Advertisement

Earth Observation Short-History

  • Herbert J. Kramer
Chapter

Abstract

Prior to the space age (conventionally dated from 1957), humankind had never been able to take in the whole of a hemisphere in a single glance. In fact it had never had a global view of the world in which it lived. It was not until the first spacecraft went into orbit that our horizons expanded and we saw our planet as never before. During more than four decades of spaceflight, planet Earth has been rediscovered through the systematic collection and analysis of vast amounts of information. At the turn of the century/millennium, satellite-provided services in many fields of application (environmental monitoring, navigation, weather forecasting, communication, etc) are taken for granted. We’ve come to depend on the satellites in a way that would have been unimaginable a few decades ago.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1).
    “The conception, growth accomplishments and future of meteorological satellites,” NASA Conference Publication 2257,1980Google Scholar
  2. 2).
    P. D. Lowman, “Landsat and Apollo: The Forgotten Legacy,” PE&RS, Vol. 65, No 10, Oct. 1999, pp. 1143–1146Google Scholar
  3. 3).
    http://academic.emporia.edu/aberjame/remote/landsat/landsat.htm (Author: J. S. Aber)
  4. 4).
    Ironically, objections of the State Department and DoD against the distribution of civil high-resolution Earth imagery (in the optical and microwave regions) and the proliferation of space technology have been around ever since and continue to be a major issue in US space policy. Special rules (including shutter control) may be imposed in particular conflict situations to restrict US-based commercial remote-sensing firms from unauthorized distribution of their imagery. Special rules apply also to the export of space technology by US companies. However, with space-imaging technology readily available outside the USA, the US-internal control functions became more or less ineffective as of 2000.Google Scholar
  5. 5).
    The policies on US remote sensing technologies and their restrictions evolved from two primary sources: a) the secret capabilities first developed for the NRO (National Reconnaissance Office), and b) civil systems like the Landsat series instruments MSS and TM. Originally, commercial considerations were not a factor in either of these areas.Google Scholar
  6. 6).
    P. L. Hays, R. F. Houchin, “Commercial Spysats and Shutter Control: The Military Implications of the US Policy,” Proceedings of AIAA Space 2000 Conference and Exposition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  7. 7).
    Daniel S. Goldin, “NASA in the 21st Century,” Millennial Challenges Colloquium series, Oct. 10, 2000, the address was presented at JHU/APL, Laurel, MDGoogle Scholar
  8. 8).
    The fields of signal processing, data processing, interpretation and use (applications) are topics outside the scope of this text. The interested reader is given a good survey reference: Celebrating a half Century of Signal Processing, “The Past, Present and Future of Image and Multidimensional Signal Processing,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, March 1998, pp. 21–58Google Scholar
  9. 9).
    Background Paper No 5: “Space Communications and Applications,” UNISPACE-III Conference in Vienna, Austria, July 19–30,1999, p. 112, A/CONF.184/BP/13 with the title: Space Benefits for Humanity in the Twenty-First Century, ISBN: 92–1–100818–2Google Scholar
  10. 10).
    Note: A photographic system is also referred to as a framing system. It means that all of the data in an image are acquired simultaneously.Google Scholar
  11. 11).
    In the Soviet Union, a parallel development to MSS (on Landsat) took place with the development of the MSS Fragment instrument at IKI (Space Research Institute), an 8-channel imager with a spectral range of 0.4–2.4 μm, flown on Meteor-Priroda-5 (launch June 18, 1980). Fragment operated successfully onboard the spacecraft for four years.Google Scholar
  12. 12).
    “Perceiving Earth’s Resources from Space,” Special issue of Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 73, No. 6, June 1985, pp. 947–1128Google Scholar
  13. 13).
    Special Issue on Remote Environmental Sensing, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 57, No. 4, April 1969Google Scholar
  14. 14).
    Special Issue on Remote Environmental Sensing, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 57, No. 4, April 1969Google Scholar
  15. 15).
    R. A. McDonald, “CORONA: Success for Space Reconnaissance, A Look into the Cold War, and a Revolution for Intelligence,” PE&RS, Vol. 61, No. 6,1995, pp. 689–719Google Scholar
  16. 16).
  17. 17).
    http://www.fas.org/spp/eprint/mckinley.htm
  18. 18).
    “Atlas zur Interpretation Aerodynamischer Spektralaufnahmen — Methodik und Ergebnisse,” Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1982Google Scholar
  19. 19).
    P. K. Weimer, et al, “Multielement self-scanned mosaic sensors,” IEEE, Spectrum, March 1969, pp. 52–65Google Scholar
  20. 20).
    Special Issue on Solid-State Imaging, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, Vol. ED-15, No. 4, April 1968, pp. 190–261Google Scholar
  21. 21).
    Conventional photographic films with high resolution imagery were not amenable for direct processing and transmission methods in remote sensing. Film material was not suitable for quantitative radiation measurements, only a small spectral range (VNIR, SWIR) could be covered with film.Google Scholar
  22. 22).
    Note: Realizing the value of multispectral data, there were a number of implementations in the early 1960s to obtain multispectral data (i.e. photographs) by special cameras. Spectral separation was accomplished by using photographic filters with multi-objective camera systems, each for a separate spectral range. This left the photo-interpreter with a dozen or so photos of the same scene, each at a different spectral band. The human eye finds it difficult to keep track of tonal variations over 16 or more levels of gray for even a modest number of different scene objects. — The discrimination problem was eventually solved with the availability of data from multispectral scanners and the development of proper algorithms for computer interpretation of imagery.Google Scholar
  23. 23).
    D. Landgrebe, “The Evolution of Landsat Data Analysis,” PE&RS, July 1997, pp. 859–867Google Scholar
  24. 24).
    Information provided by B. Horvath of ERIM, who operated the M-5 imager and analyzed the data.Google Scholar
  25. 25).
    Note: In 1973 the Willow Run Laboratories team separated from the University of Michigan and became ERIM (Environmental Research Institute of Michigan). In 2000, ERIM became part of Veridian ERIM InternationalGoogle Scholar
  26. 26).
    A. M. Mika, “Three decades of Landsat instruments,” Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, ASPRS, Vol. 63, No 7, July 1997, pp.839–852Google Scholar
  27. 27).
    W. S. Boyle, G. E. Smith, “Charge-Coupled Semiconductor Devices,” Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 49, . April 1970, pp. 587–593Google Scholar
  28. 28).
    G. F. Amelio, M. F. Tompsett, G. E. Smith, “Experimental Verification of the Charge Coupled Device Concept,” Bell System Technical Journal, April 1970, pp. 593–600Google Scholar
  29. 29).
    G. F Amelio, W. J. Bertram, M. F. Tompsett, “Charge-Coupled Imaging Devices: Design Considerations,” IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, Vol. ED-18, pp. 986–992, Nov. 1971Google Scholar
  30. 30).
    C. J. S. Damerell, “Charge-coupled devices as particle tracking detectors,” Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 69, No. 4, April 1998, pp. 1549–1573Google Scholar
  31. 31).
    D. F. Barbe, “Imaging Devices Using the Charge-Coupled Concept,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 63, No. 1, Jan. 1975, pp. 38–67Google Scholar
  32. 32).
    I. S. McLean, “Electronic Imaging in Astronomy — Detectors and Instrumentation,”John Wiley & Sons, 1997, pp.128Google Scholar
  33. 33).
    A. S. Selivanov, Y. M. Tuchin, M. K. Naraeva, B. I. Nosov, “Experimental Satellite System for Earth Monitoring,” Issledovanie Zemli iz Kosmosa, W 5, 1981Google Scholar
  34. 34).
    Information provided and document translation: courtesy of Boris Zhukov of DLR and Ian Ziman of IKI, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  35. 35).
    A good reference is: W. D. Rogatto, “The Infrared and Optical Systems Handbook, Vol. 3 Electro-Optical Components,” Copublished by ERIM and SPIE, 1993, chapter 4.5.2Google Scholar
  36. 36).
    J. Pike, http://www.fas.org/eye/imint/htm
  37. 37).
    G. Vane, A. F. H. Goetz, “Terrestrial Imaging Spectrometry: Current Status, Future Trends,” Remote Sensing of Environment, Vol. 44, 1993, pp. 117–126Google Scholar
  38. 38).
    J. Kerekes, “Hyperspectral Sensors,” http://daacdevl.stx.com/ELF/docs/PER/kerekl8.html
  39. 39).
    Binh Q. Le, P. D. Schwartz, Sharon X. Ling, et al., “A Low-Cost Miniaturized Scientific Imager Design with Chip-on-Board Technology for Space Applications,” Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 20, No 2,1999, pp. 170–179Google Scholar
  40. 40).
    P. F. McManamon, et al., “Optical Phased Array Technology,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 84, No.2, Feb. 1996, pp. 268–298Google Scholar
  41. 41).
    Note: The three-line observation concept results in forward, nadir and aft views of the CCD pushbroom array. The imagery from each scan line is assembled into strips. Relief displacement in the line perspective geometry of the strip approach differs from conventional nadir perspective geometry. Every object appears on all three strips. In contrast, on film imagery only about 60% of the area of any one photograph is in a triple overlap.Google Scholar
  42. 42).
    P. Ashcroft, “Acousto-Optic Tunable Filters for Imaging Spectrometry,” http://daacdevl.stx.com/ELF/docs/PER/ ashcrl7.html
  43. 43).
    P. Katzka. “AOTF overview: Past, present, and future,” Acousto-Optic, Electro-Optic, and Magneto-Optic Devices and Applications, Vol. 753, pp. 22–28. Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation Engineers, 1987Google Scholar
  44. 44).
    L. J. Cheng, T. H. Chao, M. Dowdy et al, “Multispectral imaging systems using acousto-optic tunable filters,” Infrared and Millimeter-Wave Engineering, Vol. 1874, pp. 224–231, 1993. Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation EngineersGoogle Scholar
  45. 45).
    D. A. Glenar et al., “Acousto-optic imaging spectropolarimetry for remote sensing,” Applied Optics, Vol. 33, No. 31, Nov. 1, 1994, pp. 7412–7424Google Scholar
  46. 46).
  47. 47).
    D. A. Ausherman, A. Kozma, J. L. Walker, H. M. Jones, E. C. Poggio, “ Developments in Radar Imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. AES-20, No 4, July 1984, pp. 363–400Google Scholar
  48. 48).
    W. M. Brown, L. J. Porcello, “An introduction to synthetic-aperture radar,” IEEE Spectrum, Vol. 6, No 9, Sept. 1969, pp. 52.–60Google Scholar
  49. 49).
    C. A. Wiley, “Synthetic Aperture Radars — A Paradigm for Technology Evolution,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, AES Vol. 21,1885, pp. 440–443Google Scholar
  50. 50).
    http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/database/www-nmc?72–096A-04
  51. 51).
    L. J. Porcello, et al., “The Apollo lunar sounder radar system,” Proceedings of the IEEE, June 1974, pp. 768–783Google Scholar
  52. 52).
    W. E. Brown, C. Elachi, T. W. Thomson, “Radar Imaging of Ocean Surface Patterns,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 81, No 15, May 20,1976, pp. 2657–2667Google Scholar
  53. 53).
    Note: The two Shuttle imaging radars, SIR-A and SIR-B, had recorders, but data was collected only for select sites due to the short mission duration of one week each.Google Scholar
  54. 54).
    J. Mittermayer, A. Moreira, “A Generic Formulation of the Extended Chirp Scaling Algorithm (ECS) for Phase Preserving ScanSAR and Spot SAR Processing,” Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS 2000 Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  55. 55).
    A. Moreira, J. Mittermayer, R. Scheiber, “Extended Chirp Scaling Algorithm for Air- and Spaceborne SAR Data Processing in Stripmap and ScanSAR Imaging Modes,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Vol. 34, No. 5, Sept. 1996, pp. 1123–1136Google Scholar
  56. 56).
    R. C. Beal, “Toward an International Storm Watch Using Wide Swath SAR,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000, pp. 12–20Google Scholar
  57. 57).
    B. Holt, J. Hilland, “Rapid-Repeat SAR Imaging of the Ocean Surface: Are Daily Observations Possible?” JHU/ APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000, pp. 162–169Google Scholar
  58. 58).
    K. B. Katsaros, et al, “Wind Fields from SAR: Could They Improve Our Understanding of Storm Dynamics?” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000, pp. 86–93Google Scholar
  59. 59).
    S. Wu, A. Liu, et al, “Ocean Feature Monitoring with Wide Swath Synthetic Aperture Radar,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000, pp. 122–129Google Scholar
  60. 60).
    G. S. Young, “SAR Signatures of the Marine Atmospheric Boundary Layer: Implications for Numerical Forecasting,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000, pp. 27–32Google Scholar
  61. 61).
    J. Horstmann, S. Lehner, W Koch, R. Tonboe., “Computation of Wind Vectors over the Ocean Using Spaceborne Synthetic Aperture Radar,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000, pp. 100–107Google Scholar
  62. 62).
    Note: JHU/APL was instrumental in developing the phased array radar technology for the US Navy whose construction began in 1959. A first prototype was installed on a Navy ship in 1961. See: A. Kossiakoff, “APL — Expanding the Limits,” Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1992, pp. 8–27Google Scholar
  63. 63).
    J. R. Klauder, A. C. Price, S. Darlington, W. J. Albersheim, “The Theory and Design of Chirp Radars,” The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 39, No 4, July 1960, pp. 745–808Google Scholar
  64. 64).
    The term “chirp” was coined at the Bell Telephone Laboratories in the 1950s to designate a new and more effective radar signal generation method.Google Scholar
  65. 65).
    M. Suess, C. Schaefer, R. Zahn, “Discussion of the Introduction of On-board SAR Data Processing in Spaceborne Instruments,” Proceedings of IEEE/IGARSS 2000, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  66. 66).
    J. Pike, http://winds.jpl.nasa.gov/scatterometry/history.html
  67. 67).
    P. S. Chang, L. N. Connor, J. R. Carswell, R. S. Dunbar, “Operational Scatterometry: High Wind Speed Retrievals,” Proceedings of IEEE/IGARSS Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  68. 68).
    Note: Wind retrievals are also available from SSM/I, flown since 1987 on the DMSP series. However, the design of SSM/I, a microwave radiometer, only permits the retrieval of the speed component of the wind vector.Google Scholar
  69. 69).
    R. F. Millief, M. H. Freilich, et al., “Global Ocean Surface Vector Wind Observations from Space,” Proceedings of OCEANOBS 99, Oct. 18–22, 1999, Saint-Raphael, FranceGoogle Scholar
  70. 70).
    M. R. Drinkwater, C. C. Lin, “Introduction to the Special Section on Emerging Scatterometer Applications,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Vol. 38, No 4, July 2000, pp. 1763–1764Google Scholar
  71. 71).
    W-Y. Tsai. S. V. Nghiem, J. N. Huddelston, et al., “Polarimetric Scatterometry: A Promising Technique for Improving Ocean Surface Wind Measurements,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Vol. 38, No 4, July 2000, pp. 1903–1921Google Scholar
  72. 72).
    V. Wismann, “Monitoring the Earth with Spaceborne Scatterometers,” Proceedings of 32nd ESLAB Symposium on ‘Remote Sensing Methodology for Earth Observation and Planetary Exploration,’ ESA/ESTEC, Sept. 15–18, 1998 (SP-423 Dec. 1998), pp.189–199Google Scholar
  73. 73).
    L. J. Allison, et. al., “Tropical cyclone rainfall as measured by the Number 5 EMSR,” BAMS, Vol. 55, pp. 1074 – 1089, 1975Google Scholar
  74. 74).
    L. Peters, J. J. Daniels, J. D. Young, “Ground Penetrating Radar as a Subsurface Environmental Sensing Tool,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 82, No. 12, Dec. 1994, pp. 1802–1821Google Scholar
  75. 75).
    U. Spagnolini, “Ground Penetrating Radar,” http://daacdevl.stx.com/ELF/docs/PER/spagnol6.html
  76. 76).
    E. G. Njoku, “Passive Microwave Remote Sensing of the Earth from Space-A Review,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 70, No. 7, July 1982, pp. 728–750Google Scholar
  77. 77).
    A. E. Basharinow, et al., “Some Results of Microwave Sounding of the Atmosphere and Ocean from the Satellite Cosmos 243,” in COSPAR Space Research XI, Proceedings of Open Meetings of Working Groups of the Thirteenth Plenary Meeting of COSPAR, Leningrad May 20–29,1970, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1971, pp. 593–600Google Scholar
  78. 78).
    G. W. Schwaab, “Heterodyne spectrometers,” Infrared Physics & Technology, Vol. 40, 1999, pp. 207–218Google Scholar
  79. 79).
    Note: The heterodyning technology is particularly suitable for the detection of very weak infrared and microwave radiation sources; heterodyning instruments (microwave limb sounders) play a crucial role for the monitoring performance of the Earth’s atmosphere (chemical composition of the atmosphere, monitoring/deduction of the fine structure of the spectra) as well as in the study of astronomical objects. The heterodyning technique is applicable in the spectral range from about 10 μm (TIR) to the microwave region of about 10 mm wavelength.Google Scholar
  80. 80).
    K. F. Evans, S. J. Walter, et al, “Modeling of Submillimeter Passive Remote Sensing of Cirrus Clouds,” Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 37, 1998, pp. 184–205Google Scholar
  81. 81).
    K. F. Künzi, “Microwave Limb Sounders,” Proceedings of 32nd ESLAB Symposium on ‘Remote Sensing Methodology for Earth Observation and Planetary Exploration,’ ESA/ESTEC, Sept. 15–18,1998 (SP-423 Dec. 1998), pp. 17–22Google Scholar
  82. 82).
    J. Mees, S. Crewell, et al., “ASUR — An Airborne SIS Receiver for Atmospheric Measurements of Trace Gases at 625 to 760 GHz,” IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, Vol. 43, No 11, Nov. 1995, pp. 2543–2548Google Scholar
  83. 83).
    P. Racette, D. M. Le Vine, “ Synthetic Aperture Radiometry: Technology for Spaceborne Microwave Radiometers for the Future,” http://daacdevl.stx.com/ELF/docs/PER/racettll.html
  84. 84).
    M. A. Fischman, A. W. England, “Sensitivity of a Direct Sampling Digital Correlation Receiver for Aperture Synthesis Radiometry,” Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS 2000 Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  85. 85).
    J. Gurka, J. Heil, “The US National Weather Service Operational Requirements for the Evolution of future NOAA Operational Geostationary Satellites,” Proceedings of the EUMETSAT Meteorological Satellite Data User’s Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, Sept. 6–10, 1999, pp. 69–76Google Scholar
  86. 86).
    W. C. Boncyk, W. J. Wilson, B. H. Lambrigtsen, “The Enabling Technologies of the Geostationary Synthetic Aperture Microwave Sounder (GEO/SAMS),” Proceedings of IEEE/IGARSS Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  87. 87).
    Special Issue on Laser Radar, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 84, No. 2, February 1996, pp. 99–298Google Scholar
  88. 88).
    J. A. McKay, D. Rees, “Space-based Doppler Wind Lidar: Modeling of Edge Detection and Fringe Imaging Doppler Analyzers,” Advances in Space research, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2000, pp. 883–891Google Scholar
  89. 89).
    Courtesy of A. Ginati of OHB -System, BremenGoogle Scholar
  90. 90).
    Note: The radio occultation technique was initially invented in the early 1960s by NASA/JPL in its planetary exploration programs to Venus, Mars (Mariner-IV flyby in 1964) and later to the outer planets (the first relevant proposal came from Stanford University in 1962). Applying this technique to the Earth’s atmosphere and using the GPS constellation as a source and a GPS receiver in LEO was first suggested in the late 1980s in two papers: a) A. S. Gurvich, T. G. Krasilnikova, “Navigation Satellites for Radio Sounding of the Earth’s Atmosphere,” Issled. Zemli Kosmosa, Vol. 6,1986 (in English: Soviet Journal of Remote Sensing, 6,1990), and b) T. P. Yunck et al. The role of GPS in precise Earth observation, Proceedings of the IEEE Position, Location, and Navigation Symposium, Orlando, FLA, 1988.Google Scholar
  91. 91).
    T. P. Yunck, C. H. Liu, R. Ware, “A History of GPS Sounding,” Special issue of TAO (Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Science, Vol. 11, No 1, March 2000, pp. 1–20Google Scholar
  92. 92).
    W. G. Melbourne, et al, The Application of Spaceborne GPS to Atmospheric Limb Sounding and Global Change Monitoring, JPL Pub. 94–18, Pasadena, CA, 147 pp., 1994Google Scholar
  93. 93).
    W. Bertiger, Y. Bar-Sever, S. Desai, et al, “Precise Orbit Determination for the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission using a New Generation of GPS Receiver,” ION GPS-2000, Sept. 19–22, 2000, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 1646–1654Google Scholar
  94. 94).
    G. Hajj, E. R. Kursinski, et. al, “Sensing the Atmosphere From a Low-Earth Orbiter Tracking GPS: Early Results and Lessons From the GPS/MET Experiment,” Proceedings of ION GPS-95, Sept. 12–15, 1995, pp. 1167–1174Google Scholar
  95. 95).
    P. Silvestrin, P. J. Baptista, P. Hoeg, “Radio Occultation Data Analysis: From Planetary Atmosphere Sounding to Operational Meteorology,” Proceedings of 32nd ESLAB Symposium on Remote Sensing Methodology for Earth Observation and Planetary Exploration,’ ESA/ESTEC, Sept. 15–18, 1998 (SP-423 Dec. 1998), pp. 179–187Google Scholar
  96. 96).
    P. Silvestrin, “Earth-Observation Applications of Navigation Satellites,” ESA Bulletin, No 102, May 2000, pp. 101–106Google Scholar
  97. 97).
    P. Silvestrin, R. Bagge, M. Bonnedal, et al., “Spaceborne GNSS Radio Occultation Instrumentation for Operational Applications,” ION GPS 2000, Sept. 19–22, 2000, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 872–880Google Scholar
  98. 98).
    W. Seiler, C. Junge, “Carbon Monoxide in the Atmosphere,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 75, No. 20, April 20, 1970, pp. 2217–2226Google Scholar
  99. 99).
    P. Fabian, P. G. Pruchniewicz, “Meridional Distribution of Ozone in the Troposphere and its Seasonal Variations,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 82, No 15, May 20, 1977, pp. 2063–2073Google Scholar
  100. 100).
    H. K. Tiefenau, P. G. Pruchniewicz, P. Fabian, “Meridional Distribution of Tropospheric Ozone from Measurements Aboard Commercial Airliners,” Pure and Applied Geophysics, Vol. 106–108, 1973, pp. 1036–1040Google Scholar
  101. 101).
    G. D. Nastrom, “Ozone in the Upper Troposphere From GASP Measurements,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 84, No C7, July 20, 1979, pp. 3683–3688Google Scholar
  102. 102).
    H. Matsueda, et al, “Carbon Monoxide in the upper troposphere over the western Pacific between 1993 and 1996,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 103, 1998, pp. 19,093–19,110Google Scholar
  103. 103).
    A. Marenco, et al., “Measurement of ozone and water vapor by Airbus in-service aircraft: The MOZAIC airborne program, An overview,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol, 103, No D19, Oct. 20, 1998, pp. 25,631–25,642. The same volume, D19, contains a special section, pp. 25,631–25,737Google Scholar
  104. 104).
    J. Y. N. Cho, et al., “Trace Gas Study Accumulates Forty Million Frequent-Flyer Miles for Science,” EOS Transactions of AGU, Vol. 80, No. 34, Aug. 24, 1999, pp. 377–384Google Scholar
  105. 105).
    D. Brunner, et al., “Large-scale nitrogen oxide plumes in the tropopause region and implications for ozone,” Science, Vol. 282, 1998, pp. 1305–1309Google Scholar
  106. 106).
    S. A. Pulinets, “Prospects of Topside Sounding,” Chap. 3 of ‘World Ionosphere/Thermosphere Study,’ WITS Handbook, Vol. 2, edited by C. H. Liu, Dec. 1989Google Scholar
  107. 107).
    Proceedings of the IEEE, Special Issue on Topside Sounding and the Ionosphere, Vol. 57, June 1969, pp. 859–1240Google Scholar
  108. 108).
    S. A. Pulinets, R. F. Benson, “Radio-Frequency Sounders in Space,” Review of Radio Science, ed. by W. Ross. Stone, Oxford University Press, Chapter 28, 1999, p. 711–733.Google Scholar
  109. 109).
    Note: Swept-frequency sounding is a technique in which a measurement is made of the frequency shift, phase shift, or time delay between the transmitted signal and its echo). Because of the Earth’s magnetic field, the ionosphere is biréfringent with the result that a transmitted electromagnetic wave normally splits into two characteristic waves which travel independently at different velocities and different polarizations. These are called the ordinary (O) and the extraordinary (X) waves and are typically elliptically polarized. As the sounding frequency is increased, the electron number density required to reflect the transmitted signal increases until reflection occurs at a region or height of maximum ionization. Above the critical frequency corresponding to the electron number density at the peak of the F2-layer, reflection can no longer take place and the ionosphere becomes transparent to the sounding signal.Google Scholar
  110. 110).
    C. A. Franklin, M. A. Maclean, “The Design of Swept-Frequency Topside Sounders,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 57, No 6, June 1969, pp. 897–929Google Scholar
  111. 111).
    C. D. Florida, “The Development of a Series of Ionospheric Satellites,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 57, No 6, June 1969, pp. 867–875Google Scholar
  112. 112).
    S. A. Pulinets, “Seismic activity as a source of the ionospheric variability,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 22, 1998, No 6, pp. 903–906Google Scholar
  113. 113).
    S.A. Pulinets, “ Strong Earthquake Prediction Possibility with the help of Topside Sounding from Satellites,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 21, No. 3, 1998, pp. 455–458Google Scholar
  114. 114).
    D. F. Barbe, “Charge-Coupled Devices,” Topics in Applied Physics, Vol. 38, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980Google Scholar
  115. 115).
    J. A. Cox, “Signal-to-noise ratio dependence on frame time, time delay and integration (TDI), and pulse shaping,” Optical Engineering, May/June 1982, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 528–536Google Scholar
  116. 116).
    W. L. Wolfe, G. L. Zissis, “Time Delay and Integration in CCD Signal Processing,” The Infrared Handbook, prepared by the Environmental Research Institute of Michigan for ONR (US Navy), 1978, pp. 12–66 and 12–28Google Scholar
  117. 117).
    Y. Kim, J. van Zyl, “On the Relationship between Polarimetric Parameters,” Proceedings of the IEEE/IGARSS 2000 Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  118. 118).
    V. Kempe, D. Oertel, R. Schuster, H. Becker-Ross, H. Jahn, “Absolute IR-spectra from the measurement of Fourier spectrometers aboard Meteor 25 and 28,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 7, 1980, pp. 1403–1416Google Scholar
  119. 119).
    M. J. Persky, “A review of spaceborne infrared Fourier transform spectrometers for remote sensing,” Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 66, No. 10, October 1995, pp. 4763–4797Google Scholar
  120. 120).
    M. C. Roggemann, V. P. Lukin, V. E. Zuev, “Adaptive optics: introduction to the feature issue,” Applied Optics, July 20, 1998, Vol. 37, No. 21Google Scholar
  121. 121).
    P. M. Hinz, et al., “Imaging circumstellar environments with a nulling interferometer,” Nature Vol. 395, Sep. 17, 1998, pp. 251–253Google Scholar
  122. 122).
    G. Stix, “Shading the Twinkle,” Scientific American, Dec. 1998, p. 20Google Scholar
  123. 123).
    G. Schilling, “Technique for Unblurring The Stars Comes of Age,” Science, Vol. 286, Nov. 19, 1999, pp. 1504–1506Google Scholar
  124. 124).
    N. Clark, P. Furth, S. Horan, “Intelligent Star Tracker,” Proceedings of the 14th Annual AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Logan, UT, Aug. 21–24, 2000, SSC00-III-1Google Scholar
  125. 125).
    I. Amato, “Fomenting a Revolution in Miniature,” Science, Vol. 282, Oct. 16, 1998, pp. 402–405Google Scholar
  126. 126).
    Special Issue on Integrated Sensors, Microactuators, and Microsystems (MEMS), Proceeding of the IEEE, Vol. 86, No. 8, August, 1998Google Scholar
  127. 127).
    M. C. Wu, “Micromachining for Optical and Optoelectronic Systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 85, No 11, Nov. 1997, pp. 1833–1856Google Scholar
  128. 128).
    M. Lacher, W. Ehrfeld, “Microproducts for Space Applications,” Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Micro Nanotechnology for Space Applications, Apr. 11–15, 1999, Pasadena, CA, Vol. 1, pp. 4–25Google Scholar
  129. 129).
    J. Mueller, I. Chakraborty, et al., “MEMS-Micropropulsion Activities at JPL,” Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Micro Nanotechnology for Space Applications, Apr. 11–15, 1999, Pasadena, CA, Vol. 1, pp. 175–200Google Scholar
  130. 130).
    Siegfried W. Janson, Henry Helvajian, Ernest. Y. Robinson, “The Concept of Nanosatellite” for Revolutionary Low Cost Space Systems, Proceedings of the 44th Congress of the International Astronautics Federation, Oct. 16–22, 1993, Graz, Austria, IAF-93-U.5.573Google Scholar
  131. 131).
    S. W. Janson, “Silicon Satellites for 21 st Century Missions,” Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Micro Nanotechnology for Space Applications, Apr. 11–15, 1999, Pasadena, CA, Vol. 1, pp. 535–544Google Scholar
  132. 132).
    Note: In Feb. 1996, researchers at Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd (Japan) achieved for the first time data rates of 1.1 Tbit/s using WDM (Wavelength Division Multiplexing) technology in an optical transmission experiment over a distance of 150 km (with 50 km amplifier spacing). In the experiment, 55 optical channels in the 1.55 μmi range (0.6 nm spacing) were used, each at 20 Gbit/s, for a total data rate of 1.1 Tbit/s.Google Scholar
  133. 133).
    M. Shikatani, et al., “Ground system development for the ETS-6/LCE laser communication experiment,” Proceedings of SPIE, 20–21 Jan. 1993, Los Angeles, Vol. 1866, pp. 21–29Google Scholar
  134. 134).
    Y. Arimoto, et al., “Preliminary Results on Laser Communication Experiment using ETS-6,” Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 2381,1995Google Scholar
  135. 135).
    M. Enoch, S. Herrin, et al., “Optical Tracking Telemetry and Commanding (TT&C) for Small Satellites,” Proceedings of the 13th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Aug. 23–26, 1999, Logan. Utah, SSC99-IIb-4Google Scholar
  136. 136).
    B. F. Levine, C. G. Bethea, K. G. Glogovsky, et al., “Long-wavelength 128 × 128 GaAs quantum well infrared pho-todetector arrays,” Semiconductor Science Technology, Vol. 6, pp. C114-C119, 1991, IOP Publishing Ltd.,UKGoogle Scholar
  137. 137).
    B. F. Levine, “Quantum-well infrared photodetectors,” Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 74, No. 8, Oct. 15, 1993, pp. Rl — R81, part of the series: Applied Physics Reviews; it includes an extensive review of the QWIP literature.Google Scholar
  138. 138).
    S. Gunapala, M. Sundaram, S. Bandara, “Quantum Wells stare at long-wave IR scenes,” Laser Focus World, June 1996 p. 233Google Scholar
  139. 139).
    M. Walther, F. Fuchs, et al., “III-V Semiconductor Quantum Well and Superlattice Detectors,” Infrared Technology and Applications XXIV, B. F. Andresen, M. Strojnik, Editors, Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 3436, 1998, pp. 348–358Google Scholar
  140. 140).
    M. Walther, F. Fuchs, et al, “Electrical and optical properties of 8–12μm GaAs/AlGaAs quantum well infrared photodiodes in 256×256 focal plane arrays,” in Tntersubband transitions in quantum wells: physics and devices,’ ed. by S. Li and Y. K. Su, pp. 207 – 212, Kluver Academic Publishers, Boston, 1998Google Scholar
  141. 141).
    http://www.iaf.fhg.de/ir/qwip/camera.html
  142. 142).
    J. P. Burrows, 1994 “GOME and SCIAMACHY,” in Ozone Layer Observation by Satellite Sensors — Proceedings of the International Workshop on Global Environment and Earth Observing Satellite Sensors Tokyo, Dec. 8–9, 1993 pp 67–74Google Scholar
  143. 143).
    J. P. Burrows, M. Buchwitz, M. Eisinger, V. Rozanov, M. Weber, A. Richter, A. Ladstätter-Weißenmayer 1998, “The Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment (GOME), Mission, Instrument Concept, and first scientific results”, Proceedings of the third ERS Symposium Florence, Italy, March 18–23, 1997. Space at the service of our Environment, 1997. ISBN 92–9092–656–2, ESA SP 414, pp. 585–590Google Scholar
  144. 144).
    U. Platt, D. Perner, H. W. Pätz, “Simultaneous measurements of atmospheric CH2O, O3, and NO2 by differential optical absorption,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 84, 1979, pp. 6329–6335Google Scholar
  145. 145).
    J. F. Noxon, “Nitrogen dioxide in the stratosphere and Troposphere. Measurement by ground-based absorption spectroscopy,” Science, 189, 1975, p. 547Google Scholar
  146. 146).
    H. Edner, P. Ragnarson, S. Spännere, S. Svanberg, “Differential optical absorption spectroscopy (DOAS) system for urban atmospheric pollution monitoring,” Applied Optics, Jan. 20, 1993, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 327–333Google Scholar
  147. 147).
    J. Frerick, H. Bovensmann, S. Noel, J. P. Burrows, M. R. Dobber, “SCIAMACHY on-ground/in-flight calibration, performance verification, and monitoring concepts,” Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 3117, pp. 176–187, Earth Observing Systems II, William L. Barnes; Ed. Publication Date: 09/1997Google Scholar
  148. 148).
    J. P. Burrows, K. V. Chance, A. P. H. Goede, R. Guzzi, B. J. Kerridge, C. Muller, D. Perner, U. Platt, J.-P. Pommereau, W. Schneider, R. J. Spurr, H. van der Woerd, “Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment: Interim Science Report”, ESA SP-1151 Edited by T. D. Guyenne and C. J. Readings ISBN 92–9092–041 – 6 European Space Agency 1993Google Scholar
  149. 149).
    “The Secrets of SPOT-5 Supermode,” SPOT Magazine, No 31, 2000, pp. 21–23Google Scholar
  150. 150).
  151. 151).
  152. 152).
    Oxford cryocooler information provided by Manny Tward of TRW, Redondo Beach, CAGoogle Scholar
  153. 153).
    J. G. Turtle, M. J. DiPirro, P. J. Shirron, “Liquid/gas phase separators for the Superfluid Helium On-Orbit Transfer (SHOOT) project,” Advances in Cryogenic Engineering, 39, 1994, p. 121Google Scholar
  154. 154).
    T. R. Gosnell, “Laser Cooling of a Solid by 65 K Starting from Room Temperature,” Optical Letters, Vol. 24, No. 15, 1999, pp. 1041–1043Google Scholar
  155. 155).
    B. C. Edwards, J. E. Anderson, R. I. Epstein, Solid State Optical Cooler Developments, Proceedings of the International Cryocooler Conference, Keystone, CO, June 2000, Paper No 76Google Scholar
  156. 156).
    G. L. Mills, A. J. Mord, P. A. Slaymaker, “ Design and Predicted Performance of an Optical Cryocooler for a Focal Plane Application,” Proceedings of the International Cryocooler Conference, Keystone, CO, June 2000Google Scholar
  157. 157).
    http://www.nationalacademies.org/ssb/smallsatappendb.htm
  158. 158).
    R. A. Wood, N. A. Foss, “Micromachined Bolometer Arrays,” Laser Focus World, 30, pp.101–106, 1994Google Scholar
  159. 159).
    J. C. Ritter, M. Nisenoff, G. Price, S. A. Wolf, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 27, 1991, p. 2533Google Scholar
  160. 160).
    Excerpts are reprinted with permission from “Assessment of Mission Size Trade-offs for NASA’s Earth and Space Science Missions,” pp. 6–12, National Academy Press, 2000, Copyright (2000) by the National Academy of Sciences. Courtesy of the National Academy Press, Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
  161. 161).
    Kepler is considered a founder of modern astronomy, he formulated the famous three laws of planetary motion. They comprise a quantitative formulation of Copernicus’s theory that the planets revolve around the sun.Google Scholar
  162. 162).
    Note: The “signal weakening” effect is due to the widening cross-sectional area of the light ray as it propagates through space — resulting of course in ever fewer photons per unit area of cross-section, hence, of measurable energy.Google Scholar
  163. 163).
    C. E. Willey, B. Huettl, D. Dowen, S. W. Hill, “Miniature Mechanisms Tool Kit for Micro Spacecraft,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 22, No 2, 2001, pp. 115–119Google Scholar
  164. 164).
    A. L. Lew, B. Q. Le, P. D. Schwartz, et al., “Microsatellites: An Enabling Technology for Government and Commercial Aerospace Applications,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 22, No 2, 2001, pp. 124–134Google Scholar
  165. 165).
    Note: The Vela (meaning “watchman” in Spanish) S/C series of DoD was designed to monitor worldwide compliance with the 1963 nuclear test ban treaty. Vela-1 was launched Oct. 17, 1963, Vela-6 was launched July 20, 1965.Google Scholar
  166. 166).
    R. Fleeter, “Being Disruptive,” Launchspace Magazine, Volume 3.01, Feb/Mar 1998Google Scholar
  167. 167).
    B. Shirgur, D. Shannon, “The Design and Feasibility Study of Nanosatellite Structures for Current and Future FSI Micro-missions,” 14th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Logan, UT, Aug. 21–24, 2000, SSC00-VII-5Google Scholar
  168. 168).
    D. M. Simpson, “The Snapdragon Family,” Proceedings of the European Conference on Spacecraft Structure, Materials & Mechanical Testing, ESA/ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, Nov. 29 — Dec. 1, 2000, pp.337–344Google Scholar
  169. 169).
    M. Williamson, “Advancing Satellite Technology,” Space & Communications, March-April 1998, pp. 3–7Google Scholar
  170. 170).
    Note: Solar concentrators reflect radiation so as to expose the cells to more radiation, together with multi-junction devices that capture a larger slice of the spectrum (UV, VNIR, and IR). Efficiencies of about 30% and more are expected to be achieved in the early years of the next decade.Google Scholar
  171. 171).
    T. Meink, K. Reinhardt, K. Luu, et al, “Power Sail — A High Power Solution,” Proceedings of the AIAA Space 2000 Conference and Exposition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  172. 172).
    Ch. F. Hoeber, D. J. Kim, “The Continued Evolution of Communication Satellites,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 47, No 2–9, July-November 2000, pp. 65–89, Special issue: Space an Integral Part of the Information AgeGoogle Scholar
  173. 173).
    V. Venugopalan, “Lithium-Ion Cells for Space Applications,” Journal of Spacecraft Technology, Vol. 11, No 1, Jan. 2001, pp. 1–73MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  174. 174).
    P. D. Schwartz, A. E Hepp, et al., “Spacecraft Miniaturization: Integrated Power Source,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2001, pp. 106–109Google Scholar
  175. 175).
    http://www-techtrans.jpl.nasa.gov/success/stories/cse.html
  176. 176).
    C. E. Willey, R. S. Bokulic, W. E. Skullney, R. C. Schulze, “Ka-band Hybrid Inflatable Dish Antenna,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 22, No 2, 2001, pp. 110–111Google Scholar
  177. 177).
    M. Lou, H. Fang, L. M. Hsia, “Development of Space Inflatable/Rigidizable STR Aluminum Laminate Booms,” Proceedings of the AIAA Space Conference and Exhibition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  178. 180).
    http://gnctech.gsfc.nasa,gov/gto/library/staif/staifl71.htmlGoogle Scholar
  179. 181).
    Y. Guo, “Autonomous Solar Navigation System,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 22, No 2, 2001, pp. 119121Google Scholar
  180. 182).
    J. Rash, R. Parise, K. Hogie, E. Criscuolo, J. Langston, C. Jackson, H. Price, “Internet Access to Spacecraft,” Proceedings’of the 14th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Logan UT, Aug. 21–24, 2000, SSC00-IX-4Google Scholar
  181. 183).
  182. 184).
    J. Rash, R. Parise, K. Hogie, E. Criscuolo, J. Langsten, “Internet Technology on Spacecraft,” Proceedings of the AIAA Space Conference and Exhibition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  183. 185).
    P. Shaki, “Industry, Agencies Adopt Data Collection Standard,” Space News, Oct. 26 — Nov. 1, 1998, p. 6Google Scholar
  184. 186).
    R. Killough, M. McLelland, “Designing Command and Telemetry Systems Using MIL-STD-1553 and CCSDS,” Proceedings of the 14th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, SSC00-XI-4, Aug. 21–24, 2000, Logan, UTGoogle Scholar
  185. 187).
    M. E. Fraeman, “Advanced Spacecraft Architectures: 1394 Serial Bus,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 22, No 2, 2001, pp. 114–115Google Scholar
  186. 188).
    http://www.space.com/news/international/japan_satcapture.html
  187. 189).
    P. Hou, M. Petrou, C. Underwood, “Advanced On-board Image Compression in Conjunction with Cloud Detection for Microsatellite Optical Imaging,” Proceedings of the 13th AIAA/USU Conference for Small Satellites, Aug. 23–26, 1999, Logan UT, SSC99-IV-5Google Scholar
  188. 190).
    P. Trinadh, R. Seshaiah, U. N. Das, V. Nalanda, “Effect of Transmission Channel Errors on ADPCM and JPEG Compression,” Journal of Spacecraft Technology, Vol. 9, No 1, 1999, pp. 23–36Google Scholar
  189. 191).
    Note: In “lossy compression” information is thrown away during compression, so that the original data cannot be recovered by decompression. The decompression produces an approximation to the original data, with the level of approximation dependent on the compression ratio. In “lossless compression” the original data is reproduced exactly by decompressing the compressed stream.Google Scholar
  190. 192).
    B. V. Brower, A. Lan, J. M. McCabe, “Hyperspectral lossless compression,” Proceedings of SPIE, Imaging Spectroscopy V, Vol 3753, Denver, CO, July 19–21, 1999, pp. 247–257Google Scholar
  191. 193).
    Note: “Rice” is an adaptive variable-length compression scheme on images, an algorithm developed by Robert F. Rice of JPL and implemented by Frank Rabe of the Technical University in Braunschweig, Germany for the Mars Pathfinder Lander IMP imaging system.Google Scholar
  192. 194).
    Robert F. Rice, “Some Practical Universal Noiseless Coding Techniques, Part III, Module PSI14,K+,” JPL Publication 91–3, November 15, 1991.Google Scholar
  193. 195).
    P. Yeh, J. Venbrux, P. Bhatia, W. H. Miller, “A Real-Time High Performance Data Compression Technique for Space Applications,” Proceedings of IEEE/IGARSS Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  194. 196).
    J. Bowles et al., “New results from the ORASIS/NEMO compression algorithm,” Proceedings of SPIE, Imaging Spectroscopy V, Vol 3753, Denver, CO, July 19–21, 1999, pp. 226–234Google Scholar
  195. 197).
    G. J. Dittberner, “NOAA’s Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) Systems and Plans,” Proceedings of the EUMETSAT Meteorological Satellite Data User’s Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, Sept. 6–10, 1999, pp. 33–38Google Scholar
  196. 198).
    F. C. Vandenbussche, “SOHO’s Recovery — An Unprecedented Success Story,” ESA Bulletin, Nr. 97, March 1999, pp. 39–47Google Scholar
  197. 199).
    J. Bates, “Software Extends Satellite Missions When Gyroscopes Fail,” Space News, Feb. 5, 2001, p. 8Google Scholar
  198. 200).
    http://www.aero.org/news/current/pseudogyro.html
  199. 201).
    J. Bistrow, D. Folta, K. Hartman, “A Formation Flying Technology Vision,” Proceedings of AIAA 2000 Space Conference and Exposition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  200. 202).
    G. H. Fountain, et al, “A Technology Path to Distributed Remote Sensing,” IAA 2nd International Symposium on Small Satellites for Earth Observation, Berlin, April 12–16, 1999, pp. 189–193Google Scholar
  201. 203).
    J. Esper, P. V. Panetta, et al., “NASA/GSFC Nano-Satellite Technology for Earth Science Missions,” IAA 2nd International Symposium on Small Satellites for Earth Observation, Berlin, April 12–16, 1999, pp. 219–225Google Scholar
  202. 204).
    F. H. Bauer, K. Hartman, J P. How, et al., “Enabling Spacecraft Formation Flying through Spaceborne GPS and Enhanced Automation Technologies,” Proceedings of the ION-GPS Conference, Nashville TN, Sept. 15, 1999Google Scholar
  203. 205).
    W. Ferster, “Tiny Satellite Fleet May Function as One Craft,” Space News, Aug. 17–23, 1998, p. 7Google Scholar
  204. 206).
  205. 207).
    W. Ferster, “NRO Awards Giant Satellite Contract to Boeing,” Space News, Sept. 13, 1999, p. 1Google Scholar
  206. 208).
    C.-W. Park, J. P. How, L. Capots, “Sensing Technologies for Formation Flying Spacecraft in LEO using CDGPS and Inter-Spacecraft Communication System,” ION GPS 2000, Sept. 19–22, 2000, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 1595–1607Google Scholar
  207. 209).
    E. A. Olsen, P. A. Stadler, M. S. Asher, “Long-Baseline Differential GPS based Relative Navigation for Spacecraft with Crosslink, Ranging Measurements,” ION GPS 2000, Sept. 19–22, 2000, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 1612–1621Google Scholar
  208. 210).
    A. A. Chacos, P. A. Stadter, W. S. Devereux, “Autonomous Navigation and Crosslink Communication Systems for Space Applications,” JHU/APL Technical Digest, Vol. 22, No 2, 2001, pp. 135–143Google Scholar
  209. 211).
    L. L. Fu, Y. Menard, “Summary of the Third Joint TOPEX/Poseidon and Jason-1 Science Working Team Meeting,” The Earth Observer, Jan/Feb. 2001, Vol. 13, No 1, pp. 17–18Google Scholar
  210. 212).
    A. Moccia, N. Chiacchio, A. Capone, “Spaceborne bistatic Synthetic Aperture Radar for remote Sensing applications,” International Journal of Remote Sensing, Vol. 21, No 18, 2000, pp. 3395–3414Google Scholar
  211. 213).
    N. J. Willis, “Bistatic Radar,” Artech House, Boston, 1991, ISBN: 0–89006-427-XGoogle Scholar
  212. 214).
    J. Wurman, “Vector Winds from a Single Transmitter Bistatic Dual-Doppler Radar Network,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, July 1994Google Scholar
  213. 215).
    J. Wurman, M. Randall, C. Frush, E. Loew, C. Holloway, “Design of a Bistatic Dual-Doppler Radar for Retrieving Vector Winds using One Transmitter and a Remote Low-Gain Passive Receiver,” Proceedings of IEEE, Dec. 1994Google Scholar
  214. 216).
    J. Wurman, S. Heckman, D. Boccippio, “A Bistatic Multiple-Doppler Radar Network: Part 1, Theory,” Journal of Applied Meteorology, Dec. 1993Google Scholar
  215. 217).
  216. 218).
    A. Komjathy, J. L. Garrison, V. Zavorotny, “GPS: A New Tool for Ocean Science,” GPS World, April 1999, pp. 50–56Google Scholar
  217. 219).
    A. M. Peterson, C. C. Teague, G. C. Tyler, “Bistatic-radar observation of long-period, directional ocean-wave spectra with LORAN-A,” Science, Vol. 170, 1970, pp. 158–161Google Scholar
  218. 220).
    Note: Coherent detection requires synchronization between master and slaves. The synchronization may either be achieved using a crosslink from master to slaves, or by accurate synchronization of all involved to the same source.Google Scholar
  219. 221).
    H. Runge, R. Bamler, J. Mittermayer, F. Jochim, D. Massonnet, E. Thouvenot, “The Interferometric Cartwheel for Envisat,” 3rd International Symposium of IAA, Berlin, April 2–6, 2001, pp.187–190Google Scholar
  220. 222).
    The term “cartwheel orbit” was initially coined by D. Massonnet of CNES in 1997Google Scholar
  221. 223).
    D. Massonnet, “Capabilities and Limitations of the Interferometric Cartwheel,” CNES paper presented at the CEOS Workshop in Toulouse, October 1999Google Scholar
  222. 224).
    J. Mittermayer, G. Krieger, M. Wendler, A. Moreira, E. Thouvenot, T. Amoit, R. Bamler, “Preliminary Interferometric Performance Estimation for the Interferometric Cartwheel in Combination with ENVISAT ASAR,” CEOS Workshop, Tokyo, Japan, April 2–5, 2001Google Scholar
  223. 225).
    http://www.hughespace.com/factsheets/xips/xips.html
  224. 226).
    http://www.planetary.org/solarsail/missions/planetary_solar_sai.html
  225. 227).
    M. Leipold, C. E. Garner, et al., “ODISSEE -A Proposal for Demonstration of a Solar Sail in Earth Orbit,” Proceedings of Third IAA Conference on Low-Cost Planetary Missions, Pasadena, CA, April 27 – May 1, 1998Google Scholar
  226. 228).
    M. Leipold, C. E. Garner, “Solar Sails — Exploiting the Space Resource of the Solar Radiation Pressure,” ESA Conference on ‘Engineering and Economic Aspects into the 21st Century,’ 20–22, Oct., 1998, Cagliari, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  227. 229).
    M. Leipold, M. Eiden, CE. Garner, et al., “Solar Sail Technology Development and Demonstration,” Proceedings of the 4th IAA International Conference on Low-Cost Planetary Missions, JHU/APL, Laurel, MD, May 2–5, 2000Google Scholar
  228. 230).
    http://powerweb.lerc.nasa.gov/pvsee/publications/TheBasics.html
  229. 231).
    D. C. Wilkinson, M. A. Shea, D. F. Smart, “A Case History of Solar and Galactic Space Weather Effects on the Geosynchronous Communication Satellite TDRS-1,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2000, pp. 27–30Google Scholar
  230. 232).
    V. I. Degtjarev, G. V. Popov, A. D. Johnstone, “Solar Wind Control of Spacecraft Charging Conditions in Geostationary Orbit during Magnetic Storms,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 26, No 1, 2000, pp. 37–40Google Scholar
  231. 233).
    http://www.newspace.com/ref/msl/QuickLooks/scathaQL.html
  232. 234).
  233. 235).
    N. L. Johnson, “Monitoring and Controlling Debris in Space,” Scientific American, Aug. 1998, pp. 42–47Google Scholar
  234. 236).
  235. 237).
    “Dossier: Orbital debris,” CNES Magazine No 4, Jan. 1999, pp. 11–28Google Scholar
  236. 238).
    http://www.aero.org/cords/index.html
  237. 239).
    M. J. Meshishnek, “Overview of the Space Debris Environment,” The Aerospace Corporation Report No. TR-95(5231)-3, SMC Report No. SMC-TR-95–9, March 15, 1995. Also at: http://www.aero.org/publications/pa-pers/pdfs/TR-95–5231–3.pdfGoogle Scholar
  238. 240).
    W. Flury, “Space Debris: An Overview,” Earth Space Review, Vol. 9, No 4, 2000, pp. 40–47Google Scholar
  239. 241).
    M. L. Fudge, “The Effect of Orbital Debris on Commercial Satellites,” Earth Space Review, Vol. 9, No 4, 2000, pp. 48–56Google Scholar
  240. 242).
    N. L. Johnson, “Man-Made Debris In And From Lunar Orbit,” Earth Space Review, Vol. 9, No 4, 2000, pp. 57–65Google Scholar
  241. 243).
    B. Reijnen, “Space Debris: A Responsibility of States,” Earth Space Review, Vol. 9, No 4, 2000, pp. 66–70Google Scholar
  242. 244).
    http://www.peterson.af.mil/usspace/boxscore.htm
  243. 245).
    N. L. Johnson, Joseph, P. Loftus, “Reducing Orbital Debris: Standards and Practices,” Launchspace, March/April 1999, p. 24Google Scholar
  244. 246).
    M. Bille, D. Dickey, “A Microsatellite ‘Space Guard’ Force,” Proceedings of the 13th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Aug. 23–26, 1999, Logan UT, SSC99-II-6Google Scholar
  245. 247).
    W. Flury, A. Massart, T. Schildknecht, U. Hugentobler, J. Kuusela, Z. Sodnik, “Searching for Small Debris in the Geostationary Ring,” ESA Bulletin, No 104, Nov. 2000, pp. 92–100Google Scholar
  246. 248).
    Information provided by Walter Flury of ESA/ESOC, Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  247. 249).
    Note: The objective of the Gemini tether missions was to see if tethers could be used for rendezvous and docking in preparation for the future moon missions. A parachute cable was used as the tether, which was attached to the Agena by a spacewalking astronaut. The other mission (Gemini-11) experimented with rotation about the CM (Center of Mass) to see if it was stable — it was. The Gemini missions were not electrodynamic in nature, nor were they performed for scientific purposes — as were the TSS missions.Google Scholar
  248. 250).
    http://infinity.msfc.nasa.gov/Public/ps01/ps02/tablel.html
  249. 251).
    http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/station/assembly/flights/2000/2r.html
  250. 252).
    R. W. Reynolds, “Specific Contributions to the Observing System: Sea Surface Temperature,” Proceedings of OCEANOBS 99, Oct. 18–22, 1999, Saint Raphael, FranceGoogle Scholar
  251. 253).
    W. P. Menzel, “Cloud Tracking with Satellite Imagery: From the Pioneering Work of Ted Fujita to the Present,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 82, No 1, Jan. 2001, pp. 33–47Google Scholar
  252. 254).
    T. Fujita, W. A. Bohan, “Detailed Views of Mesoscale Cloud Patterns Filmed from ATS-1 Pictures,” a 16 mm film of 9 minute length is available from Walter A. Bohan Co,, P. O. Box 736, Park Ridge, IL 60068–0736, USAGoogle Scholar
  253. 255).
    J. R. Greaves, W E. Shenk, “The Development of the Geosynchronous Weather Satellite System,” Monitoring Earth’s Ocean, Land, and Atmosphere from Space — Sensors, Systems, and Applications, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, AiAA, Volume 97, 1985, pp. 150–181Google Scholar
  254. 256).
    Information provided by Malcolm A. LeCompte of Astro Vision Inc.Google Scholar
  255. 257).
    D. Crommelynck, S. Dewitte, “Metrology of Total Solar Irradiance Monitoring,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 24, No 2, 1999, pp. 195–204Google Scholar
  256. 258).
    R. B. Lee III, M. A. Gibson, R. S. Wilson, S. Thomas, “Long-term total solar irradiance variability during sunspot cycle 22,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 100, No A2, pp. 1667–1675, Feb. 1, 1995Google Scholar
  257. 259).
    E. N. Parker, “The Physics of the Sun and the Gateway to the Stars,” Physics Today, June 2000, pp. 26–31Google Scholar
  258. 260).
    J. R. Hickey, et al., “ Total solar irradiance measurements by ERB/Nimbus-7, a review of nine years,” Space Science Review, Vol. 48, 1988, pp. 321–342Google Scholar
  259. 261).
    C. Fröhlich, “Observations of Irradiance Variations,” pp. 15–24 in Solar Variability and Climate, Editors: E. Friis-Christensen, C. Fröhlich, J. D. Haigh, M. Schüssler and R. von Steiger, Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 0–7923-6741–3,2000Google Scholar
  260. 262).
    D. V. Hoyt, H. L. Kyle, J. R. Hickey, R. H. Maschhoff, “The Nimbus-7 solar total irradiance: A new algorithm for its derivation,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 97, 1992, pp. 51–63Google Scholar
  261. 263).
    E. F. Harrison, P. Minnis, B. Barstrom, et al., “Seasonal variation of cloud radiative forcing derived from tire ERBE,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 95:1990, pp. 18667–18703Google Scholar
  262. 264).
    Information provided by M. Rouzé of CNESGoogle Scholar
  263. 265).
    http://remotesensing.oma.be/solarconstant/solar.html
  264. 266).
  265. 267).
    http://estirm2.oma.be/solarconstant/artiçles/articlel.html#references
  266. 268).
    T. I. Gombosi, “Modeling Gringauz’s legacy from the solar wind to weakly magnetized solar system bodies,” International Symposium on Space Plasma Studies by In-Situ and Remote Measurements (Gringauz Symposium), Moscow, Russia, June 1–5, 1998.Google Scholar
  267. 269).
    http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/whsolwi.html
  268. 271).
    Note: In the very early period of space flight, the technique of optical tracking was employed by the use of the Baker-Nunn camera.Google Scholar
  269. 271).
    Note: In the very early period of space flight, the technique of optical tracking was employed by the use of the Baker-Nunn camera.Google Scholar
  270. 272).
    E. J. Hoffman, “Spacecraft Design Innovations in the APL Space Department,” Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1992, pp. 167–181Google Scholar
  271. 273).
    R. B. Kershner, “Technical Innovations in the APL Space Department,” Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1980, pp. 264–278Google Scholar
  272. 274).
    Note: The very concept of being able to compute a location on Earth by observing the change in frequency of a spaceborne transmitter during a single pass was initially ridiculed by a number of reputable scientists.Google Scholar
  273. 275).
    The Legacy of Transit, Special issue of Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Jan.-March 1998, Volume 19, No.Google Scholar
  274. 276).
    J. Rush, “Current Issues in the Use of the Global Positioning System Aboard Satellites,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 47, No 2–9, 2000, pp. 377–387MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  275. 277).
    W. Bertiger, P. Abusali, et al, “The First Low Earth Orbiter with Precise GPS Positioning: TOPEX/Poseidon,” ION Proceedings, Sept. 1993Google Scholar
  276. 278).
    P. Argentiero, et al, “Results of GEOS 3/ATS-6 Satellite-to-Satellite Tracking Orbit Determination Experiment,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 84, No. B8, pp. 3921–3925, 1979.Google Scholar
  277. 279).
    Information provided by P. Schwintzer of GFZ PotsdamGoogle Scholar
  278. 280).
    http://www.estec.esa.nl/vrwww/explorer/GRAVITY.html#introduction
  279. 281).
    P. Touboul, B. Foulon, E. Willemenot, “Electrostatic Space Accelerometers for Present and Future Missions,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 45, No. 10, 1999, pp. 605–617Google Scholar
  280. 282).
    V. Josselin, P. Touboul, R. Kielbasa, “Capacitive detection scheme for space accelerometer applications,” Sensors and Actuators, Vol. 78, 1999, pp. 92–98Google Scholar
  281. 283).
    C. J. Koblinsky, P. Gaspar, and G. Lagerloef, editors, “The Future of Spaceborne Altimetry: Oceans and Climate Change,” Joint Oceanographic Institutions Inc., Washington, DC, 1992, pp. 72–73Google Scholar
  282. 284).
    http://esapub.esrin.esa.it/microgra/micrv8n2/natv8n2.htm
  283. 285).
    L. Sehnal, R. Peresty, L. Pospisilova, A. Kohlhase, “Dynamical Microaccelerometric Measurements on board Space Shuttle,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 47, No 1, 2000, pp. 27–34Google Scholar
  284. 286).
    N. Clark, P. Furth, S. Horan, “Intelligent Reconfigurable Integrated Satellite Processor,” Proceedings of the 14th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Logan, UT, Aug. 21–24, 2000, SSC00-VI-1Google Scholar
  285. 287).
    W. K. Burns, “Fiber Optic Gyroscopes — Light is Better,” Optics & Photonics News, May 1998, pp. 28–32Google Scholar
  286. 288).
    K. Hotate, “Fiber Optic Gyros Put in New Spin on Navigation,” Photonics Spectra, April 1997, pp. 108–112Google Scholar
  287. 289).
    P. J. Klass, “Fiber-Optic Gyros Now Challenging Laser Gyros,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, July 1, 1996, pp. 62–64Google Scholar
  288. 290).
    http://www.esrin.esa.it/htdocs/esa/progs/mg.html
  289. 291).
    http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/Shuttle/Astro2/description/ips/ips.html
  290. 292).
    R. R. Ninneman, “Middeck Active Control Experiment Reflight (MACE-II) Program: Lessons Learned,” Proceedings of AIAA Space 2000 Conference and Exposition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  291. 293).
    R. E Gasparovic, R. K. Raney, R. C. Beal, “Ocean Remote Sensing Research and Applications at ALP,” JHU/ APL Technical Digest, Vol. 20, No 4, pp. 600–610, 1999Google Scholar
  292. 294).
    http://sd-www.jhuapl.edu/Intro/2.6ocean.html#3
  293. 295).
    R. K. Raney, “The Delay/Doppler Radar Altimeter,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Vol. 36, No 5, Sept. 1998, pp. 1578–1588Google Scholar
  294. 296).
    R. K. Raney, D. L. Porter, “WITTEX: An Innovative Three-Satellite Radar Altimeter Concept,” Proceedings of IEEE/IGARSS Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 24–28, 2000Google Scholar
  295. 297).
    http://www.estec.esa.nl/explorer/cryosat/index.html
  296. 298).
    S. T. Lowe, J. L. LaBrecque, C. Zuffada, L. J. Romans, L. E. Young, G. A. Hajj, “First spaceborne observations of an earth-reflected GPS signal,” submitted to Radio Science, July 2000.Google Scholar
  297. 299).
    J. S. LaBrecque, L. Loewe, L. Young, E. Caro, S. Wu, L. Romans, “Recent Advances in the study of GPS Earth surface reflections from orbiting receivers,” UNAVACO Community Meeting, 1998Google Scholar
  298. 300).
    J.-C. Auber, A. Bibaut, J.-M. Rigal, “Characterizations of Multipath on Land and Sea at GPS Frequencies,” Proceedings of ION GPS-94, Vol. 2, pp. 1155–1171Google Scholar
  299. 301).
    Note: A multistatic altimeter can be regarded as a multistatic radar for which the transmitters and the receivers belong to different systems.Google Scholar
  300. 302).
    M. Martin-Neira, “A Passive Reflectometry and Interferometry System (PARIS): Application to Ocean Altime-try,” ESA Journal, 17 (4), 1993, pp. 331–355Google Scholar
  301. 303).
    M. Martin-Neira, et al., “ESA’s activities on GPS reflected signals for Earth observation,” Proceedings of Ionospheric Determination and Specification for Ocean Altimetry and GPS Surface Reflections Workshop, JPL, Pasadena, Dec. 1997Google Scholar
  302. 304).
    J. L. Garrison, S. J. Katzberg, M. I. Hill, “Effect of Sea Roughness on Bistatically Scattered Range Coded Signals from the Global Positioning System,” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 25, No 13, 1998, pp. 2257–2260Google Scholar
  303. 305).
    Information provided by T P. Yunck of NASA/JPLGoogle Scholar
  304. 306).
    A. Komjathy, J. L. Garrison, V. Zavorotny, “GPS: A New Tool for Ocean Science,” GPS World, April 1999, pp. 50–56Google Scholar
  305. 307).
    Note: Satellites (Ofeq series) launched from Israel (Palamchim Air Force Base south of Tel Aviv) orbit from east to west, as opposed to the traditional west to east direction, as Israel can only safely launch rockets to the west, over the Mediterranean Sea.Google Scholar
  306. 308).
    Note: With regard to the GEO concept, credit is almost universally given to only one author in the literature, namely to A. C. Clarke, who published his first article almost 20 years after that of Hermann Potocnic. In fact, some space age historians talk about the “Clarke Orbit” when referring to a geostationary Earth orbit. This is an injustice to the accomplishments of Hermann Potocnic.Google Scholar
  307. 309).
    Note: A 1st edition of the book could not be located anywhere. The reprint of “Das Problem der Befahrung des Weltraums, “ Ausgabe von 1929, is available at Turia + Kant Verlag: ISBN: 3–85132-060–3Google Scholar
  308. 310).
    http://www.ijs.si/slo/country/culture/potocnik.html
  309. 311).
    http://spacescience.com/headlines/y2000/ast26oct_2.htm?1ist65492
  310. 312).
    G. Leisman, “Analysis of on-board Servicing Architectures using Microsatellites, Advanced Propulsion, Secondary Opportunities and the Military Spaceplane Concept,” Proceedings of the AIAA 2000 Space Conference and Exhibition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  311. 313).
    B. Berger, “Astronauts Use Space Vision to Assemble Station,” Space News, Feb. 1, 1999, p. 10Google Scholar
  312. 314).
    “The Inspector Product Family,” brochure provided by F. Steinsiek of DASA/Space Infrastructure, BremenGoogle Scholar
  313. 315).
    http://www.dasa.com/dasa/index_e.htm
  314. 316).
    H. Günther, “From MIR to ISS — The Inspector Mission,” Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Small Satellites Systems and Services, Sept. 14–18, 1998, Antibes Juan les Pins, FranceGoogle Scholar
  315. 317).
    E. Lamassoure, D. E. Hastings, “Generalized Metrics for Optimization of Space Systems Cost-Effectiveness,” Proceedings of the AIAA Space Conference and Exhibition, Long Beach, CA, Sept. 19–21, 2000Google Scholar
  316. 318).
    B. W. Parkinson, T. Stansell, R. Beard, K. Gromov, “A History of Satellite Navigation,” Navigation, ION, Vol. 42, No. 1, Special Issue, Spring 1995, pp. 109–164Google Scholar
  317. 319).
    B. W. Parkinson, “GPS Eyewitness: The Early Years,” GPS World, September 1994, pp. 32–45Google Scholar
  318. 320).
    Note: Some benefits of satellite navigation are: precise, all-weather, worldwide availability, timekeeping capability, and unified reference coordinates.Google Scholar
  319. 321).
    Note: To achieve the required accuracy of the Transit system position measurement, APL had to develop a time standard several orders of magnitude more precise than existing devices (time frame of 1958/59).Google Scholar
  320. 322).
    M. Shaw, P. Levin, J. Martel, “The DoD: Stewards of a Global Information Resource, The NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (GPS),” Proceedings of ION GPS-97, Sept. 16–19, 1997, Kansas City, MO, pp. 1237–1243Google Scholar
  321. 323).
    N. L. Johnson, “GLONASS Spacecraft,” GPS World, November 1994, pp. 51–58Google Scholar
  322. 324).
    http://gauss.gge.unb.ca/gradssunil/sgps.htm
  323. 325).
    V. Ashkenazi, “Galileo — Challenge and Opportunity,” Galileo’s World, Vol. 1, No 1, Winter 2000, pp. 42–44Google Scholar
  324. 326).
    J. X Wu, “Elimination of clock errors in a GPS based tracking system,” AIAA-84–2052, AIAA/AAS Astrodynam-ics Conference, Seattle, WA, August. 1984Google Scholar
  325. 327).
    T. P. Yunck, C. H. Liu, R. Ware, “A History of GPS Sounding,” Special issue of TAO (Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Science, Vol. 11, No 1, March 2000, pp. 1–20Google Scholar
  326. 328).
    R. Muellerschoen, S. Lichten, U. Lindqwister, W. Bertiger, “Results of an Automated GPS Tracking System in Support of Topex/Poseidon and GPS/MET,” Proceedings of ION GPS-95, Sept. 12–15, 1995, pp. 183–193Google Scholar
  327. 329).
    W. Bertiger, et al., “The First Low Earth Orbiter with precise GPS Positioning: Topex/Poseidon,” Proceedings of ION GPS-93, Salt Lake City, Utah, Sept. 22–24, 1993Google Scholar
  328. 330).
    V. Ashkenazi, W. Chen, et al., “Real-Time Autonomous Orbit Determination of LEO Satellites using GPS,” Proceedings of ION GPS-97, Sept. 16–19, 1997, Kansas City, MO, pp. 755–761Google Scholar
  329. 331).
    M. Unwin, M. Sweeting, “A Practical Demonstration of Low Cost Autonomous Orbit Determination Using GPS,” Proceedings of ION GPS-95, Sept. 12–15, 1995, Palm Springs, CA, pp. 579–587Google Scholar
  330. 332).
    F. H. Bauer, J. R. O’Donnell, “Space-Based GPS 1996 Mission Overview,” Proceedings of ION GPS-96, Sept. 17–20, 1996, Kansas City MO, pp. 1293–1302Google Scholar
  331. 333).
    F. van Graas, M. Braasch, “GPS Interferometric Attitude and Heading Determination: Initial Flight Test Results,” Navigation ION, Vol. 38, No. 4, Winter 1991–92, pp. 297–316Google Scholar
  332. 334).
    C. E. Cohen, B. W. Parkinson, “Aircraft Applications of GPS-based Attitude Determination,” Proceedings of ION GPS-92, Albuquerque, NM, Sept. 1992, pp. 775–782Google Scholar
  333. 335).
    C. E. Cohen, B. W Parkinson, D. McNally, “Flight Tests of Attitude Determination Using GPS Compared Against an Inertial Navigation Unit,” Navigation ION, Vol. 41, No. 1, Spring 1994, pp. 83–97Google Scholar
  334. 366).
    L. Kruczynski, J. Delucchi, T. Iacobacci, “Results of DC-10 Tests using GPS Attitude Determination,” Proceedings of ION GPS-95,Google Scholar
  335. 366).
    L. Kruczynski, J. Delucchi, T. Iacobacci, “Results of DC-10 Tests using GPS Attitude Determination,” Proceedings of ION GPS-95,Google Scholar
  336. 338).
    M. Cislaghi, U. Thomas, M. Lellouch, J. M. Pairot, “Development and Verification of Automated Rendezvous for ATV,” Proceedings IAF-96-T.2.08, Oct. 7–11, 1996, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  337. 339).
    M. Cislaghi, U. Thomas, M. Lellouch, G. Limouzin, “ATV — Pre-development Program — Flight Demonstrations,” IAF-97.T.2.03Google Scholar
  338. 340).
    Note: Prior to measurement integration of GPS and GLONASS into one receiver, proper transformations must be established between the two time scales [UTC(USNO) and UTC(SU)],and the two coordinate systems [WGS84 and PE-90 respectively]Google Scholar
  339. 341).
    GPS World Receiver Survey, GPS World, January 1998, pp. 46–59Google Scholar
  340. 342).
    J. G. Murphy, W V. Cottrell, “Airborne Testing of GPS+GLONASS Positioning Sensor Against A Proven Test Truth Source,” Proceedings of ION GPS-97, Sept. 16–19, 1997, Kansas City, MO, pp. 1047–1054Google Scholar
  341. 343).
    O. Balbach, et al., “Tracking of GPS Above GPS Satellite Altitude: Results of the GPS Experiment on the HEO Mission Equator-S,” Proceedings of ION GPS 1998 Conference, Nashville, TN, 1998Google Scholar
  342. 344).
    J. D. Kronman, “Experience Using GPS for Orbit Determination of a Geosynchronous Satellite,” Proceedings of ION GPS-2000, Sept. 19–22, 2000, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 1622–1626Google Scholar
  343. 345).
    M. Mittnacht, W. Fichter, “Real-Time On-board Orbit Determination of GEO Satellites using Software and Hardware Correlation,” Proceedings of ION GPS-2000, Sept. 19–22, 2000, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 1976–1984Google Scholar
  344. 346).
    Ch. Mehlen, D. Laurichesse, “Real-time GEO orbit determination using TOPSTAR 3000 GPS Receiver,” Proceedings of ION GPS-2000, Sept. 19–22, 2000, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 1985–1994Google Scholar
  345. 347).
    R. Zaenick, K. Kohlhepp, “GPS Micro Navigation and Communication System for Clusters of Micro and Nanosa-tellites,” Proceedings of the 14th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Logan, UT, Aug. 21–24, 2000, SSC00-VI-8Google Scholar
  346. 348).
    R. E. Neilan, A. Moore, T. Springer, J. Kouba, J. Ray, Ch. Reigber, “International GPS Service 2000: Life without SA,” ION GPS 2000, Slat Lake City, UT, Sept. 19–22, 2000, pp. 438–446Google Scholar
  347. 349).
  348. 350).
    P. B. de Selding, “Europe Cheers While Questioning End of GPS Selective Availability,” Space News, May 15, 2000, pp. 4 and 26Google Scholar
  349. 351).
    M. Rabinowitz, B. W. Parkinson, K. Gromov, C. H. Cohen, “Architectures for Joint GPS/LEO Satellite Carrier Phase Receivers Designed for Rapid Robust Resolution of Carrier Cycle Ambiguities on Mobile Platforms,” ION GPS 2000, Slat Lake City, UT, Sept. 19–22, 2000, pp. 881–890Google Scholar
  350. 352).
    M. Rabinowitz, B. W. Parkinson, J. J. Spilker, “Some Capabilities of a Joint GPS-LEO Navigation System,” ION GPS 2000, Slat Lake City, UT, Sept. 19–22, 2000, pp. 225–265Google Scholar
  351. 353).
    F. Vannicola, “The Time Is Now,” GPS World Showcase, Dec. 1997, p. 40Google Scholar
  352. 354).
    J. Lillibridge, “Real-time ERS altimetry at NOAA,” Earth System Monitor, Vol. 9, No. 3, March 1999, pp. 6–9Google Scholar
  353. 355).
  354. 356).
    W. Buedeler, “Geschichte der Raumfahrt,” Sigloch Edition, Künzelsau, 1979,Google Scholar
  355. 357).
    D. L. Glackin, “International Earth remote sensing: overview 1980–2010,” Proceedings of the SPIE International Symposium on Optical Science and Technology, San Diego, July 2000Google Scholar
  356. 358).
    “International Space Cooperation: Solving Global Problems,” Report of an AIAA, UN/OOSA, CEAS, CASI Workshop, April 1999 (printed and distributed by AIAA)Google Scholar
  357. 359).
    W. Ferster, “Weak Industry Response Brings End to LightSAR,” Space News, Aug. 9, 1999, p. 3Google Scholar
  358. 360).
    K. S. Jayaraman, “India Plans New Insat Design Around Private Sector Needs,” Space News, Dec. 18, 2000, pp. 4, 44Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Herbert J. Kramer
    • 1
  1. 1.GilchingGermany

Personalised recommendations