TY - JOUR AU - Korobka, V. AU - Dron, M. AU - Golubek, А. PY - 2021/11/17 Y2 - 2024/03/29 TI - ESTIMATION OF THE POSSIBILITY OF USING A SOLAR SAIL IN THE PROBLEMS OF COMBINED DEORBITING FROM LOW-EARTH ORBITS JF - Journal of Rocket-Space Technology JA - Rocket-Sp. Tech. VL - 29 IS - 4 SE - Spacecraft, satellite systems and methods for processing satellite data DO - 10.15421/452120 UR - http://rocketspace.dp.ua/index.php/rst/article/view/122 SP - 179-189 AB - To clean the upper segment of low-Earth orbits with an altitude of 1400-2000 km, the possibility of using a combined method of deorbiting to the Earth's atmosphere has been evaluated. It is based on the combined use of a jet propulsion system and a solar sail. A scheme has been developed for the combined deorbiting of a satellite with a lifetime of up to 25 years. Its features: the solar sail provides a gradual decrease in flight altitude, and the ignition of a jet propulsion system at the end of the deorbiting period - the formation of an orbit with perigee in the dense layers of the Earth's atmosphere (120 km and below). Simulation of the deorbiting processes of a large-sized satellite using a jet propulsion system, a solar sail and their combination has been carried out. A comparative analysis of the mass of the deorbiting system for various methods is carried out. At the same time, it is believed that the satellite is equipped with a jet propulsion system for additional orbital expansion and maintenance. For the deorbiting of a spacecraft with a mass of 1 ton from an orbit of 2000 km, the following results were obtained. The minimum solar sail area is about 1200 m2. For comparison, the most expensive is the deorbiting by the active method using a jet propulsion system. It requires about 140 kg of propellant on board. The least costly steer is the passive method using a solar sail. It requires a system with a mass of about 34 kg on board. In turn, the area of the combined method lies between these two methods. It is inferior in mass to the passive deorbit system, but outperforms the active one. Its effectiveness in comparison with the active method ranges up to 76%. It can be used in cases where there are restrictions on passive deorbiting, for example, in terms of the overall and mass characteristics of the deorbit system or in terms of the control system lifetime. ER -