A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Technology
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Plane change using aerobraking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 24th 04, 10:55 PM
Remy Villeneuve
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Plane change using aerobraking

Hi,

In one of those moments of conceptual flux, I wondered if it would be
feasible, using today's existing materials, to developp a
zero-propellant orbital plane change capable satellite. (Emphasis on
the word -propellant-, not -energy- ;-P)

Considering that orbital plane change requires so much energy, in
fact, in many cases more energy than relaunching the thing from the
ground up again, I was considering combining two methods to achive a
plane change with zero propellant usage.

Consider a satellite with an electrodynamic tether and appropriate
structural stiffness and materials to resist Very LEO passages thru
the upper fringes of the atmosphere. Using it's solar panels as flaps,
a la Mars Global Surveyor, it would aerobrake with a profile such that
the resulting vector would be as perpendicular as possible to the
orbit in a normal or antinormal fashion, changing the inclination a
few tenths of degrees at a time, every 90 minutes...

At apogee, the sat deploys an electromagnetic tether, and using power
from it's solar panel, induces propulsion to raise the perigee back to
the optimal altitude.

My questions are, how long would a tether need to be to provide
substantial propulsive capability, for "average" solar panel output.
And what would be the optimal perigee, balancing the thermal and drag
issue along with a reasonable plane change capability. At what point
does one need to consider thermal cycling issues and integrating a TPS
into the design?
  #2  
Old July 25th 04, 08:03 PM
MSu1049321
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Plane change using aerobraking

The drag created by tethers can also be used for braking/ deorbiting... in
fact, I seem to recall Boeing or TRW looking into making them standard
equipment for de-orbiting without relying on chemical motors or fuel.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MSNBC (JimO) - Hubble debate -- a lot of sound and fury JimO Space Shuttle 148 April 28th 04 06:39 PM
An UltraLight plane on Mars? A Canuck Technology 9 November 10th 03 11:07 PM
Three aerospace innovators Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Orbital Sciences Combine strengths to design and build NASA's Orbital Space Plane Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 1 October 15th 03 12:21 AM
Three aerospace innovators Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Orbital Sciences Combine strengths to design and build NASA's Orbital Space Plane Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 October 14th 03 03:31 PM
Columbia Investigator Worried NASA Won't Change Culture, Allowing'Faulty Reasoning' to Prevail Steven D. Litvintchouk Space Shuttle 0 August 3rd 03 06:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.