Kinematic and reduced-dynamic precise orbit determination of low earth orbiters

By D. Svehla, Markus Rothacher. 2003

170 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract. Various methods for kinematic and reduced-dynamic precise orbit determination (POD) of Low Earth Orbiters (LEO) were developed based on zero- and double-differencing of GPS carrier-phase measurements with and without ambiguity resolution. In this paper we present the following approaches in LEO precise orbit determination: – zero-difference kinematic POD, – zero-difference dynamic POD, – double-difference kinematic POD with and without ambiguity resolution, – double-difference dynamic POD with and without ambiguity resolution, – combined GPS/SLR reduced-dynamic POD. All developed POD approaches except the combination of GPS/SLR were tested using real CHAMP data (May 20-30, 2001) and independently validated with Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) data over the same 11 days. With SLR measurements, additional combinations are possible and in that case one can speak of combined kinematic or combined reduced-dynamic POD. First results of such a combined GPS/SLR POD will be presented, too. This paper shows what LEO orbit accuracy may be achieved with GPS using different strategies including zerodifference and double-difference approaches. Kinematic versus dynamic orbit determination is presently an interesting issue that will also be discussed in this article. Key words. POD, kinematic orbit, dynamic orbit, LEO, CHAMP, ambiguity resolution, GPS, SLR

Subfields: Aerospace Engineering, Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/51568817ff1cdfe6d2be3736da67785edd3bee4c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Aerospace Engineering

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

Citations in the corpus

Pseudo-Stochastic Orbit Modeling Techniques for Low-Earth Orbiters (2006, methodology): “There are many different studies for CHAMP POD based on GPS tracking data (e.g., Svehla and Rothacher 2002; van den IJssel et al. 2003; Konig et al. 2004).”