Absolute atmospheric densities determined from the spin and orbital decays of explorer VI

Moe, Kenneth

doi:10.1016/0032-0633(66)90022-5

Cited by 38 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of a number of excellent models available [Schamberg, 1959;Nocilla, 1963;Karr, 1969] we have found it convenient to use Schamberg's. This model was used to infer drag and accommodation coefficients from the paddle wheel satellite Explorer 6 [Moe, 1966]. Because of the highly eccentric orbit of that satellite it was possible to make several simplifying assumptions and approximations which permitted the integrals to be evaluated analytically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On fundamental problems in the deduction of atmospheric densities from satellite drag

Imbro¹,

Moe²,

Moe³

1975

J. Geophys. Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The largest source of error in the deduction of atmospheric densities from orbital data stems from uncertainty in our knowledge of the interaction of atmospheric molecules with satellite surfaces. A method of determining two of the important parameters, the accommodation and drag coefficients, is developed in detail. As an example, the method is applied to observational data from the paddle wheel satellite Ariel 2. Because of the importance of spherical sateilk{es the drag coefficient for a sphere under the conditions of Ariel 2 ( a moderately eccentric orbit with perigee near 300 km) is also obtained. The importance of well-designed orbital experiments to improve our knowledge of surface-particle interactions at a variety of altitudes is stressed.2 and derived an accommodation coefficient from observa-parameters and surface conditions. The Schamberg model was developed to describe the interaction of artificial satellites with the upper atmosphere. The appropriate aerodynamic regime is 'free molecular' flow; i.e., the effects on the satellite can be deduced by considering only 3077

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On fundamental problems in the deduction of atmospheric densities from satellite drag

Imbro¹,

Moe²,

Moe³

1975

J. Geophys. Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ken Moe who had developed improved atmospheric models, established some limits on accommodation coefficient for calculation of the drag coefficient of satellites by considering the linear and angular momentum of paddle wheel satellites [12]. The thrusters were mounted so they were servoed to null, thus making a direct measurement of the thruster force.…”

Section: Drag-freementioning

confidence: 99%

Pomeranchuk singularity and high-energy hadronic interactions

Kaidalov

2003

Phys.-Usp.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The design of drag cancellation missions of the future will take advantage of the technology experience of the past. The importance of data for modeling of the atmosphere led to at least six types of measurement: (a) balloon flights, (b) missile-launched falling spheres, (c) the 'cannonball' satellites of Ken Champion with accelerometers for low-altitude drag measurement (late 1960s and early 1970s), (d) the Agena flight of LOGACS (1967), a Bell MESA accelerometer mounted on a rotating platform to spectrally shift low-frequency errors in the accelerometer, (e) a series of French low-level accelerometers (e.g. CACTUS, 1975), and (f) correction of differential accelerations for drag errors in measuring gravity gradient on a pair of satellites (GRACE, 2002). The independent invention of the drag-free satellite concept by Pugh and Lange (1964) to cancel external disturbance added implementation opportunities. Its first flight application was for ephemeris prediction improvement with the DISCOS flight (1972)-still the only extended free test mass flight. Then successful flights for reduced disturbance environment for science measurement with gyros on GP-B (2004) and for improved accuracy in geodesy and ocean studies (GOCE, 2009) each using accelerometer measurements to control the drag-canceling thrust. LISA, DECIGO, BBO and other gravity wave-measuring satellite systems will push the cancellation of drag to new levels. PACS numbers: 04.80.Cc, 04.80.Nn, 07.07.Df, 07.05.Fb, 92.60.−e, 93.85.Hj, 95.5.−n, 95.10.Eg, 95.30.Sf, 95.40.+s (Some figures in this article are in color only in the electronic version) 0264-9381/11/094015+11$33.00

show abstract

“…Another paper by Newton [1969] represents an effort to correct the pressure-gage measurements made aboard Explorer 17 [Newton et al, 1965]. As had been pointed out on theoretical [Cook, 1965;Izakov, 1965] and experimental grounds [Moe, 1966[Moe, , 1968, the satellite drag coefficients near 250 krn are in error by no more than 10 or 20%, so most of the reported discrepancy of a factor of 2 between the gage and drag measurements of Explorer 17 had to be ascribed to the gages. The resolution of this discrepancy proposed by Newton is incomplete, however, because it is an ad hoc adjustment that does not resolve some of the fundamental physical problems encountered in interpreting gage data: His resolution cannot explain, for example, why the curve that gives the pressure as a function of time during a spin cycle is asymmetric, or why the background rises when the satellite moves down toward perigee.…”

Section: Lettersmentioning

confidence: 99%