Flashover Plasma Characteristics on 5m2 Solar Array Panels in a Simulated Plasma Environment of Geostationary Orbit and Low Earth Orbit

Author(s):  
Teppei Okumura ◽  
Tomonori Suzuki ◽  
Kumi Nitta ◽  
Masato Takahashi ◽  
Kazuhiro Toyoda
2006 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1986-1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Hosoda ◽  
T. Okumura ◽  
J.-H. Kim ◽  
K. Toyoda ◽  
M. Cho

2005 ◽  
Vol 53 (622) ◽  
pp. 516-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seiji Aso ◽  
Tomoki Kitamura ◽  
Satoshi Hosoda ◽  
Jeongho Kim ◽  
Mengu Cho ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ahmed Mokhtar Mohamed ◽  
Fawzy ElTohamy H. Amer ◽  
R. M. Mostafa ◽  
Walid A. Wahballah

Author(s):  
Sandeep Vishwakarma ◽  
Aradhana S. Chauhan ◽  
Shoeba Aasma

It is known facts that satellites are used to receive the signal at geostationary orbit by remaining stationary above a particular point on the Earth. The orbit that is chosen for a satellite depends upon its application. Those used for direct broadcast television use geostationary orbit. Many communication satellites similarly use geostationary orbit. Other satellite systems used for satellite phones use Low Earth orbiting systems. Similarly, satellite systems used for navigation like Nav-star or Global Positioning (GPS) system occupy a relatively Low Earth Orbit. There are also many other types of satellites : Weather satellites Research satellites and many others. Each will have its own type of orbit depending upon its application. The actual satellite orbit that is chosen will depend on factors including its function, and the area of serving. At some instances, the satellite orbit may be as low as 100 miles (160 km) for a Low Earth Orbit (LEO), whereas others may be over 22 000 miles (36000 km) high as in the case of a Geostationary Orbit (GEO). The satellite may even has an elliptical rather than a circular orbit.


2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 055304
Author(s):  
Liying ZHU ◽  
Linchun FU ◽  
Ming QIAO ◽  
Bo CUI ◽  
Qi CHEN ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 120 (1226) ◽  
pp. 573-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Chudoba ◽  
G. Coleman ◽  
L. Gonzalez ◽  
E. Haney ◽  
A. Oza ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTIn an effort to quantify the feasibility of candidate space architectures for astronauts servicing Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO) satellites, a conceptual assessment of architecture-concept and operations-technology combinations has been performed. The focus has been the development of a system with the capability to transfer payload to and from geostationary orbit. Two primary concepts of operations have been selected: (a) Direct insertion/re-entry (Concept of Operations 1 – CONOP 1); (b) Launch to low-earth orbit at Kennedy Space Center inclination angle with an orbital transfer to/from geostationary orbit (Concept of Operations 2 – CONOP 2). The study concludes that a capsule and de-orbit propulsion module system sized for the geostationary satellite servicing mission is feasible for a direct insertion/re-entry concept of operation CONOP 1. Vehicles sized for CONOP 2 show overall total mass savings when utilising the aero-assisted orbital transfer vehicle de-orbit propulsion module options compared to the pure propulsive baseline cases. Overall, the consideration of technical, operational and cost factors determine if either the aero-assisted orbital transfer vehicle concepts or the re-usable/expendable ascent/de-orbit propulsion modules is the preferred option.


2011 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-141
Author(s):  
Sung-Soo Jang ◽  
Sung-Hoon Kim ◽  
Sang-Ryool Lee ◽  
Jae-Ho Choi

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document