Feasibility for Orbital Life Extension of a CubeSat Flying in the Lower Thermosphere

Impact of Mega Constellations on Geospace Safety

“…For the same ACPL values, the risks of the three have increased, becoming 5.5947, 4.5, and 62.73 times more than the previous ones, which means that even with frequent control avoidance, the geospace environment does not improve, i.e., the total amount of risk becomes greater, the same proportional residual risk becomes higher, and therefore the same ACPL values require more control avoidance For most satellites the probability of problems with the payload itself is extremely low, so the life of a satellite is designed to be measured in terms of propellant, and when the propellant is depleted, the life of a satellite is over. Orbital avoidance consumes propellant, and when satellites change orbit more often due to excessive avoidance, the lifetime of the satellite is affected [30,31].Assuming a lifetime of 5 years for one satellite in the case of ACPL-10 −4 when Starlink is not considered, the lifetime of the three satellites is shortened by 56.21%, 99.09%, and 99.82% when Starlink is considered without advance avoidance control; the lifetime of the three satellites is shortened by 10 revolutions of advance avoidance control without Starlink, when assuming that each warning event satellite can be detected in the case of avoiding control 10 revolutions in advance, without considering Starlink. Assuming that each warning event satellite can be detected and controlled in advance, the lifetime of the three target satellites can be extended by 380%, 502.6%, 493.12%.…”