Attitude control analysis of tethered de-orbiting

The increase of satellites and rocket upper stages in low earth orbit (LEO) has also increased substantially the danger of collisions in space. Studies have shown that the problem will continue to grow unless a number of debris are removed every year. A typical active debris removal (ADR) mission scenario includes launching an active spacecraft (chaser) which will rendezvous with the inactive target (debris), capture the debris and eventually deorbit both satellites. Many concepts for the capture of the debris while keeping a connection via a tether, between the target and chaser have been investigated, including harpoons, nets, grapples and robotic arms. The paper provides an analysis on the attitude control behaviour for a tethered de-orbiting mission based on the ESA e.Deorbit reference mission, where Envisat is the debris target to be captured by a chaser using a net which is connected to the chaser with a tether. The paper provides novel insight on the feasibility of tethered de-orbiting for the various mission phases such as stabilization after capture, de-orbit burn (plus stabilization), stabilization during atmospheric pass, highlighting the importance of various critical mission parameters such as the tether material. It is shown that the selection of the appropriate tether material while using simple controllers can reduce the effort needed for tethered deorbiting and can safely control the attitude of the debris/chaser connected with a tether, without the danger of a collision

Similar behaviour of the thermosphere and the ionosphere in the recovery phase of geomagnetic disturbances,

The neutral density excess as compared to the MSIS 86 model indicates a double valued dependence on the Kp geomagnetic activity index; a very similar dependence was found in some ionospheric parameters. The similarity hints at coupling between the ionosphere and the neutral upper-atmosphere during geomagnetic disturbances. Relations between the changes of these parameters and the neutral density are considered

Impact of the 26-30 May 2003 solar events on the earth ionosphere and thermosphere.

During the last week of May 2003, the solar active region AR 10365 produced a large number of flares, several of which were accompanied by Coronal Mass Ejections (CME). Specifically on 27 and 28 May three halo CMEs were observed which had a significant impact on geospace. On 29 May, upon their arrival at the L1 point, in front of the Earth's magnetosphere, two interplanetary shocks and two additional solar wind pressure pulses were recorded by the ACE spacecraft. The interplanetary magnetic field data showed the clear signature of a magnetic cloud passing ACE. In the wake of the successive increases in solar wind pressure, the magnetosphere became strongly compressed and the sub-solar magnetopause moved inside five Earth radii. At low altitudes the increased energy input to the magnetosphere was responsible for a substantial enhancement of Region-1 field-aligned currents. The ionospheric Hall currents also intensified and the entire high-latitude current system moved equatorward by about 10°. Several substorms occurred during this period, some of them - but not all - apparently triggered by the solar wind pressure pulses. The storm's most notable consequences on geospace, including space weather effects, were (1) the expansion of the auroral oval, and aurorae seen at mid latitudes, (2) the significant modification of the total electron content in the sunlight high-latitude ionosphere, (3) the perturbation of radio-wave propagation manifested by HF blackouts and increased GPS signal scintillation, and (4) the heating of the thermosphere, causing increased satellite drag. We discuss the reasons why the May 2003 storm is less intense than the October-November 2003 storms, although several indicators reach similar intensities

Progress in space weather modeling in an operational environment

This paper aims at providing an overview of latest advances in space weather modeling in an operational environment in Europe, including both the introduction of new models and improvements to existing codes and algorithms that address the broad range of space weather’s prediction requirements from the Sun to the Earth. For each case, we consider the model’s input data, the output parameters, products or services, its operational status, and whether it is supported by validation results, in order to build a solid basis for future developments. This work is the output of the Sub Group 1.3 ‘‘Improvement of operational models’’ of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action ES0803 ‘‘Developing Space Weather Products and services in Europe’’ and therefore this review focuses on the progress achieved by European research teams involved in the action

Ionospheric scintillation monitoring and modelling

This paper presents a review of the ionospheric scintillation monitoring and modelling by the European groups involved in COST 296. Several of these groups have organized scintillation measurement campaigns at low and high latitudes. Some characteristic results obtained from the measured data are presented. The paper also addresses the modeling activities: four models, based on phase screen techniques, with different options and application domains are detailed. Finally some new trends for research topics are given. This includes the wavelet analysis, the high latitudes analysis, the construction of scintillation maps and the mitigation techniques

Estimation and analysis of multi-GNSS differential code biases using a hardware signal simulator

In ionospheric modeling, the differential code biases (DCBs) are a non-negligible error source, which are routinely estimated by the different analysis centers of the International GNSS Service (IGS) as a by-product of their global ionospheric analysis. These are, however, estimated only for the IGS station receivers and for all the satellites of the different GNSS constellations. A technique is proposed for estimating the receiver and satellites DCBs in a global or regional network by first estimating the DCB of one receiver set as reference. This receiver DCB is then used as a ‘known’ parameter to constrain the global ionospheric solution, where the receiver and satellite DCBs are estimated for the entire network. This is in contrast to the constraint used by the IGS, which assumes that the involved satellites DCBs have a zero mean. The ‘known’ receiver DCB is obtained by simulating signals that are free of the ionospheric, tropospheric and other group delays using a hardware signal simulator. When applying the proposed technique for Global Positioning System legacy signals, mean offsets in the order of 3 ns for satellites and receivers were found to exist between the estimated DCBs and the IGS published DCBs. It was shown that these estimated DCBs are fairly stable in time, especially for the legacy signals. When the proposed technique is applied for the DCBs estimation using the newer Galileo signals, an agreement at the level of 1–2 ns was found between the estimated DCBs and the manufacturer’s measured DCBs, as published by the European Space Agency, for the three still operational Galileo in-orbit validation satellites