellite Research Group School of Applied Science Curtin University of Technology PO Box U1987 Perth Western Australia 6845 AUSTRALIA tel +618-9266-7540 fax +618-9266-2377 email <[email protected]> Module 1: Satellite Orbits 1.0 Artificial Earth Orbiting Satellites The early research on orbital mechanics arose through the efforts of people such as Tyco Brahe, Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo who were clearly concerned with some of the fundamental questions about the motions of celestial objects. Their efforts led to the establishment by Keppler of the three laws of planetary motion and these, in turn, prepared the foundation for the work of Isaac Newton who formulated the Universal Law of Gravitation in 1666: namely, that F = GmM/r2 , (1) Where F = attractive force (N), r = distance separating the two masses (m), M = a mass (kg), m = a second mass (kg), G = gravitational constant. It was in the very next year, namely 1667, that Newton raised the possibility of artificial Earth orbiting satellites. A further 300 years lapsed until 1957 when the USSR achieved the first launch into earth orbit of an artificial satellite - Sputnik - occurred. Returning to Newton's equation (1), it would predict correctly (relativity aside) the motion of an artificial Earth satellite if the Earth was a perfect sphere of uniform density, there was no atmosphere or ocean or other external perturbing forces. However, in practice the situation is more complicated and prediction is a less precise science because not all the effects of relevance are accurately known or predictable.
    [Show full text]
  • Orbital Inclination and Eccentricity Oscillations in Our Solar
    Long term orbital inclination and eccentricity oscillations of the planets in our solar system Abstract The orbits of the planets in our solar system are not in the same plane, therefore natural torques stemming from Newton’s gravitational forces exist to pull them all back to the same plane. This causes the inclinations of the planet orbits to oscillate with potentially long periods and very small damping, because the friction in space is very small. Orbital inclination changes are known for some planets in terms of current rates of change, but the oscillation periods are not well published. They can however be predicted with proper dynamic simulations of the solar system. A three-dimensional dynamic simulation was developed for our solar system capable of handling 12 objects, where all objects affect all other objects. Each object was considered to be a point mass which proved to be an adequate approximation for this study. Initial orbital radii, eccentricities and speeds were set according to known values. The validity of the simulation was demonstrated in terms of short term characteristics such as sidereal periods of planets as well as long term characteristics such as the orbital inclination and eccentricity oscillation periods of Jupiter and Saturn. A significantly more accurate result, than given on approximate analytical grounds in a well-known solar system dynamics textbook, was found for the latter period. Empirical formulas were developed from the simulation results for both these periods for three-object solar type systems. They are very accurate for the Sun, Jupiter and Saturn as well as for some other comparable systems.
    [Show full text]
  • A Decade of Growth
    A publication of The Orbital Debris Program Office NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 October 2000 Volume 5, Issue 4. NEWS A Decade of Growth P. Anz-Meador and Globalstar commercial communication of the population. For example, consider the This article will examine changes in the spacecraft constellations, respectively. Given peak between 840-850 km (Figure 1’s peak low Earth orbit (LEO) environment over the the uncertain future of the Iridium constellation, “B”). This volume is populated by the period 1990-2000. Two US Space Surveillance the spike between 770 and 780 km may change Commonwealth of Independent State’s Tselina- Network (SSN) catalogs form the basis of our drastically or even disappear over the next 2 spacecraft constellation, several US Defense comparison. Included are all unclassified several years. Less prominent is the Orbcomm Meteorological Support Program (DMSP) cataloged and uncataloged objects in both data commercial constellation, with a primary spacecraft, and their associated rocket bodies sets, but objects whose epoch times are “older” concentration between 810 and 820 km altitude and debris. While the region is traversed by than 30 days were excluded from further (peak “A” in Figure 1). Smaller series of many other space objects, including debris, consideration. Moreover, the components of satellites may also result in local enhancements these satellites and rocket boosters are in near the Mir orbital station are 3.0E-08 circular orbits. Thus, any “collectivized” into one group of spacecraft whose object so as not to depict a orbits are tightly January 1990 plethora of independently- 2.5E-08 maintained are capable of orbiting objects at Mir’s A January 2000 producing a spike similar altitude; the International B to that observed with the Space Station (ISS) is 2.0E-08 commercial constellations.
    [Show full text]