Dynamical lifetime survey of geostationary transfer orbits

Abstract

In this paper, we study the long-term dynamical evolution of highly-elliptical orbits (HEOs) in the medium-Earth orbit (MEO) region around the Earth. The real population consists primarily of Geosynchronous Transfer Orbits (GTOs), launched at specific inclinations, Molniya-type satellites and related debris. We performed a suite of long-term numerical integrations (up to 200 years) within a realistic dynamical model, aimed primarily at recording the dynamical lifetime of such orbits (defined as the time needed for atmospheric reentry) and understanding its dependence on initial conditions and other parameters, such as the area-to-mass ratio (A/m). Our results are presented in the form of 2-D lifetime maps, for different values of inclination, A/m, and drag coefficient. We find that the majority of small debris (> 70%, depending on the inclination) can naturally reenter within 25-90 years, but these numbers are significantly less optimistic for large debris (e.g., upper stages), with the notable exception of those launched from high latitude (Baikonur). We estimate the reentry probability and mean dynamical lifetime for different classes of GTOs and we find that both quantities depend primarily and strongly on initial perigee altitude. Atmospheric drag and higher A/m values extend the reentry zones, especially at low inclinations. For high inclinations, this dependence is weakened, as the primary mechanisms leading to reentry are overlapping lunisolar resonances. This study forms part of the EC-funded (H2020) "ReDSHIFT" project.

Medium Earth Orbit dynamical survey and its use in passive debris removal

“…The top diagrams show the population for e = [0 : 0.9] and i = [0 : 90 • ], while the bottom diagrams focus around the GNSS groups. We refer the reader to Skoulidou et al (2018) for a recent more detailed study of the long-term dynamics of the GTO and Molniya populations.…”

“…Of course, atmospheric drag is relevant for GTO and Molniya evolution, as expounded on inSkoulidou et al (2018).6 Note that the satellite's initial node and perigee angles were taken relative to the equatorial lunar values at the corresponding epoch.…”

Dynamical cartography of Earth satellite orbits

“…The nonnegligible collision risks posed by these LEO-GEO transiting spacecraft has motivated both theoretical study and practical implementation (Armellin et al, 2015;Colombo et al, 2015;Merz et al, 2015). Even for the, seemingly more simple, inclined, nearly circular orbits of the navigation satellites, no official guidelines exist, and recent analyses have shown that the problem is far too complex to allow of an adoption of the basic geosynchronous graveyard strategy (Rosengren et al, 2015;Daquin et al, 2016;Celletti et al, 2016;Gkolias et al, 2016;Rosengren et al, 2017;Skoulidou et al, 2017) Fig. 1.…”

“…However, we consider here a relatively coarse grid of initial conditions, spanning the complete LEO to GEO distributions in the whole range of e and i. The higher-resolution exploration, using grids specifically tailored to each orbital region based on the spatial densities of operational orbits, is presented elsewhere (Skoulidou et al, 2017;Gkolias and Colombo, 2017;Alessi et al, 2018a) or is forthcoming (Alessi et al, 2018b;Skoulidou et al, submitted for publication). Note, however, that our coarse grid also covers large parts of near-Earth space (particularly in the MEO region) that are currently not used much in operations and are typically excluded from similar studies.…”

ReDSHIFT: A Global Approach to Space Debris Mitigation

“…Examples of the maps obtained, for the different orbital regimes are shown in Figures 2-5. All the maps produced can be found in the website of the project (http:\redshift-h2020.eu) and the theoretical analysis of the results obtained in the mapping can be found in [2][3][4][5][6] and cannot be repeated here for lack of space. Similarly, Figure 3 shows the same map but with only the satellites now highlighted with red circles.…”