Geometrical geodesy techniques in Goddard earth models

The method for combining geometrical data with satellite dynamical and gravimetry data for the solution of geopotential and station location parameters is discussed. Geometrical tracking data (simultaneous events) from the global network of BC-4 stations are currently being processed in a solution that will greatly enhance of geodetic world system of stations. Previously the stations in Goddard earth models have been derived only from dynamical tracking data. A linear regression model is formulated from combining the data, based upon the statistical technique of weighted least squares. Reduced normal equations, independent of satellite and instrumental parameters, are derived for the solution of the geodetic parameters. Exterior standards for the evaluation of the solution and for the scale of the earth's figure are discussed

Effect of parallactic refraction correction on station height determination

The effect of omitting the parallactic refraction correction for satellite optical observations in the determination of station coordinates is analyzed for a large satellite data distribution. A significant error effect is seen in station heights. A geodetic satellite data distribution of 23 close earth satellites, containing 30,000 optical observations obtained by 13 principal Baker-Nunn camera sites, is employed. This distribution was used in a preliminary Goddard Earth Model (GEM 1) for the determination of the gravity field of the earth and geocentric tracking station locations. The parallactic refraction correction is modeled as an error on the above satellite data and a least squares adjustment for station locations is obtained for each of the 13 Baker-Nunn sites. Results show an average station height shift of +8 meters with a dispersion of plus or minus 0.7 meters for individual sites. Station latitude and longitude shifts amounted to less than a meter. Similar results are obtained from a theoretical method employing a probability distribution for the satellite optical observations

Evaluation of the Goddard range and range rate system at Rosman by intercomparison with GEOS 1 long-arc orbital solutions

Evaluation of Goddard range and range rate system at Rosman by intercomparison with GEOS 1 long-arc orbital solution

Gravity model comparison using Geos-1 long arc orbital solutions

Gravity model comparison using Geos-1 long arc orbital solution

A refined gravity model from Lageos (GEM-L2)

For abstract for A83-1354

Goddard earth models (5 and 6)

A comprehensive earth model has been developed that consists of two complementary gravitational fields and center-of-mass locations for 134 tracking stations on the earth's surface. One gravitational field is derived solely from satellite tracking data. This data on 27 satellite orbits is the most extensive used for such a solution. A second solution uses this data with 13,400 simultaneous events from satellite camera observations and surface gravimetric anomalies. The satellite-only solution as a whole is accurate to about 4.5 milligals as judged by the surface gravity data. The majority of the station coordinates are accurate to better than 10 meters as judged by independent results from geodetic surveys and by Doppler tracking of both distant space probes and near earth orbits

Optimum data weighting and error calibration for estimation of gravitational parameters

A new technique was developed for the weighting of data from satellite tracking systems in order to obtain an optimum least squares solution and an error calibration for the solution parameters. Data sets from optical, electronic, and laser systems on 17 satellites in GEM-T1 (Goddard Earth Model, 36x36 spherical harmonic field) were employed toward application of this technique for gravity field parameters. Also, GEM-T2 (31 satellites) was recently computed as a direct application of the method and is summarized here. The method employs subset solutions of the data associated with the complete solution and uses an algorithm to adjust the data weights by requiring the differences of parameters between solutions to agree with their error estimates. With the adjusted weights the process provides for an automatic calibration of the error estimates for the solution parameters. The data weights derived are generally much smaller than corresponding weights obtained from nominal values of observation accuracy or residuals. Independent tests show significant improvement for solutions with optimal weighting as compared to the nominal weighting. The technique is general and may be applied to orbit parameters, station coordinates, or other parameters than the gravity model