[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]
Fwd: AO-40 Orbital Stability
- Subject: Fwd: [amsat-bb] AO-40 Orbital Stability
- From: "Mark L. Hammond" <mlhammond@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 07:59:33 -0400
>Following the ARCJET cold out-gassing to raise perigee in June 2001, the
>orbit was modeled and, like AO-10, it is stable for hundreds and
>hundreds of years. I got tired of letting the orbital integrator
>run!! I had an amsat-bb post regarding this, but can't find it at the
>moment. The software used is the same software that correctly predicted
>AO-13's re-entry to the DAY, using keps immediately after its second
>orbital burn, just after launch.
Is this the post you were thinking of Stacey? At least it's relevant...
73,
Mark
>X-Sender: w4sm@cstone.net
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
>Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 19:17:40 -0500
>To: amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org (Amsat Bulletin Board)
>From: "Stacey E. Mills, M.D." <w4sm@cstone.net>
>Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-40 Orbital Stability
>Sender: owner-AMSAT-BB@AMSAT.Org
>X-RCPT-TO: <hammond@surrealnet.net>
>
>At 04:30 PM 2000-12-24 -0600, you wrote:
>>One other question to be considered: Is the current orbit stable? I know
>>next to nothing about orbital mechanics. But AO-13 died a firey death
>>because of an orbital instability. We wouldn't want the same thing to
>>happen to P3D. But then again, it might be fine.
>>
>>73,
>>
>>Jon
>>NA9D
>
>I'll take a shot at this one. The orbit is incredibly stable. It's not
>the eccentricity per se that creates instability. It's the combination of
>eccentricity and high inclination, along with RAAN and ArgP that has the
>potential for instability due to solar/lunar forces. The current low
>inclination orbit is highly stable. I've integrated the orbital elements,
>accounting for drag, and the pull of the sun and moon for decades and the
>orbit is quite stable. Perigee height varies by several hundred km and
>there is some very minor drag loss when the perigee is at its lowest
>point, but there is also gravitational "pumping" of energy into the
>orbit. In fact, after 40 years, mean motion is 1.266, lower (ie. a higher
>energy orbit) than it is today. For a graph of the orbital elements over
>the next approx. 10 years, 20 years and 40 years download:
>
>www.cstone.net/~w4sm2/software2/AO40-10.gif
>
>www.cstone.net/~w4sm2/software2/AO40-20.gif
>
>www.cstone.net/~w4sm2/software2/AO40-40.gif
>
>
>NOTE: these graphs, particularly the 40 year graph are very "busy" and
>difficult to read. However, note that mean motion (in green) barely
>changes and height at perigee (in black) shows a cyclic variation from a
>low of about 270 km to a high of about 700 km. If you look carefully, you
>will also see the cyclic effects of the sun and the moon on the orbital
>elements.
>
>
>
>--
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Stacey E. Mills, W4SM WWW: http://www.cstone.net/~w4sm/ham1.html
> Charlottesville, VA PGP key: http://www.cstone.net/~w4sm/key
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
----
Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
AMSAT Home