Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Conjunction assessment — where it appears

The prediction of whether two orbiting objects will pass close enough to warrant a manoeuvre, screened days ahead and decided hours before. It is nearly immune to a density error, because both objects are displaced almost equally.

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

1,236 fragments anybody can see, and 63,397 that can kill. The cumulative fragment size distribution from the standard breakup model, for a catastrophic collision involving 1500 kilograms and for an explosion of the same object, both axes logarithmic. The exponents are −1.71 and −1.60, measured off the drawn curves; they are empirical, fitted to ground tests and to the observed clouds of real events, and they are steep. What follows is the reason a catalogue of tracked objects is not a catalogue of the hazard. Above ten centimetres — the size a ground radar can follow in low orbit — the collision makes about 1,236 pieces. Above one centimetre, which is the size that goes through a spacecraft at ten kilometres a second and cannot be shielded against, it makes 63,397. Above a millimetre, which shielding does stop but which erodes a surface, 3,251,385. The tracked population is under two per cent of the lethal one, and the difference is not a gap in the catalogue that better radars will close — objects of a centimetre at a thousand kilometres are beyond any sensor that has been proposed. An explosion makes fewer large pieces than a collision and a comparable number of small ones, because an explosion divides one object and a collision destroys two.

The fragments nobody can see and cannot shield against

A catastrophic collision in low orbit makes about a thousand pieces big enough to track and sixty thousand big enough to destroy a spacecraft. The catalogue is under two per cent of the hazard, the gap is not one better radars will close, and the fragments' lifetimes span a factor of twenty-five within a single event.

spaceflight · Orbital debris Assimilation buys a factor of 3.6 at 2 hours and 1.03 at 14 days. The along-track position error of a low-orbit object against how far ahead the prediction reaches, on logarithmic axes. The upper curve uses a climatological density model, whose error stays at 15 per cent however long it is run — the limitation is the functional form and the proxies driving it rather than a shortage of data. The others assimilate the observed drag on objects already in orbit, which replaces that with an observation error of 3 per cent and then lets the thermosphere forget, with memories of 0.5, 1.5, 4 days. Every curve rises as the square of the time, because an error in a drag acceleration integrates twice into a position. The advantage is a factor of 3.6 at 2 hours and 1.03 at 14 days, so assimilation changes what a conjunction screening can do and changes nothing about a re-entry date — and the dashed line is the kilometre at which a close approach becomes a manoeuvre decision.

A weather forecast made out of orbits

A density model fitted to fifty years of satellite drag is a climatology, and its error does not shrink with more data. Updating it from the drag observed on objects in orbit right now is the manoeuvre a weather forecast makes — and it buys a factor of several for a day and nothing at all for a fortnight.

spaceflight · Atmospheric drag

Named alongside it

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

Along-track errorArea-to-mass ratioBallistic coefficientBreakup modelData assimilationEmpirical modelForecast horizonHypervelocity impactKessler syndromeOrbital debrisOrbital decayOrbital lifetime

All concepts