In distributed space systems such as formation flying and constellations, relative orbit control is an essential technology. Thrusters are often used for this purpose; however, in low Earth orbit, aerodynamic forces can also be utilized. Unlike thruster-based control, aerodynamic control does not consume propellant, so the mission lifetime is free from propellant limitations. However, it cannot, in principle, increase orbital altitude, and the additional installation of aerodynamic control devices is instead expected to accelerate orbital decay. This paper investigates whether thruster-based control or aerodynamic control is more advantageous for relative orbit control from the perspective of mission lifetime. For thruster-based control, the operational duration is estimated through simulations assuming a flight-proven thruster suitable for small s atellites. For aerodynamic control, orbital decay is simulated for satellite con-figurations equipped with aerodynamic control paddles, and the feasible mission duration is estimated. These analyses are conducted across multiple classes of satellites to compare their mission lifetimes. As a result, the aerodynamic control paddle area and the scale of the relative orbit that make aerodynamic control advantageous over thruster-based control in terms of mission lifetime were clarified.
View full abstract