Next Article in Journal
Reliability Evaluation of Landing Gear Retraction/Extension Accuracy Based on Bayesian Theory
Previous Article in Journal
The Modulatory Effect of Inhibitors on the Thermal Decomposition Performance of Graded Al@AP Composites
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Patrol Route Design for Inclined Geosynchronous Orbit Satellites in Space Traffic Management

Space Engineering University, Beijing 101416, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Aerospace 2025, 12(4), 299; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace12040299
Submission received: 7 February 2025 / Revised: 28 March 2025 / Accepted: 29 March 2025 / Published: 31 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Astronautics & Space Science)

Abstract

:
Conducting surveys and the timely acquisition of satellite status, especially for high-value geostationary orbit (GEO) targets, is of great significance for space traffic management. This article proposes an approach for patrolling inclined geosynchronous orbit (IGSO) targets based on crossing points and spiral rings. The method involves six steps: (1) calculate the crossing position and crossing time of the IGSO targets; (2) design a spiral trajectory that satisfies the desired patrol time; (3) divide IGSO targets into regions using a dichotomy approach; (4) calculate the bidirectional longitude drift rate within each region; (5) determine the starting position of patrol for each region; and (6) determine the transfer trajectory for each region. By selecting a class of IGSO satellites as the target set, the proposed approach is analyzed and validated in detail. The results show that the patrol orbit can effectively achieve patrol all of IGSO targets, with a period of no more than 40 days and less than 13.5 kg fuel consumption. The total fuel consumption of a single patrol cycle in all regions does not exceed 91.82 kg.

1. Introduction

Space activities, including not only commercial mega constellation launches and on-orbit services, but also space exploration missions by more and more countries and international organizations, are increasing day by day, making the space environment more complex. The importance of space traffic management (STM) is becoming increasingly prominent. Space traffic management refers to the planning, supervision, coordination, and emergency response activities carried out by relevant management agencies through technical, legal, and other means to ensure the safe, efficient, and orderly launch, orbit operation, re-entry, and other activities of satellites. Space traffic management is also used to maintain the space environment and prevent unsafe factors such as electromagnetic interference, physical collisions, and environmental damage [1,2,3,4]. Although the legal issues of space traffic management are still under discussion and studied by scholars around the world, research of its technological issues, especially in future scenarios, could provide support for subsequent space traffic management and also contribute to the research of legal issues.
Space traffic management revolves around three core goals: safety, orderliness, and sustainability. Safety is the primary consideration, ensuring the normal operation of satellites and related equipment and preventing the occurrence of various accidents and incidents. As an important component of space traffic management, the space situational awareness (SSA) system is primarily responsible for monitoring and tracking of space targets, ensuring the safety and sustainable use of the space environment.
In the vast expanse of space, the GEO zone is a key area for space traffic management. It is generally considered that the GEO zone is a circular orbit with inclination of 0° and a radius of 42,164 km from the Earth’s center. In a strict sense, there is only one GEO in space. In order to effectively use and protect GEO, the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) has artificially delineated a GEO zone as shown in Figure 1 [5]. It can be seen that the GEO zone’s upper and lower height is 35,786 km ± 200 km, and the north-south range is latitude ±15°. In the zone, the inner ±75 km zone is the GEO working zone, while the rest is GEO maneuvering zone. Satellites in the GEO zone are widely used in navigation, communication, early warning systems, and other fields due the unique orbital advantage, such as the sub-satellite point trajectory and global coverage [6].
The prerequisite for space traffic management in the GEO zone is to obtain the status information of GEO targets quickly and accurately. However, due to the long distance and poor tracking accuracy, the ground-based space situation awareness system for GEO satellite inspection is limited. Space-based observations, which can achieve close range, long-term, and multi-angle tracking and observation of space targets, become the only means to obtain detailed information on GEO satellites. Due to the vastness of GEO, the GEO SSA typically adopts a method of traverse patrol, which is similar to traffic patrol, called space traffic patrol. Space traffic patrol means to go around a zone or an area at regular times to check that it is safe and that there is no trouble at close range by using one or more satellite. Thus, we believe that the future space traffic management system should include three levels. The first level is mainly cataloging and orbit anomaly patrols based on ground-based equipment. The second layer is a long-distance range patrol, which can further confirm whether there are any abnormal postures or behaviors, and this is the focus of our study. The third layer is the close-in detailed investigation, which means that based on the previous two layers, the spacecraft approaches the target and carries out On-orbit service.
According to the UCS database, as of May 2023, there are 590 controllable GEO satellites [7]. In terms of satellite types, GEO satellites can be divided into three categories: military, civilian/government, and commercial. The number of commercial satellites is largest, accounting for about 57%, and the numbers of military and civilian/government are equivalent, accounting for 21% and 22%, respectively. When considering that the perigee and apogee are both in the working zone, the number of qualified satellites is 495, accounting for about 84%. When considering the distribution of orbital inclination, it can be seen that most GEO satellites have a small inclination angle, the number of satellite inclinations exceeding 0.1° is 179, accounting for more than 30%. Those satellites belong to a different orbital plane due to their inclination, which poses a huge challenge to space traffic patrol. In this article, satellites with an inclination angle exceeding 0.1° are defined as IGSO.
Essentially, the space traffic patrol problem belongs to the problem of multiple targets rendezvous. There are a lot of domestic and international researchers who study this topic, especially in terms of on-orbit services. These articles can be divided into four categories: one to multiple (OTM), multiple to multiple (MTM), peer to peer (PTP), and mixed.
OTM means that one service satellite refuels multiple targets. In OTM, most scholars consider the service order as the main variable for optimization, with the minimum consumption as the optimization objective. Those scholars transform it into a traveling salesman problem (TSP) or a mixed integer nonlinear programming (MILP) problem. Ref. [8] studied the OTM service order problem with the service satellite and targets in same circular orbit. Ref. [9] studied the route problem of servicing GEO targets with small inclination, while same question was addressed in Ref. [10]. In addition, a spiral cruise orbit for GEO satellites was designed using relative orbit equations in Refs. [11,12]. Genetic algorithms (GA), particle swarm optimization (PSO), and other optimization algorithms are also used to solve the problem [13,14,15,16,17].
MTM means that multiple service satellites refuel multiple targets. The MTM problem is much more complex than OTM. Many factors, such as the initial position and traverse cost, will affect the path planning. Moreover, considering the limited capacity of service satellites, the location and number of fuel stations affect the final result. For MTM, different scenarios are set, and different models are established. Ref. [18] assumes that the service satellite can return to the fuel station for refueling and continue the service. Taking the service sequence and the time of return to station as variables, the service plan with lowest consumption is optimized. By converting the problem into a location-route problem (LRP), a service plan is given in Ref. [19], and similar research is reported in Refs. [20,21,22,23].
PTP assumes that each service satellite and target have the ability to maneuver. PTP is actually an optimal matching problem, and the model is established depending on the constraints of the scene conditions. All models vary slightly. To make all targets fuel abundant with the lowest cost, the PTP problem was transformed into an optimal matching problem model and solved using auction algorithms. Ref. [24] studied the PTP traverse mode assuming that the targets are in a circular orbit with an uneven fuel distribution. The PTP refueling model added the fuel quantity threshold as a new parameter, where targets with a larger quantity were defined as fuel abundant, and those with a smaller quantity were defined as fuel deficient [25]. Furthermore, some scholars assumed that each service satellite can return to the original position of an satellite after rendezvous; transformed it into a three-index assignment problem, also called a E-PTP (egalitarian peer to peer) problem; and solved it using search algorithms [26]. Some others solved the problem by converting it into an optimal matching problem (OMP) [27] or a mixed mode [28,29].
Mixed traverse is relatively complex, and generally two or more categories are used to achieve the goal of reducing fuel consumption or more effective traverse. Refs. [30,31] simplify the MTM and PTP problems to achieve equilibrium through weighting, resulting in a relatively ideal state for fuel consumption and a fuel gap between targets. Ref. [32] selected some service satellites to only provide fuel for some targets in the constellation. After these targets receive fuel, they transform into service satellites to provide fuel for other targets. Through enumeration and PSO comprehensive algorithm comparisons, it was verified that the hybrid traverse strategy is more cost-effective than other strategies.
Although there are many literature studies on this topic, most of them focus on the coplanar rendezvous, and there is relatively little research on the non-coplanar rendezvous problem. Bai et al. used the dual target rendezvous orbit cluster to obtain the rendezvous orbit approaching multiple non-coplanar targets by searching and calculating the closest distance to other targets [33,34]. Zhang et al. used Lambert’s theorem to determine the service satellite orbits that were close to two targets, then improved the orbit using least squares method and genetic algorithm, and obtained the orbit that approaches three non-coplanar targets [35,36,37]. Ref. [38] demonstrated that a service satellite orbit that can rendezvous with multiple satellites in the Walker constellation without orbit maneuver. Based on this, the author summarized the rendezvous orbit constraints for the maximum number of constellation satellites and then used phase modulation to change the initial phase of the service satellite to rendezvous with all satellites in the orbit plane. The strategy is verified that fuel consumption is less compared to Lambert’s theorem. Ma N. designed the traversal orbit for GPS satellites using a single pulse coplanar orbit maneuver. After traversing one orbit plane, the maneuver is carried out at the intersection with next one, and the same operation is repeated until the traversal of all satellites [39].
The above articles mainly focus on the Walker constellation, but the IGSO orbit is not a regular part of the Walker constellation. To solve the rendezvous multiple targets problem on a general orbital plane, Zhang et al. proposed the crossing point method, and achieving the rendezvous orbit based on the method [40,41].
According to orbital dynamics, each satellite is in a plane passing through the center of the Earth. That is, the orbital planes of any two satellites will inevitably intersect, forming two intersection points, called crossing points, as shown in Figure 2.
Select any orbit plane as the reference plane, and the target orbit passes through the reference plane and intersects at points A and A’, where point A north of the equatorial plane is called the north crossing point, and point A’ south of the equatorial plane is called the south crossing point. The two points have a phase difference of 180° within the reference plane.
In this article, we propose a patrol route design approach based on the gradient longitude drift rate and crossing points to patrol IGSO targets. Section 2 introduces the approach in detail. The proposed approach is illustrated in Section 3 using numerical experiments. Additionally, a case study is illustrated in Section 4. Finally, the conclusion and potential future research directions are provided in Section 5.

2. Materials and Methods

For safety, the patrol satellite should not frequently pass through the GEO working zone and should not affect the normal satellites in working zone. Thus, the patrol satellite should be located in GEO maneuver zone defined by the IADC. It can be seen from the definition that the GEO maneuver zone is divided into two independent parts, above or below GEO. Therefore, the patrol orbit zone should be located in a part of the maneuver zone. When the satellite is in the maneuver zone, it will drift relative to GEO. Taking the standard GEO as the reference coordinate system, the patrol route relative to the GEO is shown in Figure 3.
It can be seen from the figure that when the satellite is located below GEO, its trajectory relative to GEO is wave-shaped (elliptical orbit) or linear (circular orbit). The sub-satellite point longitude becomes larger and drifts from west to east. Conversely, when located above the GEO, its relative trajectory is also wave-shaped or linear, and the sub-satellite point longitude becomes smaller and drifts from east to west.
By utilizing the relative drift, it is possible to patrol the GEO targets. The longitude drift rate D is expressed as follows:
D = 0.0128 a s a c
where ac is the radius of GEO. Therefore, by designing the drift rate reasonably, it is possible to achieve a natural patrol of all targets in the GEO zone. As shown in Figure 4, assume that a GEO zone contains six targets. The patrol satellite first drifts from west to east, observing targets 2 and 6 at apogee. Then, implementing an orbital maneuver at the zone boundary, it turns around and drifts from east to west, observing targets 1, 3, 4, and 5 at perigee. Thereby, the satellite achieves the patrol of the entire zone’s targets. Afterwards, through orbital maneuvers, the satellite will turn around again and enter the east-drift orbit, conducting periodic patrol of targets in the zone.
The above strategy is very effective when the sub-satellite points of targets are stationary, but IGSO targets are up and down relative to the equatorial plane. Patrolling these targets not only requires consideration of relative position, but also relative time, which is a more complex spatiotemporal problem.
If we use the strategy above to implement the patrol of IGSO targets, there will be a situation where the patrol satellite nears the crossing point, but the target does not reach the crossing point. If the patrol satellite could hold on near the crossing point for a period of time, waiting while the target crosses the reference plane, then the problem can be smoothly transformed into the stationary problem. According to the space special orbit design theory [41], when the height difference of ac and as meets certain conditions, the patrol satellite can achieve a holding-on spiral ring near the target as shown in Figure 5.
When the target crosses the reference plane, the patrol satellite happens to be on the spiral ring. By designing the spiral ring reasonably, the cycle of the spiral ring can cover the crossing time within a day. This transforms the patrol problem of IGSO targets into a problem of geostationary targets. Using the gradient longitude drift rate method shown in Figure 4, the patrol satellite can achieve the patrol of IGSO targets.
This article proposes a gradient longitude drift rate patrol configuration approach based on crossing points and spiral rings to patrol IGSO targets and includes following steps:
Step 1: Calculate the crossing position and crossing time of the IGSO targets;
Step 2: Design a spiral trajectory that satisfies desired patrol time;
Step 3: Divide IGSO targets into regions based on a dichotomy approach;
Step 4: Calculate the bidirectional longitude drift rate within each region;
Step 5: Determine the starting position of patrol for each region;
Step 6: Determine the transfer orbit for each region.
For the convenience of understanding, the symbols and their definitions used in this article are shown in Table A1.

2.1. Calculate the Crossing Position and Time of the IGSO Targets

Assuming a IGSO target crosses the orbital plane, the target orbital element is ( a t , e t , i t , Ω t , ω t , τ t ) . Set the orbital plane of patrol satellite as the reference plane, which can be represented by ( i s , Ω s ) . The coordinates of crossing point in reference plane can be represented as ( t c r o s s , r c r o s s , ϕ c r o s s ) , where t c r o s s is the moment when target crosses through the plane, r c r o s s is the geocentric distance of the crossing point, and ϕ c r o s s is the ascending intersection angle of the crossing point. Thus, the following is obtained:
cos ϕ c r o s s = cos ( Ω t Ω s ) cos u c r o s s + sin u c r o s s sin ( Ω t Ω s ) cos ( 180 ° i t ) sin ϕ c r o s s = sin u c r o s s sin i t sin i s = sin ( Ω t Ω s ) sin i t sin ( i t i s )
Among them, u c r o s s is the argument of latitude of the target, which can be obtained as follows:
t g ϕ c r o s s = sin ( Ω t Ω S ) cos ( Ω t Ω s ) cos i s + sin i s cot ( 180 ° i t )
The crossing time can be obtained from the Kepler equation:
t c r o s s = ( E c r o s s e t sin E c r o s s ) a t 3 μ + τ t
t g E c r o s s 2 = 1 e t 1 + e t t g ( u c r o s s ω t ) 2
Due to the periodic motion, the target periodically crosses the reference plane, with a time interval of orbital period Tt, and this is expressed as follows:
t c r o s s m = t c r o s s + m T t m = 0 , 1 , 2 ,
In this article, the patrol satellite operates within the equatorial plane; thus, the following is obtained:
i s = 0 Ω s = 0
Then, the crossing point becomes the ascending and descending nodes of the target, and the crossing point can be represented by ( t , Ω ) . Thus, Formulas (5)~(7) derive the crossing time as follows:
t c r o s s m = ( E c r o s s e t sin E c r o s s ) a t 3 μ + τ t + 2 π m a t 3 μ m = 0 , 1 , 2 ,
Considering that most IGSO targets are in near circular orbit, the following are noted:
E M f e 0
Formula (8) can be simplified as follows:
d t c r o s s m d t = d ( E c r o s s + 2 π m ) d t a t 3 μ + ( E c r o s s + 2 π m ) d a t 3 μ d t = d E c r o s s d t a t 3 μ + 3 2 ( E c r o s s + 2 π m ) a t μ d a d t = d λ d t a t 3 μ + 3 2 ( E c r o s s + 2 π m ) a t a t 3 μ d a d t 3 2 a c a t a c
It can be seen that the change in crossing time is closely related to the semi-major axis difference between the target and GEO. The difference between two consecutive crossing times is expressed as follows:
Δ t = 3 2 a c a t a c 2 π a t 3 μ = 2 π a c 3 μ 3 2 a c a t a c a t 3 a c 3 = 3 2 a c a t a c T e
If the semi-major axis difference is 100 km, it can be obtained that the daily variation of crossing time is about 306.5 s. Considering that the semi-major axis change is only a few kilometers under the perturbation, it can be considered that the crossing time of the IGSO target in this article remains basically unchanged. The Ωcross will also experience precession drift due to the perturbation influence, where the Ωcross decreases by about 0.0089° per day. However, under controlled conditions, the Ωcross will remain within ±0.1° of its sub-point longitude. Therefore, in this paper, we consider that the crossing points of selected targets remain unchanged.

2.2. Design a Spiral Trajectory That Satisfies the Desired Patrol Time

As shown in Figure 5, the intersection point is called the aiming point, and the point where the trajectory turns from west to east or from east to west is called the turning point. The satellite that passes through the same aiming point twice is in a spiral loop, which is a closed teardrop trajectory. The turning point is the point where the velocity of the patrol satellite is equal to the geostationary satellite. Using the vitality formula, the turning point is expressed as follows:
v t u r n 2 = 2 μ r t u r n μ a s = μ a c
Among them, vturn is the velocity of the turning point, and rturn is the position of the turning point. The turning point position is expressed as follows:
r t u r n = 2 a s a c a c + a s
According to the displacement difference between aiming point and turning point, it is approximately equal to half of the difference between the aiming point and the satellite. Thus, the position of the aiming point is expressed as follows:
r a i m = 2 r t u r n + 75 a c r t u r n < a c 2 r t u r n 75 a c r t u r n > a c
The period of the spiral ring is the time interval where the satellite continuously passing through the same aiming point, which is approximately twice the time between turning points. Similarly, the following can be obtained:
T r i n g 4 a s 3 μ arccos 1 ν t u r n e s + e s sin arccos 1 ν t u r n e s
where νturn is the energy parameter at the turning point, which is expressed as follows:
ν t u r n = v t u r n 2 μ r t u r n = μ a c μ r t u r n = r t u r n a c = 2 a s a c + a s
Assuming that the crossing times within a day is {t1, t2, …, tn} and the earliest aiming point is Tins, the following are obtained:
T r i n g max t i min t i T i n s = min t i

2.3. Divide IGSO Targets into Regions Using the Dichotomy Approach

It can be seen that when the longitude drift rate is constant, the patrol period of targets depends on the maximum longitude difference. On the other hand, if the distribution of longitude differences between targets within the zone is uneven, there will be a situation where the targets are concentrated on both sides, which causes a great waste of time. Therefore, when designing the patrol configuration, it is necessary to consider dividing all targets reasonably to ensure that the longitude differences within each zone are consistent, so that the patrol periods of each zone are not significantly different. Thus, periodic patrol of all targets is achieved.
Without losing generality, sort n IGSO targets in ascending order according to their sub-satellite point longitude, and record the longitude as λi (i = 1, 2, …, n), and λ1 < λ2 <…< λn. The difference gaps in longitude between adjacent targets is recorded as Δλi (i = 1, 2, …, n), then the following is obtained:
Δ λ i = λ i + 1 λ i i = 1 n 1 Δ λ n = λ 1 λ n + 360
When the distribution of IGSO targets is uneven, there will inevitably be several large longitude gaps. If the divided area covers the gaps, there will be a significant increase in the patrol period due to a single target. Therefore, when dividing zones, it is necessary to avoid these huge gaps as much as possible.
This paper presents a zone division method based on the dichotomy approach, which can quickly perform zone division. Set the maximum and second largest longitude difference gap between targets as follows:
Δ λ max = max Δ λ i i = 1 n Δ λ sec max = max Δ λ i | Δ λ max i = 1 n
Due to the characteristics of a circular distribution, these two longitude differences divide all targets into two zones, as shown in Figure 6.
The longitude coverage ranges of the two zones is shown below:
I : λ max + 1   ~   λ sec max I I : λ max + 1   ~   λ sec max
Set the range of longitude drift rate to the following:
D D min   ~   D max
Then, the maximum patrol period of the two zones can be calculated as follows:
T I = λ sec max + 360 λ max + 1 D min T I I = λ max λ sec max D min
Compare the sizes of TI and TII, select the zone with a larger period, select the maximum longitude difference gap within the zone, and perform secondary division, as shown in Figure 7.
Compare the periods of the three zones TI, TII, and TIII and also select the zones with larger periods for segmentation using the maximum longitude difference gap until all zones meet the patrol period T0 (T0 is the given limitation period), as shown in Figure 8.
The process steps for dividing the entire zone are shown in Figure 9.

2.4. Calculate the Bidirectional Longitude Drift Rate Within Each Region

After dividing the entire target into multiple zones, it is necessary to determine the east/west longitude drift rate within each zone. Assuming n targets are divided into N zones, denoted as Zi (i = 1, 2, …, N), each zone contains Mi targets represented by their sub-satellite point longitude and denoted as λij (i = 1, 2, …, N, j = 1, 2, …, Mi). Thus, the following is obtained:
Z i = λ i 1 λ i 2 λ i M i i = 1 N M i = n
It can be seen from Figure 4 that if target k and target l can be observed in one patrol, their longitude difference needs to be an integral multiple of the drift rate, which is expressed as follows:
λ k λ l = p D p N
The above equation also indicates that the remainder of D for target k and target l is the same, which indicates the following:
mod λ k D = mod λ l D
Mod represents the remainder of two numbers. Assuming that the eastward longitude drift rate of the patrol satellite is DE and the westward is DW, it can be inferred from the above analysis that the conditions for achieving patrol of targets can be transformed into the existence of DE and DW. The eastward target set QE refers the targets with DE, and the westward target set QW refers the targets with DW. When these meet, the union of the QE and QW can include all targets as follows:
Z = Q E Q W
Taking zone N as an example for analysis, the sub-satellite point longitude of the targets is λj (j = 1, 2, …, MN). Considering that the GEO satellite works in a certain longitude box, keep the sub-satellite point to one decimal, denoted as λj* (j = 1, 2, …, MN). Simultaneously, simplify the longitude drift rate to one decimal as follows:
D D 1 D 2 D d
The ordered expression is provided as follows:
q D i = mod λ j D i
Take Q corresponding to the mode of the above set, denoted as QDi, then the following is obtained:
Q D i = λ j mod λ j D i = M O D E q D i
where MODE() means the most frequently occurring numerical value in a set of data. Join the above target sets until patrol of all targets is achieved as follows:
Z N = Q D k Q D l
Considering that the orbital periods for patrol satellite are not significantly different, the drift rate affects the number of patrol cycles under certain longitude difference conditions. The larger the drift rate is, the more longitudes drift each day, the fewer cycles required for patrol, and the shorter the corresponding patrol cycle. On the contrary, the smaller the drift rate is, the longer the patrol period. Therefore, patrol satellites with high longitude drift rates should be selected first. When satellites with high longitude drift rates do not meet the requirements for patrol, they choose to use smaller longitude drift rates for patrol.
In addition, according to the constraint analysis, there is redundancy in the observation distance. By adjusting the observation distance, a certain sub-satellite point longitude threshold can be brought to the target’s sub-satellite point longitude, as shown in Figure 10.
Set the point longitude threshold to Δq. The same remainder condition is transformed into the following:
q D i = λ i Z λ j Z mod λ i D i mod λ j D i Δ q
Correspondingly, the target set corresponding to the mode becomes the target set corresponding to the same set of residues with the most elements as follows:
Q D = q D n u m q D = max n u m q D i
Take the intersection of the target set Q generated by each longitude drift rate mentioned above, and find two sets of longitude drift rates for the east-west longitude drift of the patrol satellite.

2.5. Determine the Starting Position of Patrol for Each Region

Assuming that the set of eastward drift targets and westward drift targets are QE and QW, respectively, the initial positions λE and λW are expressed as follows.
λ E = min Q E p E D E λ W = max Q W + p W D W
Here, pE and pW meet the following:
min Q E p E D E min Z i min Q E p E D E + D E max Q W + p W D W D W max Z i max Q W + p W D W
At this point, the initial time TE of the eastward drift is the 0 o’clock of λE local time, and the initial time TW of the westward drift is the 12 o’clock of λW local time.

2.6. Determine the Transfer Orbit for Each Region

Assuming that the patrol satellite does not consume fuel during the westward and eastward drifts (ignoring the pulses applied during orbit maintenance), the classic double pulse orbit transfer method is used for the turning process. Eastward drift occurs first and then westward, as shown in Figure 11.
From the previous section, it can be seen that when patrol satellite turns around from east drift to west drift, it should maneuver from the apogee of the east drift orbit to the perigee of the west drift orbit. As previously analyzed, the patrol position of the eastward drift orbit is apogee, while the position of the westward drift orbit is perigee. The period is approximately 24 h. The above transfer orbit allows the patrol satellite to carry out normal missions after turning around. The specific transfer process is shown in Figure 12.
According to Formula (1), the semi-major axes of the east and west drift orbits are expressed as follows:
a E = a c D E 0.0128 a W = a c + D W 0.0128
The perigee of the transfer orbit is the eastward drift orbit apogee raE, and the apogee of the transfer orbit is the westward drift orbit perigee rpW. Thus, its semi-major axis is expressed as follows:
a T = r a E + r p W 2
Based on orbital dynamic knowledge, it is easy to obtain the velocity of the eastward drift orbit apogee vaE; the velocity of westward drift orbit apogee vpW; and v1 and v2 of the transfer orbit apogee, respectively, as follows:
v a E = μ a E r p E r a E v p W = μ a W r a W r p W v 1 = μ a T r p W r a E v 2 = μ a T r a E r p W
Therefore, the velocity increment required for the transition is expressed below:
Δ v E W = v 1 v a E + v p W v 2
Similarly, when the patrol satellite transitions from a west to east drift, it shifts from the perigee of the westward drift orbit to the apogee of the eastward drift orbit, as shown in Figure 13.
It can be seen that the required velocity increment is expressed as follows:
Δ v W E = v 1 v a E + v p W v 2
Thus, the velocity increment of patrol of the targets in the zone once is obtained as follows:
Δ V = Δ v E W + Δ v W E
According to the engine principle, the relationship between the velocity increment and fuel consumption is expressed as follows:
Δ m = m 0 1 e Δ V V e
Here, m0 is the mass of the patrol satellite, and Ve is the engine equivalent exhaust velocity, which is expressed as follows:
V e = I s p g 0
Isp is the engine specific impulse, and g0 is the ground gravity acceleration, which is equal to 9.8 m/s2.

3. Results

Satellites can be divided into three categories: military, civilian/government, and commercial. According to the UCS database, there are a total of 48 IGSO military targets. In our paper, the analysis and design of patrol orbit configurations will be carried out for these targets. It is assumed that the mass of the patrol satellite is 1000 kg and the engine specific impulse is 300 s. Based on the above steps, this section provides a specific analysis of the patrol for IGSO targets.

3.1. Calculate the Crossing Position and Crossing Time of the IGSO Targets

The crossing time of IGSO targets and the results are shown in Table 1.

3.2. Design a Spiral Trajectory That Satisfies Desired Patrol Time

The closer the observation distance is, the more detailed characteristic information can be obtained. Therefore, when the distance between the patrol satellite and GEO is the smallest, the observation effect is the best. That is, the observation position should be selected as the apogee (east drift orbit) or perigee (west drift orbit) of the patrol satellite. It can be seen that the conditions for forming a spiral ring are that the apogee velocity is less than the target orbit, while the perigee velocity is greater than the target orbit. This is noted as follows:
v a v c v p v c
Among them, va and vp are the perigee and apogee velocities of the patrol orbit, respectively.
According to orbital dynamics, the velocities of the perigee and apogee can be expressed as follows:
v a = μ r p + r a 2 r p r a v p = μ r p + r a 2 r a r p v c = μ a c
By substituting into Formula (19), we can obtain the following:
r p r p + r a 2 r a a c r a r p + r a 2 r p
As analyzed above, the edge of the GEO maneuvering area is ±75 km, and the observation position is taken as the perigee (west drift) or apogee (east drift), as shown in Figure 14.
East   r p r p + a c 75 2 a c 75 a c a c 75 r p + a c 75 2 r p West   a c + 75 a c + 75 + r a 2 r a a c r a a c + 75 + r a 2 a c + 75
By organizing the above equation, we can obtain the following:
East   drift   a c a s 150 a c a c + 75 West   drift   a s a c 150 a c a c 75
By rearranging Formulas (45)–(47), the relationship among the aiming point position, spiral ring period, and longitude drift rate D can be obtained as follows:
r a i m = 2 2 a c 2 a c 2 2 a c D 0.0128 + 75 a c r < a c 2 2 a c 2 a c 2 2 a c D 0.0128 75 a c r > a c
T r i n g = 2 a c 3 μ 1 + D 0.0128 a c 3 arccos a s D 0.0128 a c + a s D 0.0128 75 + D 0.0128 75 a s sin arccos a s D 0.0128 a c + a s D 0.0128 75
The aiming point position and spiral ring period with respect to the longitude drift rate are shown in Figure 15 and Figure 16.

3.3. Divide IGSO Targets into Regions Based on Dichotomy Approach

Use the dichotomy approach to divide the regions of the 48 IGSO targets. There are several significant longitude gaps in the distribution of the targets. If the divided region covers these gaps, there may be a significant increase in the patrol period due to a certain target. Therefore, when dividing regions, it is important to avoid these gaps as much as possible. The position and the longitude difference gap for IGSO targets are shown in Table 2.
From Table 2, it can be seen that there are five longitude differences greater than 20°, but the first four notches are very concentrated, considering the actual situation such as period. Mark the longitude gaps greater than 10°, and control the patrol period of each region to be within 60 days. Based on the distribution characteristics of IGSO targets and the analysis of orbital longitude drift rate, the targets are divided into seven regions. The divisions are shown in Table 3.

3.4. Calculate the Bidirectional Longitude Drift Rate Within Each Region

As shown in Figure 4, as the longitude drift rate increases, the aiming point position relative to GEO increases linearly. As shown in Figure 16, the spiral ring period shows a rapid growth and then a slowing trend, eventually tending toward 15 h. If all of the crossing times correspond to an interval range of 0–12 h (according to the concept of crossing points, the crossing points always appear in pairs, and there must be a crossing point in this interval), and the patrol satellite adopts a strategy of regional control and a round-trip path. To achieve comprehensive coverage of crossing time, it requires that the spiral ring period cannot be less than 12 h. According to Figure 5, the longitude drift rate corresponding to a 12 h is 3.3°/day.
On the other hand, in order to ensure that the patrol satellite can observe the target during the spiral loop, the position of the aiming point relative to GEO needs to meet the observation distance constraint condition (takes 250 km as an example). Similarly, as shown in Figure 5, the longitude drift rate corresponding to a relative distance of 250 km is 4.1°/day. In summary, the longitudinal drift rate of the patrol orbit for IGSO targets is expressed as follows:
Eastward   drift   3.3 ° / day D E 4.1 ° / day Westward   drift   4.1 ° / day D W 3.3 ° / day
Also, consider setting region thresholds for the target set as follows:
Δ q = 0.2 °
At this point, the corresponding aiming point position is 200 km. As shown in Figure 4, the corresponding longitude drift rate is 3.5°/day. Therefore, the set of longitude drift rates D as follows:
Eastward   drift   3.3 ° / day D E 3.5 ° / day Westward   drift   3.5 ° / day D W 3.3 ° / day
The above calculation is applied to each region using the gradient longitude drift rate strategy, and the longitude drift rate and patrol period for each region were obtained as shown in Table 4. From the table, it can be seen that the longest period does not exceed 40 days.

3.5. Determine the Starting Position of the Patrol for Each Region

The initial positions of the west drift and east drift are shown in Table 5.

3.6. Determine the Transfer Orbit for Each Region

The fuel consumption for one patrol cycle in each region can be obtained as shown in Table 6. It can be seen that fuel consumption does not exceed 13.5 kg. The total fuel consumption of a single patrol cycle in all regions should not exceed 91.82 kg.
In summary, the IGSO patrol configuration is shown in Figure 17.

4. Case Study

Taking zone A as example, there are five targets in this region, with sub-satellite point longitudes of {−160.0°, 172.3°, −177.1°, −159.6°, −159.0°}, and the longitude drift rate used is expressed as follows:
D E = 3.5 ° / day D W = 3.4 ° / day
The corresponding sets of east and west drift targets are expressed as follows:
Q E = 172.3 ° 177.1 ° 159.6 ° Q W = 160.0 ° 159.0 °
The corresponding initial positions for east and west drift are expressed as follows:
λ E = 158.4 ° λ W = 159.0 °
The simulation results are shown in Figure 18.
It can be seen that the patrol satellite has achieved patrol of all targets. The patrol of various targets is shown in Figure 19.
During the patrol, the minimum observation distance and observation duration of the satellite for each target are shown in Table 7.
From Table A1, it can be seen that for region A, the minimum observation distance of the patrol satellite for each target is less than 250 km, and the observation duration that meets the observation condition constraint is above 20 min, which can ensure the patrol of targets.

5. Conclusions

With the rapid development of mega constellations, the space environment is becoming increasingly harsh, and space traffic management is a future trend. Space traffic patrol is one of the important components in space traffic management. This involves going around a zone or an area at regular times to check that it is safe and that there is no trouble at close range using one or more satellites.
This paper focuses on the patrol of IGSO targets. A method based on the longitude drift rate and crossing points is proposed for the patrol IGSO targets and includes the following steps: (1) calculate the crossing position and crossing time of the IGSO targets; (2) design a spiral trajectory that satisfies the desired patrol time; (3) divide IGSO targets into regions using a dichotomy approach; (4) calculate the bidirectional longitude drift rate within each region; (5) determine the starting position of patrol for each region; and (6) determine the transfer trajectory for each region. Using the above methods, the STK tool was used to simulate a target in region A, and the simulation results verified that using the gradient longitude drift rate method based on crossing points and spiral rings can achieve patrol of IGSO targets. The patrol period should not exceed 40 days, and the fuel consumption is no more than 13.5 kg for a single zone patrol period. And, the total fuel consumption of a single patrol cycle in all regions should not exceed 91.82 kg. The approach proposed in this article not only can be applied in the design of GEO zone patrol route, but also be used to guide space traffic patrol, thereby enhancing space safety.
Potential future research directions include the following: (1) The optimal match between different types of patrol satellites and GEO targets should be determined; (2) The research in this article is only at the theoretical stage, and there will be many problems in practical engineering; (3) This article divided the areas and adopted a “single to many” patrol form for each area. It is worth further research and exploration to determine whether using a “many to many” approach is more efficient in regional simulation.

6. Patents

This work was supported by National Defense Science and Technology Excellence Youth Fund Project of China. All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear in the submitted paper.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.C.; methodology, N.C. and B.J.; software, N.C. and Z.Z.; validation, S.F. and W.X.; writing—original draft preparation, N.C. and S.F.; writing—review and editing, N.C. and B.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research and its APC was funded by National Defense Science and Technology Excellence Youth Fund Project of China grant number 2023-JCJQ-ZQ-085.

Data Availability Statement

The article contains all the data.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. List of symbols.
Table A1. List of symbols.
DLongitude drift rate
a s , e s , i s , Ω s , ω s , τ s Patrol satellite orbital element
acSemi-major axis of GEO
a t , e t , i t , Ω t , ω t , τ t Target orbital element
t c r o s s Time of the crossing point
r c r o s s Geocentric distance of the crossing point
ϕ c r o s s Ascending intersection angle of the crossing point
ucrossArgument of latitude of the crossing point
μThe gravitational constant of the Earth
EEccentric anomaly
TtTarget’s orbital period
TeThe period of rotation of the Earth
ΩcrossRight ascension of the ascending node of the crossing point
vturnVelocity of the turning point
rturnPosition of the turning point
vaimVelocity of the aiming point
raimPosition of the aiming point
TringThe period of the spiral ring
νturnEnergy parameter at the turning point
TinsTime of the earliest aiming point
λi (i = 1, 2, …, n)Targets’ sub-satellite point longitude
Δλi (i = 1, 2, …, n)Difference in longitude between adjacent targets
ΔλmaxLargest longitude difference gap between targets
Δλsec-maxSecond largest longitude difference gap between targets
DminMin longitude drift rate
DmaxMax longitude drift rate
Ti (i = I, II, …)Periods of the zones
T0The given limitation period
Zi (i = 1, 2, …, N)Target set in zone i
Mi (i = 1, 2, …, N)Number of targets in zone i
DEEastward longitude drift rate of the patrol satellite
DWWestward longitude drift rate of the patrol satellite
QETargets with the same remainder of DE
QWTargets with the same remainder of DW
ΔqRegion thresholds for the target set
TEInitial time of the eastward drift
TWInitial time of the westward drift
λEInitial position of the eastward drift
λWInitial position of the westward drift
aESemi-major axis of the eastward drift orbit
aWSemi-major axis of the westward drift orbit
aTSemi-major axis of the transfer orbit
raEPosition of the eastward drift orbit apogee
rpEPosition of the eastward drift orbit perigee
raWPosition of the westward drift orbit apogee
rpWPosition of the westward drift orbit perigee
vaEVelocity of the eastward drift orbit apogee
vpEVelocity of the eastward drift orbit perigee
vaWVelocity of the westward drift orbit apogee
vpWVelocity of the westward drift orbit perigee
v1Velocity of the first maneuver
v2Velocity of the second maneuver
rpPosition of the patrol orbit perigee
raPosition of the patrol orbit apogee
vpVelocity of the patrol orbit perigee
vaVelocity of the patrol orbit apogee

References

  1. Quan, H.; Li, X. Preliminary Research on Space Traffic Management Standards System. Space Debris Res. 2021, 21, 50–57. [Google Scholar]
  2. Duan, F. Research on the Shift from Space Traffic Management to Space Traffic Coordination in the United States. Space Debris Res. 2022, 22, 66–71. [Google Scholar]
  3. Yao, W.; Feng, S.; Chen, L. Study on the Development of Space Traffic Management. Aerosp. China 2021, 3, 49–52. [Google Scholar]
  4. Feng, S.; Yao, W.; Chen, L. Discussion on the Framework of Space Traffic Management System. Aerosp. China 2021, 9, 38–43. [Google Scholar]
  5. Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines; Revision 2; IADC: Houston, TX, USA, 2020.
  6. ESA’s Annual Space Environment Report; ESA: Paris, France, 2024.
  7. Available online: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/satellite-database (accessed on 1 May 2023).
  8. Shen, H.; Tsiotras, P. Optimal Scheduling for Servicing Multiple Satellites in a Circular Constellation. In Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, Monterey, CA, USA, 5–8 August 2002. [Google Scholar]
  9. Alfriend, K.T.; Creamer, N.G.; Lee, D.J. Optimal Servicing of Geosynchronous Satellites. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 2006, 29, 203–206. [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhou, Y.; Yan, Y.; Huang, X.; Kong, L. Mission planning optimization for multiple geosynchronous satellites refueling. Adv. Space Res. 2015, 56, 2612–2625. [Google Scholar]
  11. Zhang, Y.; Xu, Y.; Zhou, H. Theory and Design Method of Special Space Orbit; National Defense Industry Press: Beijing, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  12. Zheng, L.; Xu, Y.; Zhu, D. Cruise orbit design for multiple geostationary orbit targets. Aerosp. Control Appl. 2016, 42, 37–41. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bo, X.; Feng, Q. Research on constellation refueling based on formation flying. Acta Astronaut. 1987, 68, 1987–1995. [Google Scholar]
  14. Madakat, D.; Morio, J.; Vanderpooten, D. Biobjective planning of an active debris removal mission. Acta Astronaut. 2013, 84, 182–188. [Google Scholar]
  15. Du, B.; Zhao, Y.; Dutta, A.; Yu, J.; Chen, X. Optimal scheduling of multispacecraft refueling based on cooperative maneuver. Adv. Space Res. 2015, 55, 2808–2819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jackson, B. Minimum energy maneuvering strategies for multiple satellite inspection missions. In Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, USA, 5–12 March 2005. [Google Scholar]
  17. Zhang, J.; Parks, G.T.; Luo, Y.Z. Multisatellite Refueling Optimization Considering the J2 Perturbation and Window Constraints. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 2014, 37, 111–122. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhou, Y.; Yan, Y.; Huang, X.; Kong, L. Optimal scheduling of multiple geosynchronous satellites refueling based on a hybrid particle swarm optimizer. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2015, 47, 125–134. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhang, T.J.; Yang, Y.K.; Wang, B.H.; Li, Z.; Shen, H.X.; Li, H.N. Optimal scheduling for location geosynchronous satellites refueling problem. Acta Astronaut. 2019, 163, 264–271. [Google Scholar]
  20. Xiao, D.; Xu, B.; Gao, Y. Optimization of Supply Orbit for Heterogeneous Constellations Based on Companion Flight Mode Chinese Science. Phys. Mech. Astron. 2012, 12, 67–77. [Google Scholar]
  21. Xiao, D.; Zhu, Q.; Zu, L. Research on Multi Supply Tasks of Heterogeneous Constellations Based on Accompanying Flight Mode. Shanghai Aerosp. 2016, 33, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
  22. Yu, J.; Yu, Y.-G.; Hao, D.; Chen, X.-Q.; Liu, H.-Y. Biobjective mission planning for geosynchronous satellites on-orbit refueling. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. 2019, 233, 686–697. [Google Scholar]
  23. Prodhon, C.; Prins, C. A survey of recent research on location-routing problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2014, 238, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  24. Shen, H.; Tsiotras, P. Peer-to-Peer Refueling for Circular Satellite Constellations. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 2005, 28, 1220–1230. [Google Scholar]
  25. Salazar, A.; Tsiotras, P. An auction algorithm for allocating fuel in satellite constellations using peer-to-peer refueling. In Proceedings of the 2006 American Control Conference, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 14–16 June 2006. [Google Scholar]
  26. Rui, B.L.; Ferreira, C.; Santos, B.S. A simple and effective evolutionary algorithm for the capacitated location routing problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 2016, 70, 155–162. [Google Scholar]
  27. Tang, R.; Wang, W.; Fu, X. Orbit selection and optimization for approaching multiple Walker constellation satellites. Comput. Simul. 2008, 4, 59–62. [Google Scholar]
  28. Dutta, A.; Tsiotras, P. Greedy Random Adaptive Search Procedure for Optimal Scheduling of P2P Satellite Refueling. In Proceedings of the AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, American Astronautical Society Paper 07-150, Sedona, Arizona, 28 January–1 February 2007. [Google Scholar]
  29. Dutta, A.; Tsiotras, P. Network Flow Formulation for an Egalitarian P2P Refueling Strategy. In Proceedings of the AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, American Astronautical Society Paper 07-151, Sedona, Arizona, 28 January–1 February 2007. [Google Scholar]
  30. Dutta, A.; Tsiotras, P. Asynchronous optimal mixed P2P satellite refueling strategies. Astronaut. Sci. 2006, 54, 543–565. [Google Scholar]
  31. Dutta, A.; Tsiotras, P. An Egalitarian Peer-to-Peer Satellite Refueling Strategy. J. Satell. Rocket. 2008, 45, 608–618. [Google Scholar]
  32. Chen, X.Q.; Yu, J. Optimal mission planning of GEO on-orbit refueling in mixed strategy. Acta Astronaut. 2017, 133, 63–72. [Google Scholar]
  33. Bai, X.; Xi, X. Realizing close proximity between a single spacecraft and multiple satellites in a constellation without the need for orbit changes. J. Astronaut. 2005, 26, 114–116. [Google Scholar]
  34. Wang, W.; Huang, W.; Fu, X. The close-up approach of a single spacecraft to multiple satellites in the Walker constellation. Space Sci. 2005, 25, 547–551. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, J.; Xi, X.; Wang, W. Sufficient conditions and characteristic analysis for a single spacecraft to rendezvous with multiple stars in the Walker constellation without the need for orbit change. Natl. Univ. Def. Technol. 2010, 32, 87–92. [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhang, J.; Wang, W.; Xi, X. Approach orbit design for deviated Walker constellation satellites. J. Astronaut. 2008, 29, 1200–1204. [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhang, J.; Wu, M.; Fu, X. The Application of Genetic Algorithm in Optimization of Multi star Approach Orbits in Constellations. Space Sci. 2012, 32, 99–105. [Google Scholar]
  38. Yang, Y. Research on Satellite Traverse Target Dynamics and Orbit Design. Master’s Thesis, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ma, N. Fuel Optimal Orbit Design for Satellite Constellation Traversal in Limited Thrust. Master’s Thesis, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhang, Y.; Zhou, H. A multi-objective rendezvous orbit design method based on crossing points. Mod. Def. Technol. 2013, 5, 13–17. [Google Scholar]
  41. Li, Y.; Zhang, Y. Design of non-coplanar multi-objective rendezvous orbits based on crossing points. Aerosp. Control 2013, 31, 66–70. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. GEO zone defined by the IADC.
Figure 1. GEO zone defined by the IADC.
Aerospace 12 00299 g001
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of a satellite crossing point.
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of a satellite crossing point.
Aerospace 12 00299 g002
Figure 3. Patrol route relative to the GEO orbit.
Figure 3. Patrol route relative to the GEO orbit.
Aerospace 12 00299 g003
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of the patrol strategy.
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of the patrol strategy.
Aerospace 12 00299 g004
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of a spiral cruise.
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of a spiral cruise.
Aerospace 12 00299 g005
Figure 6. Schematic diagram of zone division.
Figure 6. Schematic diagram of zone division.
Aerospace 12 00299 g006
Figure 7. Schematic diagram of the second zone division.
Figure 7. Schematic diagram of the second zone division.
Aerospace 12 00299 g007
Figure 8. Schematic diagram of the zone division result.
Figure 8. Schematic diagram of the zone division result.
Aerospace 12 00299 g008
Figure 9. The zone division process.
Figure 9. The zone division process.
Aerospace 12 00299 g009
Figure 10. Schematic diagram of a certain sub-satellite point longitude threshold.
Figure 10. Schematic diagram of a certain sub-satellite point longitude threshold.
Aerospace 12 00299 g010
Figure 11. Schematic diagram of turning around.
Figure 11. Schematic diagram of turning around.
Aerospace 12 00299 g011
Figure 12. Schematic diagram of the turning around orbit.
Figure 12. Schematic diagram of the turning around orbit.
Aerospace 12 00299 g012
Figure 13. Schematic diagram of the turning around orbit.
Figure 13. Schematic diagram of the turning around orbit.
Aerospace 12 00299 g013
Figure 14. Schematic diagram of observation positions for the patrol satellite.
Figure 14. Schematic diagram of observation positions for the patrol satellite.
Aerospace 12 00299 g014
Figure 15. Diagram of the aiming point position relative to GEO with a longitude drift rate.
Figure 15. Diagram of the aiming point position relative to GEO with a longitude drift rate.
Aerospace 12 00299 g015
Figure 16. Diagram of spiral ring period variation with a longitude drift rate.
Figure 16. Diagram of spiral ring period variation with a longitude drift rate.
Aerospace 12 00299 g016
Figure 17. Schematic diagram of the IGSO patrol configuration.
Figure 17. Schematic diagram of the IGSO patrol configuration.
Aerospace 12 00299 g017
Figure 18. Patrol simulation results of zone A.
Figure 18. Patrol simulation results of zone A.
Aerospace 12 00299 g018
Figure 19. Patrol of various targets by the patrol satellite.
Figure 19. Patrol of various targets by the patrol satellite.
Aerospace 12 00299 g019
Table 1. The time of crossing the target.
Table 1. The time of crossing the target.
NORAD NumberTime (UTCG)NORAD NumberTime (UTCG)NORAD NumberTime (UTCG)
2346717:03:002716815:57:004172414:42:00
4193722:45:002669412:00:004194010:06:00
4316215:21:003912013:54:003835217:49:20
2501913:01:204370015:37:202815811:58:20
3825423:37:202278714:06:004433719:45:10
3748111:03:002854217:54:004420411:29:00
277118:03:002563916:36:003725615:19:20
2671513:27:003809115:46:203780411:01:20
2298812:27:00268808:31:203723413:07:20
266958:42:003937519:03:003737721:06:00
330558:42:002811712:54:00442315:23:00
2025322:37:202596719:06:00415860:25:20
3846615:51:00392345:48:004368321:04:20
2077613:12:00291554:00:00362879:07:20
444818:03:303895315:19:203721019:52:20
2473715:46:204294921:27:002525817:54:00
Table 2. IGSO target positions and their longitude differences.
Table 2. IGSO target positions and their longitude differences.
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)−177.1−159.6−159.0−130.1−120.0−96.8−90.0
Longitude gap (°) 17.50.628.910.123.26.8
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)−90.0−67.9−38.9−34.0−17.8−14.7−10.1
Longitude gap (°) 22.1294.916.23.14.6
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)−10.1−1.30.03.916.320.626.0
Longitude gap (°) 8.81.33.912.44.35.4
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)26.028.829.035.659.069.570.0
Longitude gap (°) 2.80.26.623.410.50.5
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)70.071.572.774.075.080.091.1
Longitude gap (°) 1.51.21.31.05.011.1
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)91.192.093.198.0103.8106.0113.9
Longitude gap (°) 0.91.14.95.82.27.9
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)113.9118.0129.8130.0131.1143.0144.0
Longitude gap (°) 4.111.80.21.111.91.0
Sub-satellite point longitude (°)144.0144.5160.0172.3−177.1
Longitude gap (°) 0.515.512.310.6
Table 3. IGSO target divisions.
Table 3. IGSO target divisions.
RegionABCDEFG
IGSO
targets using the sub-satellite point longitude as a reference (°)
160.0−130.1−38.916.359.091.1129.8
172.3−120.0−34.020.669.592.0130.0
−177.1−96.8−17.826.070.093.1131.1
−159.6−90.0−14.728.871.598.0143.0
−159.0−67.9−10.129.072.7103.8144.0
−1.335.674.0106.0144.5
0.0 75.0113.8
3.9 80.0118.0
Table 4. Longitude drift rate and patrol period of regions.
Table 4. Longitude drift rate and patrol period of regions.
RegionABCDEFG
Westward drift rate (°/day)3.43.43.43.43.53.43.3
Eastward drift rate (°/day)3.53.43.53.33.53.43.3
Patrol period
(day)
25392813141812
Table 5. The initial positions of each region.
Table 5. The initial positions of each region.
RegionABCDEFG
Initial longitude of eastward drift (°)158.4−130.2−39.016.158.991.0129.8
Initial longitude of westward drift (°)−159.0−66.06.835.682.0120.6147.6
Table 6. Fuel consumption for one patrol cycle.
Table 6. Fuel consumption for one patrol cycle.
RegionABCDEFG
ΔV (km/s)0.03930.03870.03930.03820.03990.03870.0376
Δm (kg)13.2813.0813.2812.9113.4813.0812.71
Table 7. The minimum observation distance and duration for each target.
Table 7. The minimum observation distance and duration for each target.
Target12345
Minimum patrol distance (km)108.8187.1205.784.7101.1
Patrol duration (s)5820.61180.51585.71487.61352.9
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, N.; Zhang, Z.; Feng, S.; Xue, W.; Jia, B. A Patrol Route Design for Inclined Geosynchronous Orbit Satellites in Space Traffic Management. Aerospace 2025, 12, 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace12040299

AMA Style

Chen N, Zhang Z, Feng S, Xue W, Jia B. A Patrol Route Design for Inclined Geosynchronous Orbit Satellites in Space Traffic Management. Aerospace. 2025; 12(4):299. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace12040299

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Ning, Zhanyue Zhang, Songjiang Feng, Wu Xue, and Boya Jia. 2025. "A Patrol Route Design for Inclined Geosynchronous Orbit Satellites in Space Traffic Management" Aerospace 12, no. 4: 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace12040299

APA Style

Chen, N., Zhang, Z., Feng, S., Xue, W., & Jia, B. (2025). A Patrol Route Design for Inclined Geosynchronous Orbit Satellites in Space Traffic Management. Aerospace, 12(4), 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace12040299

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop