Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Characteristic energy — where it appears

The square of the speed a departing spacecraft retains relative to a planet at infinite distance, written C3 and quoted in square kilometres per second squared. It is what a launch vehicle's performance is specified against, and it is the vertical axis of every porkchop plot.

Named by 7 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The energy budget of an orbit at e = 0.7. Kinetic, potential and total energy per unit mass against distance from the primary, in units where GM = 1. The total is a horizontal line — it depends only on the semi-major axis — and the vis-viva relation is that statement solved for the speed.

One equation for the speed anywhere, and the eccentricity is not in it

The vis-viva relation gives the speed at any point of any orbit from two numbers. What it leaves out is the surprise — the shape of the orbit does not appear at all.

orbits · Vis-viva 1I/ʻOumuamua: an orbit at e = 1.201, and the angle it turned through. The open branch of a conic at eccentricity 1.201 and periapsis 0.2559 AU, with the Sun at the occupied focus. Two numbers fix everything else: |a| = q/(e−1) = 1.273 AU, an impact parameter b = |a|√(e²−1) = 0.847 AU, an asymptote at ν∞ = arccos(−1/e) = 146.37° from periapsis, and a deflection of δ = 2ν∞ − 180° = 112.74° — which is the same statement as sin(δ/2) = 1/e. The asymptotes cross at |a|e = 1.529 AU from the Sun on the periapsis side, where a bound orbit's centre would be on the other. The speed left over at infinity is √(μ/|a|) = 26.40 km/s. Schematic in one respect: the drawing runs at about 119 px to the AU, so the Sun's own disc would be far smaller than its marker.

The orbit that has no period

Above an eccentricity of 1 the conic is open, the energy is positive and the semi-major axis is negative — and the vis-viva relation survives the sign change without a single alteration. What replaces the period is a speed, and that speed is what says where a visitor came from.

orbits · Hyperbolic orbits Flight time against semi-major axis, for a fixed 135° sweep. Lambert's theorem drawn: the time to fly between two points 1 and 1.524 AU out and 135° apart, against the semi-major axis of the orbit that does it. Nothing else about the orbit enters — not its eccentricity, not where its periapsis is, not how it is oriented — which is the content of the theorem and the reason a two-point transfer is a one-dimensional search rather than a six-dimensional one. Two branches: the lower one is the ellipse whose arc stays short of apoapsis, falling towards the parabolic floor at 103.2 days as a grows without limit; the upper one is the ellipse of the same size whose arc runs through apoapsis, rising without limit. They meet at a = s/2 = 1.2161 AU, 244.2 days, which is the minimum-energy transfer and the slowest ellipse available — every faster one is bigger. Each branch is monotone, checked point by point across the drawn range, so a horizontal line cuts each at most once: for a given pair of points and a given time there is exactly one ellipse, and at 260 days it is a = 1.2189 AU on the upper branch. The freedom a mission designer has is not in this picture: it is the choice of the two points, which is what a porkchop plot sweeps.

Two places and a clock decide the path

The time to fly between two points depends on the semi-major axis, the chord between them, and the sum of their distances — and on nothing else about the orbit. Not the eccentricity, not where periapsis is, not the orientation. Lambert's theorem is why an interplanetary launch date is the root of one equation.

orbits · Lambert's problem How small a sphere of influence is. Each planet's sphere of influence as a fraction of its own orbital radius, against that radius, both logarithmic. The largest belongs to Jupiter at 6.19% and the smallest to Mercury at 0.194%. The patched-conic method treats a trajectory as heliocentric everywhere outside these, and the figure is the argument for why that costs so little: they are thousandths of the journey.

One trajectory, stitched from three two-body problems

An interplanetary flight is a problem with no closed solution. It is flown by cutting it into pieces that each have one, and the seams are places where the model is knowingly false.

spaceflight · Patched conics What a 1 km/s burn is worth, against where it is spent. A vehicle arriving at Jupiter with an excess speed of 5.6 km/s, burning 1 km/s along its velocity at one point of the hyperbola. The vertical axis is the excess speed it leaves with. Spent at the surface the burn is worth 12.33 km/s of departure speed; spent far away it is worth 7.20. The energy bought is v·Δv, so the same propellant is worth 5.9 times as much at the bottom of the well — and nothing about the rocket has changed.

The same burn is worth more when moving fast

A rocket firing for ten seconds delivers the same change of speed wherever it is. It does not deliver the same change of energy, because energy is quadratic in speed — so the identical burn buys six times as much at the bottom of a gravity well as at the top, and every escape manoeuvre ever flown is arranged around that fact.

spaceflight · Vis-viva The cost of going to Mars, against when to leave and how long to take. Contours of departure energy C₃ over a grid of 64 × 56 solved Lambert problems: each point is a departure date, a flight time, and the unique single-revolution conic that connects the two planets between them. The cheapest transfer on this grid costs 5.1 km²/s², leaving in Mar 2001 with a flight time of 220 days, against 8.7 for the idealised Hohmann transfer between circular orbits of the same radii. A launch window is a region on this plane, not a moment, and its shape is what a launch period is negotiated against.

Two dates decide a mission

Given where a spacecraft leaves from, where it is going, and how long it may take, there is exactly one orbit joining the two. Solving that problem over every pair of departure and arrival dates produces a contour map, and the shape of the contours is what a launch window actually is.

spaceflight · Launch windows Windows every 780 days, costing between 5 and 13. The cheapest departure energy available in each of 8 consecutive launch opportunities, each found by solving a grid of Lambert problems around the window and taking the minimum. Opportunities recur every 780 days — the synodic period of Earth and Mars, which is exact and which is why the interval between missions is always about twenty-six months. Their cost is not periodic on that interval. The cheapest here is 5.0 km²/s² and the dearest 12.9, a factor of 2.59, and the pattern repeats on a period of about fifteen years rather than on the synodic one. The cause is Mars's eccentricity of 0.093: a transfer that arrives near Mars's perihelion has less distance to cover and meets a faster-moving planet, and whether an opportunity does that depends on where Mars is in its own orbit — which drifts relative to the synodic cycle by a fixed amount each time and comes back into phase after seven windows. In launch mass the factor is larger than it looks: departure energy enters the rocket equation through an exponential, so a C₃ of 13 rather than 5 costs roughly 1.08 times the propellant at departure.

The window that comes back and the cost that does not

Launch opportunities to Mars recur every 780 days exactly, because that is the synodic period and a synodic period is arithmetic. What they cost does not repeat on that interval at all — the cheapest window is a factor of two and a half below the dearest, and the pattern comes back every fifteen years rather than every two.

spaceflight · Launch windows

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Launch windowGravity assistHohmann transferPatched conicsConic sectionsΔvEccentricityHyperbolic excess speedHyperbolic orbitKepler's equationLambert's problemOberth effect

All concepts