Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Line of sight — where it appears

The direction from an observer to a source. In relative navigation it is all a camera measures, and because the dynamics are homogeneous a direction carries no length, so the range remains unknown until something with a length in it is spent.

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

How far across the ground a satellite can be seen from, at 0, 10, 30° masks. The footprint of a satellite — the largest angle at the Earth's centre between the point beneath it and a station that can still see it above an elevation mask — against altitude, on a logarithmic axis. λ = arccos(R cos ε / (R + h)) − ε. At low altitude it grows as the square root of the height, λ ≈ √(2h/R), drawn dashed for the horizon mask, so doubling a low orbit's altitude widens its footprint by only about forty per cent; far out it saturates, and no altitude sees past 90° − ε. At 420 km (a space station) the 0° footprint is 20.2°, a circle 2,254 km in radius holding 3.1 per cent of the Earth's surface. At 20,180 km (a navigation satellite) the 0° footprint is 76.1°, a circle 8,472 km in radius holding 38.0 per cent of the Earth's surface. At 35,786 km (geostationary) the 0° footprint is 81.3°, a circle 9,050 km in radius holding 42.4 per cent of the Earth's surface. Raising the mask costs most at low altitude: at 420 km a 10° mask takes 38 per cent off the footprint's radius and 62 per cent off its area, because most of what a low satellite could see is near the horizon, while at 35,786 km the same mask takes 20 per cent of the area.

The circle a station can see

A ground station can talk to a satellite only while the satellite is above its horizon, and the region it can do that from is a circle drawn round the point beneath the spacecraft. The circle grows as the square root of the altitude and then stops growing, the time spent inside it diverges at one altitude, and the stations that get the most contact are not where anyone would first put them.

spaceflight · Ground tracks Two ranges that look identical until something is spent. The bearing to a target, as a camera measures it, for two relative orbits that differ only in size — one 2.5 times further away than the other in every coordinate at every instant. Before the manoeuvre the two histories are identical to machine precision, and that is not a numerical accident but a property of the equations: the linearised relative dynamics are homogeneous, so scaling a whole trajectory gives another trajectory, and a direction is unchanged by scaling. An angles-only tracker is therefore exactly blind to range, and no amount of observing improves it. At 42 per cent of the way through, both vehicles fire the same 0.05 m/s impulse — and the histories separate, by up to 2.3 degrees, because an impulse measured in metres per second is the one quantity in the problem that does not scale with the trajectory. The manoeuvre is what makes range observable, which is why an autonomous vehicle navigating on a camera alone flies a deliberate zig-zag rather than a straight approach, and why the manoeuvre is chosen for what it reveals as much as for where it goes.

A camera that cannot see how far

The equations that make a close approach tractable are linear and homogeneous, so scaling an entire relative trajectory gives another valid one with every bearing identical. A vehicle navigating on angles alone is therefore not merely imprecise about range — it is exactly blind to it, and the only thing that restores the scale is spending propellant.

spaceflight · Rendezvous

Named alongside it

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

Angles only navigationThe Clohessy–Wiltshire equationsDegeneracyElevation maskFootprintGeostationary orbitGround stationGround trackHorizonImpulseInclinationKalman filter

All concepts