Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T07:24:03.132Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

ORION: Clearing near-Earth space debris using a 20-kW, 530-nm, Earth-based, repetitively pulsed laser

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

C.R. Phipps
Affiliation:
Advanced Optical Systems Development Group, Mail Stop E543, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA
G. Albrecht
Affiliation:
Advanced Applications Group, Mail Stop L488, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
H. Friedman
Affiliation:
Advanced Applications Group, Mail Stop L488, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
D. Gavel
Affiliation:
Advanced Applications Group, Mail Stop L488, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
E.V. George
Affiliation:
Advanced Applications Group, Mail Stop L488, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
J. Murray
Affiliation:
Advanced Applications Group, Mail Stop L488, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
C. Ho
Affiliation:
Astrophysics and Radiation Measurements Group, Mail Stop D-436, Los Alamos, National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA
W. Priedhorsky
Affiliation:
Astrophysics and Radiation Measurements Group, Mail Stop D-436, Los Alamos, National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA
M.M. Michaelis
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Natal, Durban 4001, South Africa
J.P. Reilly
Affiliation:
Northeast Science and Technology Inc., 117 Northshore Blvd., East Sandwich, MA 02537, USA

Abstract

When a large piece of space debris forced a change of flight plan for arecent U.S. Space Shuttle mission, the concept that we are trashing space as well as Earth finally attained broad public awareness. Almost a million pieces of debris have been generated by 35 years of spaceflight, and now threaten long-term space missions. The most economical solution to this problem is to cause space debris items to reenter and burn up in the atmosphere. For safe handling of large objects, it is desired to do this on a precomputed trajectory. Due to the number, speed, and spacial distribution of the objects, a highly agile source of mechanical impulse, as well as a quantum leap in detection capability are required. For reasons we will discuss, we believe that the best means of accomplishing these goals is the system we propose here, which uses a ground-based laser system and active beam phase error correcting beam director to provide the impulse, together with a new, computer-intensive, very high-resolution optical detection system to locate objects as small as 1 cm at 500-km range. Illumination of the objects by the repetitively pulsed laser produces a laser-ablation jet that gives the impulse to de-orbit the object. A laser of just 20-kW average power and state-of-the-art detection capabilities could clear near-Earth space below 100-km altitude of all space debris larger than 1 cm but less massive than 100 kg in about 4 years, and all debris in the threatening 1–20-cm size range in about 2 years of continuous operation. The ORION laser would be sited near the Equator at a high altitude location (e.g., the Uhuru site on Kilimanjaro), minimizing turbulence correction, conversion by stimulated Raman scattering, and absorption of the 530-nm wavelength laser beam. ORION is a special case of Laser Impulse Space Propulsion (LISP), studied extensively by Los Alamos and others over the past 4 years.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Albrecht, G.F. et al. 1990 Appl. Opt. 29, 3079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, J.J. 1989 Appl. Opt. 28, 438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bischel, W.K. & Heustis, D.L. 1984 In Proc. Workshop on Nonlinear Optical Techniques for Short Wavelength Lasers (Naval Research Laboratory), Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bolotin, V.A. et al. 1992 Laser Part. Beams 10, 685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess, M.D.J. et al. 1978 In Proc. IAEA Conf. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion Research (International Atomic Energy Agency, Innsbruck, Austria).Google Scholar
Campbell, J.H. et al. 1990 Proc. SPIE 1441, 444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramer, B. & Bogert, P. 1993 (unpublished NASA viewgraph presentation).Google Scholar
Dane, C.B. et al. 1995 IEEE J. Quant. Electron. QE-31, 148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Encyclopaedia Britannica 1992.Google Scholar
Erlandson, A.C. et al. 1992 J. Opt. Soc. Am. B9, 214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabbro, R. et al. 1991 J. Appl. Phys. 68, 775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flury, W. & McKnight, D. 1993 Adv. Spce Res. 13, 299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, D.L. 1965. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 55, 11.Google Scholar
Gebhardt, F.G. 1976 Appl. Opt. 15, 1479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hills, J. 1992 Los Alamos internal report LA-UR-92–2321.Google Scholar
Ho, C. et al. 1993 In Proc. SPIE 1951, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffland, R. 1986 J. Defense Research Special Issue 86, 1.Google Scholar
Hongwoo, N. 1987 International Conference on Lasers '87, (Paper IV. 13) Xiamen, PRC.Google Scholar
Kantrowitz, A. 1972 Astronaut. Aeronaut. 10, 74.Google Scholar
Kurnit, N. 1994 private communication.Google Scholar
Kurnit, N. & Ackerhalt, J. 1984 In Proc. Workshop on Nonlinear Optical Techniques for Short Wavelength Lasers, (Naval Research Laboratory), Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Lencioni, D.E. & Kleinman, H. 1975 report AGARD-CP-183, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.Google Scholar
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Report 1994, UCRL-PROP-117093.Google Scholar
Loftus, J. & Reynolds, R. 1993 SPIE 1951, 147.Google Scholar
Maethner, S. et al. 1995, paper AAS-95–198, AAS/AIAA Spaceflight Mechanics Conference, February 13–16, Albuquerque, NM.Google Scholar
Marx, G. 1966 Nature 211, 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, J.D. et al. 1989 J. Propulsion & Power 5, 582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möckel, W.E. 1972a J. Spacecraft and Rockets 9, 863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möckel, W.E. 1972b J. Spacecraft and Rockets 9, 942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möckel, W.E. 1975 J. Spacecraft and Rockets 12, 700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, J.R. & Fleck, J.A. 1977 Lawrence Livermore Laboratory report UCRL-52377.Google Scholar
Monroe, D.K. 1994 SPIE 2121, 276.Google Scholar
Nnko, G. 1994 private communication.Google Scholar
Phipps, C.R. et al. 1988 J. Appl. Phys. 64, 1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phipps, C.R. 1993 AIP Conference Proceedings 318, 466.Google Scholar
Phipps, C.R. & Dreyfus, R.W. 1993. Laser Microprobe Analysis, Vertes, A., Gijbels, R., and Adams, F., eds., (John Wiley, NY), p. 369.Google Scholar
Phipps, C.R. & Michaelis, M.M. 1994 Laser & Part. Beams 12, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phipps, C.R. 1995 Laser & Part. Beams 13, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly, J.P. 1976 In Proc. Second DoD High Energy Laser Conference, (U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs).Google Scholar
Robey, H.F. et al. 1991 J. Appl. Phys 69, 1915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sänger, E. 1956 Aero Digest, 68.Google Scholar
Shoup, M.J. III et al. 1992 Proc. SPIE 1627, 252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, S.B. & Albrecht, G.F. 1991 J. Appl. Phys. 69, 1183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Times Atlas of the World 1992 Times Books, London. Plates 93 (Kilimanjaro), 119 (Ecuador), and 15 (Jaya).Google Scholar
Van Wonterghem, B.M. et al. 1995 In Proc. IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Drivers for Inertial Confinement Fusion, Paris, 1418 November 1994, IAEA, May 1995.Google Scholar
Zeiders, G.W. 1974 W.J. Schafer Associates report WJSA-TR-74–18.Google Scholar