Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:19:13.379Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Sun-synchronous repeat ground tracks and other useful orbits for future space missions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2020

S.W. Paek*
Affiliation:
Materials R&D Centre, Samsung SDI, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea
S. Kim
Affiliation:
Centre for Electronic Materials, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, Republic of Korea
L. Kronig
Affiliation:
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Space Engineering Centre (eSpace), Lausanne, Switzerland
O. de Weck
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Abstract

The development of oceanography and meteorology has greatly benefited from satellite-based data of Earth’s atmosphere and ocean. Traditional Earth observation missions have utilised Sun-synchronous orbits with repeat ground tracks due to their advantages in visible and infrared wavelengths. However, diversification of observation wavelengths and massive deployment of miniaturised satellites are both enabling and necessitating new kinds of space missions. This paper proposes several unconventional satellite orbits intended for use in, but not limited to, Earth observation. This ‘toolbox’ of orbits and taxonomy thereof will thus support the definition of design requirements for the individual satellites in nano-satellite constellations developed by national space agencies, industries and academia.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

A version of this paper was first presented at the 18th Australian International Aerospace Congress in February 2019.

References

REFERENCES

Short, N.M., Lowman, P.D., Scott, M., Hobsh, M.K., Stoney, W.E., Rosalanka, J., Love, J., Robinson, J.W. and Weissel, J.The remote sensing tutorial, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA, 2004.Google Scholar
Irons, J.R., Taylor, M.P. and Rocchio, L. Landsat1 – NASA Landsat Science, 2016. https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/landsat-1/ (Accessed: 30 April 2019).Google Scholar
Ruf, C.S., Atlas, R., Chang, P.S., Clarizia, M.P., Garrison, J.L., Gleason, S., Katzberg, S.J., Jelenak, Z., Johnson, J.T., Majumdar, S.J., O’brien, A., Posselt, D.J., Ridley, A.J., Rose, R.J. and Zavorotny, V.U.. New ocean winds satellite mission to probe hurricanes and tropical convection. Bulletin American Meteorological Society, 2016, pp 385395. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00218.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, P., Radnóti, G., Healy, S. and Cadinali, C. GNSS radio occultation constellation observing system experiments, Mon Weather Rev, 2014, 142, (2), pp 555572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reigber, C., Helm, A. and Rother, M. CHAMP: Mission & Orbit, 2005. http://op.gfz-potsdam.de/champ/orbit/index_PRD.html (Accessed: 30 April 2019).Google Scholar
Paek, S.W., Kim, S., Kronig, L.G. and De Weck, O.L. Sun-synchronous repeat ground tracks and other useful orbits for future space missions. Proceeding of 27th International Symposium on Space Flight Dynamics, Melbourne, Australia, February 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Moigne, J., Adams, J.C. and Nag, S.A new taxonomy for distributed spacecraft missions, IEEE J-STARS, 2020 (in print).Google Scholar
Paek, S.W., Kronig, L. G., Ivanov, A. B. and De Weck, O. L.Satellite constellation design for the SOLVE mission investigating diurnal cycles of vegetation phenomena, Adv Space Res, 2018, 62, (9), pp 25292550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paek, S.W., Kim, S. and De Weck, O.L.Optimization of reconfigurable satellite constellations using simulated annealing and genetic algorithm, Sensors, 2019, 19, 765.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paek, S.W.Reconfigurable satellite constellations for geo-spatially adaptive Earth observation mission, Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 2012.Google Scholar
Vallado, D.Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Applications, Springer, 2007, New York.Google Scholar
Paek, S.W., De Weck, O.L. and Smith, M.W.Concurrent design optimization of Earth observation satellites and reconfigurable constellations, J Br Interplanet Soc, 2017, 70, (1), pp 1935.Google Scholar
Legge, R.S., Optimization and valuation of reconfigurable satellite constellations under uncertainty, PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 2012.Google Scholar
Brucolleri, C. Flower Constellation Optimization and Implementation, PhD thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA, 2007.Google Scholar
Nag, S., Li, A.S. and Merrick, J.H.Scheduling algorithms for rapid imaging using agile Cubesat constellations. Adv Space Res, 2018, 61, (3), pp 891913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorst, N. What is the average forward speed of a hurricane? 2014. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/G16.html (Accessed: 2 January 2019).Google Scholar
Paek, S.W. and De Weck, O.L. Delta-v map of useful orbits for Earth observation missions, International Astronautical Congress, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, October 2014.Google Scholar
Richter, A., Eyring, V., Burrows, J.P., Bovensmann, H., Lauer, A., Sierk, B., Crutzen, P. J.Satellite measurements of NO2 from international shipping emissions, Geophys Res Lett, 2004, 31, (23), L23110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebreton, L., Slat, B., Ferrari, F., Sainte-Rose, B., Aitken, J., Marthouse, R., Hajbane, S., Cunsolo, S., Schwarz, A., Levivier, A., Noble, K., Debeljak, P., Maral, H., Schoeneich-Argent, R., Brambini, R. and Reisser, J.Evidence that the great Pacific Garbage Patch is rapidly accumulating plastic, J Sci Rep, 2018, 8, (4666), pp 115.Google ScholarPubMed
Mortari, D., Matthew, P., Wilkins, M.P. and Bruccoleri, C. On Sun-Synchronous Orbits and Associated Constellations, Proceedings of 6th Dynamics and Control of Systems and Structures (DCSSS) Conference, Riomaggiore, Italy, 2004.Google Scholar
Ulivieri, C. and Anselmo, L. Multi-sun-synchronous (MSS) orbits for Earth observation, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Astrodynamics, 1991, 76, AAS91-361.Google Scholar
Wagner, T.J.W., Dell, R. W. and Eisenman, I.An analytical model of iceberg drift, J Phys Oceanograph, 2017, 47, (6), pp 16051616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, C.J., Macdonald, M., Greenland, S. and Mckee, D. ‘Charybdis’–The next generation in ocean colour and biogeochemical remote sensing, Proceedings of Small Satellite Conference, 2012, SSC12-IV-7, Logan, Utah, USA.Google Scholar
De Weck, O. L., Scialom, U. and Siddiqi, A.Optimal reconfiguration of satellite constellations with the auction algorithm. Acta Astronaut, 2008, 62, (2–3), pp 112130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourgoin, J.-P., Meyer-Scott, E., Higgins, B.L., Helou, B., Erven, C., Hübel, H., Kumar, B., Hudson, D., D’souza, I., Girard, R., Laflamme, R. and Jennewein, T.A comprehensive design and performance analysis of low Earth orbit satellite quantum communication, New J Phys, 2013, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudhary, K. and Vishvakarma, B.R.Feasibility study of LEO, GEO and Molniya orbit-based satellite solar power station for some identified sites in India. Adv Space Res, 2010, 46, (9), pp 11771183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foreman, V., Siddiqi, A. and De Weck, O.L. Large satellite constellation orbital debris impacts: case studies of OneWeb and SpaceX proposals, AIAA 2017-5200, AIAA SPACE and Astronautics Forum and Exposition, Orlando, Florida, USA, September 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paek, S.W., Kim, S. and Payappan, C.V.R.Optimal endurance and range of electric aircraft with battery degradation, T Jpn Soc Aeronaut, 2020, 63 (in print).Google Scholar