DOCSLIB.ORG

Design and Evaluation of an Orbital Debris Remediation System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Design and Evaluation of an Orbital Debris Remediation System Design and Evaluation of an Orbital Debris Remediation System SYST 495 Technical Report Benjamin Noble Yahya Almanee Abdulelah Shakir Sungmin Park George Mason University Systems Engineering Senior Design Project, 2015-2016 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 5 2 Context Analysis ................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Current Investments ..................................................................................................................7 2.2 Types of Orbits ...........................................................................................................................8 2.3 Orbital Debris Threat ................................................................................................................9 3 Stakeholder Analysis .......................................................................................................... 11 3.1 National Governments .............................................................................................................11 3.1.1 United States of America .......................................................................................................12 3.1.2 Europe ....................................................................................................................................12 3.1.3 Russia .....................................................................................................................................13 3.1.4 China ......................................................................................................................................13 3.2 Commercial Industry ...............................................................................................................14 3.2.1 Transport Companies .............................................................................................................14 3.2.2 System Manufacturers ............................................................................................................14 3.2.3 Insurance Companies .............................................................................................................14 3.3 Civil Organizations ...................................................................................................................14 3.3.1 Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) ..............................................14 3.3.2 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) ....................................................15 3.3.3 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ...............................................15 3.3.4 European Space Agency (ESA) .............................................................................................15 3.3.5 Russian Federal Space Agency ..............................................................................................15 3.3.6 China National Space Administration (CNSA) .....................................................................16 3.4 Stakeholder Interactions and Tensions ..................................................................................16 3.5 Process for Implementing ADR ..............................................................................................19 4 Problem Statement .............................................................................................................. 21 4.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................................21 4.2 Problem Analysis ......................................................................................................................21 4.3 Gap Analysis .............................................................................................................................21 4.4 Need Statement .........................................................................................................................22 1 5 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 23 5.1 Scope and Assumptions ............................................................................................................23 5.2 Mission Requirements ..............................................................................................................23 5.3 Functional Requirements .........................................................................................................23 6 Concept of Operations ........................................................................................................ 24 6.1 Competing Approaches ............................................................................................................24 6.1.1 Active Debris Removal (ADR) ..............................................................................................24 6.1.2 Just-in-time Collision Avoidance (JCA) ................................................................................25 6.1.3 Property Rights ......................................................................................................................26 6.2 Design Alternatives ...................................................................................................................26 6.2.1 Launch and Rendezvous Designs ..........................................................................................27 6.2.2 Grapple Designs .....................................................................................................................28 6.2.3 De-tumble Designs .................................................................................................................30 6.2.4 De-orbit Designs ....................................................................................................................30 6.3 Method of Analysis ...................................................................................................................31 6.3.1 Launch and Rendezvous ........................................................................................................32 6.3.2 Grapple ...................................................................................................................................36 6.3.3 De-tumble ...............................................................................................................................40 6.3.4 De-orbit ..................................................................................................................................42 6.3.5 Political Viability ...................................................................................................................44 6.4 Utility Analysis ..........................................................................................................................49 6.4.1 Value Hierarchy .....................................................................................................................49 6.4.2 Attribute Descriptions ............................................................................................................50 6.4.3 Attributes and ADR Designs ..................................................................................................52 6.4.4 Weight Elicitation ..................................................................................................................52 6.4.5 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) ........................................................................................54 7 Results .................................................................................................................................. 55 7.1 Launch and Rendezvous ..........................................................................................................55 7.2 Grapple ......................................................................................................................................55 7.3 De-orbit ......................................................................................................................................56 7.4 Overall Debris Remediation System .......................................................................................58 8 Business Case ....................................................................................................................... 59 2 8.1 Potential Market Size ...............................................................................................................59 8.2 Business Model .........................................................................................................................59 8.3 Sales Profile ...............................................................................................................................60 9 Project Plan ......................................................................................................................... 62 9.1 Statement of Work ...................................................................................................................62 9.1.1 Objective ................................................................................................................................62 9.1.2 Project Scope ..........................................................................................................................62
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Maneuver Detection of Space Object for Space Surveillance
    MANEUVER DETECTION OF SPACE OBJECT FOR SPACE SURVEILLANCE Jian Huang*, Weidong Hu, Lefeng Zhang $756WDWH.H\/DE1DWLRQDO8QLYHUVLW\RI'HIHQVH7HFKQRORJ\&KDQJVKD+XQDQ3URYLQFH&KLQD (PDLOKXDQJMLDQ#QXGWHGXFQ ABSTRACT on the technique of a moving window curve fit. Holzinger & Scheeres presented an object correlation Maneuver detection is a very important task for and maneuver detection method using optimal control maintaining the catalog of the orbital objects and space performance metrics [5]. Kelecy & Jah focused on the situational awareness. This paper mainly focuses on the detection and reconstruction of single low thrust in- typical maneuver scenario where space objects only track maneuvers by using the orbit determination perform tangential orbital maneuvers during a relative strategies based on the batch least-squares and long gap. Particularly, only two classical and extended Kalman filter (EKF) [6]. However, these commonly applied orbital transition manners are methods are highly relevant to the presupposed considered, i.e. the twice tangential maneuvers at the maneuvering mode and a relative short observation gap. apogee and the perigee or one tangential maneuver at In this paper, to address the real observed data, we only an arbitrary time. Based on this, we preliminarily consider the common maneuvering modes and estimate the maneuvering mode and parameters by observation scenarios in practical. For an orbital analyzing the change of semi-major axis and maneuver, minimization of fuel consumption is eccentricity. Furthermore, if only one tangential essential because the weight of a payload that can be maneuver happened, we can formulate the estimation carried to the desired orbit depends on this problem of maneuvering parameters as a non-linear minimization.
    [Show full text]
  • Reduction of Saturn Orbit Insertion Impulse Using Deep-Space Low Thrust
    Reduction of Saturn Orbit Insertion Impulse using Deep-Space Low Thrust Elena Fantino ∗† Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Roberto Flores‡ International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 08034 Barcelona, Spain. Jesús Peláez§ and Virginia Raposo-Pulido¶ Technical University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain. Orbit insertion at Saturn requires a large impulsive manoeuver due to the velocity difference between the spacecraft and the planet. This paper presents a strategy to reduce dramatically the hyperbolic excess speed at Saturn by means of deep-space electric propulsion. The inter- planetary trajectory includes a gravity assist at Jupiter, combined with low-thrust maneuvers. The thrust arc from Earth to Jupiter lowers the launch energy requirement, while an ad hoc steering law applied after the Jupiter flyby reduces the hyperbolic excess speed upon arrival at Saturn. This lowers the orbit insertion impulse to the point where capture is possible even with a gravity assist with Titan. The control-law algorithm, the benefits to the mass budget and the main technological aspects are presented and discussed. The simple steering law is compared with a trajectory optimizer to evaluate the quality of the results and possibilities for improvement. I. Introduction he giant planets have a special place in our quest for learning about the origins of our planetary system and Tour search for life, and robotic missions are essential tools for this scientific goal. Missions to the outer planets arXiv:2001.04357v1 [astro-ph.EP] 8 Jan 2020 have been prioritized by NASA and ESA, and this has resulted in important space projects for the exploration of the Jupiter system (NASA’s Europa Clipper [1] and ESA’s Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer [2]), and studies are underway to launch a follow-up of Cassini/Huygens called Titan Saturn System Mission (TSSM) [3], a joint ESA-NASA project.
    [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]
  • 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.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Analysis of Transfer Maneuvers from Initial
    Revista Mexicana de Astronom´ıa y Astrof´ısica, 52, 283–295 (2016) ANALYSIS OF TRANSFER MANEUVERS FROM INITIAL CIRCULAR ORBIT TO A FINAL CIRCULAR OR ELLIPTIC ORBIT M. A. Sharaf1 and A. S. Saad2,3 Received March 14 2016; accepted May 16 2016 RESUMEN Presentamos un an´alisis de las maniobras de transferencia de una ´orbita circu- lar a una ´orbita final el´ıptica o circular. Desarrollamos este an´alisis para estudiar el problema de las transferencias impulsivas en las misiones espaciales. Consideramos maniobras planas usando ecuaciones reci´enobtenidas; con estas ecuaciones se com- paran las maniobras circulares y el´ıpticas. Esta comparaci´on es importante para el dise˜no´optimo de misiones espaciales, y permite obtener mapeos ´utiles para mostrar cu´al es la mejor maniobra. Al respecto, desarrollamos este tipo de comparaciones mediante 10 resultados, y los mostramos gr´aficamente. ABSTRACT In the present paper an analysis of the transfer maneuvers from initial circu- lar orbit to a final circular or elliptic orbit was developed to study the problem of impulsive transfers for space missions. It considers planar maneuvers using newly derived equations. With these equations, comparisons of circular and elliptic ma- neuvers are made. This comparison is important for the mission designers to obtain useful mappings showing where one maneuver is better than the other. In this as- pect, we developed this comparison throughout ten results, together with some graphs to show their meaning. Key Words: celestial mechanics — methods: analytical — space vehicles 1. INTRODUCTION The large amount of information from interplanetary missions, such as Pioneer (Dyer et al.
    [Show full text]
  • ORBIT MANOUVERS • Orbital Plane Change (Inclination) It Is an Orbital
    UNIVERSITY OF ANBAR ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS FOR 4th CLASS STUDENTS COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING by: Dr. Naser Al-Falahy ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING WE EK 4 ORBIT MANOUVERS Orbital plane change (inclination) It is an orbital maneuver aimed at changing the inclination of an orbiting body's orbit. This maneuver is also known as an orbital plane change as the plane of the orbit is tipped. This maneuver requires a change in the orbital velocity vector (delta v) at the orbital nodes (i.e. the point where the initial and desired orbits intersect, the line of orbital nodes is defined by the intersection of the two orbital planes). In general, inclination changes can take a very large amount of delta v to perform, and most mission planners try to avoid them whenever possible to conserve fuel. This is typically achieved by launching a spacecraft directly into the desired inclination, or as close to it as possible so as to minimize any inclination change required over the duration of the spacecraft life. When both orbits are circular (i.e. e = 0) and have the same radius the Delta-v (Δvi) required for an inclination change (Δvi) can be calculated using: where: v is the orbital velocity and has the same units as Δvi (Δi ) inclination change required. Example Calculate the velocity change required to transfer a satellite from a circular 600 km orbit with an inclination of 28 degrees to an orbit of equal size with an inclination of 20 degrees. SOLUTION, r = (6,378.14 + 600) × 1,000 = 6,978,140 m , ϑ = 28 - 20 = 8 degrees Vi = SQRT[ GM / r ] Vi = SQRT[ 3.986005×1014 / 6,978,140 ] Vi = 7,558 m/s Δvi = 2 × Vi × sin(ϑ/2) Δvi = 2 × 7,558 × sin(8/2) Δvi = 1,054 m/s 18 UNIVERSITY OF ANBAR ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS FOR 4th CLASS STUDENTS COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING by: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Orbital Mechanics
    Danish Space Research Institute Danish Small Satellite Programme DTU Satellite Systems and Design Course Orbital Mechanics Flemming Hansen MScEE, PhD Technology Manager Danish Small Satellite Programme Danish Space Research Institute Phone: 3532 5721 E-mail: [email protected] Slide # 1 FH 2001-09-16 Orbital_Mechanics.ppt Danish Space Research Institute Danish Small Satellite Programme Planetary and Satellite Orbits Johannes Kepler (1571 - 1630) 1st Law • Discovered by the precision mesurements of Tycho Brahe that the Moon and the Periapsis - Apoapsis - planets moves around in elliptical orbits Perihelion Aphelion • Harmonia Mundi 1609, Kepler’s 1st og 2nd law of planetary motion: st • 1 Law: The orbit of a planet ia an ellipse nd with the sun in one focal point. 2 Law • 2nd Law: A line connecting the sun and a planet sweeps equal areas in equal time intervals. 3rd Law • 1619 came Keplers 3rd law: • 3rd Law: The square of the planet’s orbit period is proportional to the mean distance to the sun to the third power. Slide # 2 FH 2001-09-16 Orbital_Mechanics.ppt Danish Space Research Institute Danish Small Satellite Programme Newton’s Laws Isaac Newton (1642 - 1727) • Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica 1687 • 1st Law: The law of inertia • 2nd Law: Force = mass x acceleration • 3rd Law: Action og reaction • The law of gravity: = GMm F Gravitational force between two bodies F 2 G The universal gravitational constant: G = 6.670 • 10-11 Nm2kg-2 r M Mass af one body, e.g. the Earth or the Sun m Mass af the other body, e.g. the satellite r Separation between the bodies G is difficult to determine precisely enough for precision orbit calculations.
    [Show full text]
  • Collision Probability Prediction and Orbit Maneuvering Probability Determination of Non-Cooperative Space Object Orbit
    remote sensing Article Collision Probability Prediction and Orbit Maneuvering Probability Determination of Non-Cooperative Space Object Orbit 1,2 3 1, 1 1, , Yuanlan Wen , Zhuo Yu , Lina He y, Qian Wang and Xiufeng He * y 1 School of Earth Science and Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China; [email protected] (Y.W.); [email protected] (L.H.); [email protected] (Q.W.) 2 Research School of High Technology, Hunan Institute of Traffic Engineering, Hengyang 421099, China 3 Xi’an Satellite Control Center, Xi’an 710043, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] These authors contributed equally to the work. y Received: 5 September 2020; Accepted: 1 October 2020; Published: 12 October 2020 Abstract: Probability of collision between non-cooperative space object (NCSO) and the reference spacecraft (RS) has been increased drastically over the past few decades. The traditional method is difficult to identify the maneuvering of non-cooperative space object. In the present paper, not only positions and velocities, but also accelerations of non-cooperative space object are estimated as parameters by the extended Kalman filtering based on setting up the state linear equation and measurement model of the non-cooperative space object. The algorithm for predicting collision probability is derived from position error ellipsoid, and the algorithm for determining maneuvering probability is derived from maneuvering acceleration and its error ellipsoid, which can be employed to identify whether the upcoming space object is being maneuvered. An epoch Earth-centered inertial (EECI) coordinate system is suggested to replace Earth-centered inertial (ECI) to simplify coordinate transformation.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonlinear Filtering for Autonomous Navigation of Spacecraft in Highly Elliptical Orbit
    Nonlinear Filtering for Autonomous Navigation of Spacecraft in Highly Elliptical Orbit by Adam C. Vigneron, B.Sc.(Eng.) A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science Ottawa-Carleton Institute for Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario May, 2014 c Copyright Adam C. Vigneron, 2014 The undersigned hereby recommends to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs acceptance of the thesis Nonlinear Filtering for Autonomous Navigation of Spacecraft in Highly Elliptical Orbit submitted by Adam C. Vigneron, B.Sc.(Eng.) in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science Professor Anton H. J. de Ruiter, Thesis Supervisor Professor Bruce Burlton, Thesis Co-supervisor Professor Alex Ellery, Thesis Co-supervisor Professor Metin Yaras, Chair, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Ottawa-Carleton Institute for Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Carleton University May, 2014 ii Abstract To fill a gap in satellite services for the Canadian Arctic, the Canadian Space Agency has proposed a Polar Communication and Weather (PCW) mission to be flown in a highly elliptical Molniya orbit. In an era of increasingly capable space hardware, au- tonomous satellite navigation has become a standard means by which satellites in low Earth orbit can increase their independence and functionality. This study examined the accuracy to which autonomous navigation might be realized in a Molniya orbit. Using appropriate physical force models and simulated pseudorange signals from the Global Positioning System (GPS), a navigation algorithm based on the Extended Kalman Filter was demonstrated to achieve a three-dimensional root-mean-square accuracy of 58:9 m over a 500 km ¢ 40 000 km Molniya orbit.
    [Show full text]
  • Orbital Mechanics Course Notes
    Orbital Mechanics Course Notes David J. Westpfahl Professor of Astrophysics, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology March 31, 2011 2 These are notes for a course in orbital mechanics catalogued as Aerospace Engineering 313 at New Mexico Tech and Aerospace Engineering 362 at New Mexico State University. This course uses the text “Fundamentals of Astrodynamics” by R.R. Bate, D. D. Muller, and J. E. White, published by Dover Publications, New York, copyright 1971. The notes do not follow the book exclusively. Additional material is included when I believe that it is needed for clarity, understanding, historical perspective, or personal whim. We will cover the material recommended by the authors for a one-semester course: all of Chapter 1, sections 2.1 to 2.7 and 2.13 to 2.15 of Chapter 2, all of Chapter 3, sections 4.1 to 4.5 of Chapter 4, and as much of Chapters 6, 7, and 8 as time allows. Purpose The purpose of this course is to provide an introduction to orbital me- chanics. Students who complete the course successfully will be prepared to participate in basic space mission planning. By basic mission planning I mean the planning done with closed-form calculations and a calculator. Stu- dents will have to master additional material on numerical orbit calculation before they will be able to participate in detailed mission planning. There is a lot of unfamiliar material to be mastered in this course. This is one field of human endeavor where engineering meets astronomy and ce- lestial mechanics, two fields not usually included in an engineering curricu- lum.
    [Show full text]