The present invention relates generally to a satellite communications system and, more particularly, to a satellite system having satellites to provide continuous near global coverage with few satellites in elliptical sub-geosynchronous orbit.
Satellites in geostationary orbit (GSO) have been widely preferred for several decades because of the economic advantages afforded by such orbit. In a geostationary orbit, a satellite traveling above the Earth's equator, in the same direction as that in which the Earth is rotating, and at the same angular velocity, appears stationary relative to a point on the Earth. These satellites are always “in view” at all locations within their service areas, so their utilization efficiency is effectively 100 percent. Antennas at Earth ground stations need be aimed at a GSO satellite only once; no tracking system is required.
Coordination between GSO's and with terrestrial services is facilitated by governmental allocation of designated “slots” spatially spaced according to service type. Given the desirability of geostationary satellite orbits and the fact that there are only a finite number of available “slots” in the geostationary “belt,” the latter capacity has been essentially saturated with satellites operating in desirable frequency bands up through the Ku-band (up to 18 GHz). As a result, the government has been auctioning the increasingly scarce remaining slots.
This has encouraged the development of complex and expensive new systems including those using low Earth orbits (LEO's), medium Earth orbits (MEO's), and/or higher frequencies, for example, the Ka band (up to approximately 40 GHz). Proposed LEO and MEO applications have circular based orbits. Growth to higher frequencies is limited by problems of technology and propagation, and expansion in satellite applications requires exploitation of the spatial dimension (i.e., above and below the GSO belt). A host of proposed LEO and MEO systems exemplify this direction. A drawback of LEO and MEO systems for users is the relative uncertainty of satellite position, and rapid motion, leading typically to the use of omni-directional antennas having low gain, which limits data rate. Another drawback is that they must be designed not to interfere with previously deployed, currently constructed, or future planned GSO satellite systems. This may require cycling the satellite off and on during flight into the beam of a GSO satellite.
Typical LEO and MEO systems with relatively low altitude circular orbit constellations require a large number of satellites for coverage at a specified elevation angle to a single service area. The drawback to the large number of satellites is that several launches must be used to deploy the satellites. This increases the cost of the system dramatically.
Another known proposed system is the so called “Virtual GSO” (VGSO) by Virtual Geosatellite LCC. The VGSO system is a non-geostationary orbit system. The proposed VGSO requires 15 satellites to achieve global landmass coverage and wide separation away from GSO satellites. The main drawback to this system is that 15 satellites are required to achieve coverage. In many instances this may be cost prohibitive for a preliminary system.
Similar to VGSO system, another known system is a non-geostationary orbit system called “Denali” by Denali Telecom. The proposed system requires 3 satellites to achieve initial non-global coverage and 9 satellites to achieve the final global landmass coverage. Satellites in both initial and final deployment have a wide separation away from GSO satellites. The main drawback to this system is that 9 satellites are required to achieve global coverage. Yet another known system is the “West” system by the European Space Agency. The West system has nine satellites with the same ground track on Earth surface. The nine satellites are disposed in nine individual circular orbits whose ground tracks follow the same pattern that provides focused coverage at three highly populated regions, US, Europe, and East Asia. Drawbacks of this system are that its coverage is not optimized for landmass coverage and its coverage is not a near global.
While the various prior systems function relatively satisfactorily and efficiently, none discloses the advantages of a satellite system using overhead elliptical, eccentric sub-geosynchronous satellite orbits in accordance with the present invention as is hereinafter more fully described.
The present invention provides a satellite system that takes advantage of elliptical eccentric sub-geosynchronous orbits to achieve a relatively low cost satellite service with low investment particularly suitable for early entry into broadband consumer markets.
The present invention also provides a satellite system with continuous coverage of the service area using a synchronized set of satellites. The system can be configured to provide coverage at predetermined elevation angles. The present invention also provides a system having optimized land coverage to reduce the number of satellites to provide a desired level of coverage.
In one aspect of the invention, a communications system has a ground station for communicating communication signal to a plurality of satellites located in a specific inclined elliptical orbits with respect to the earth. The plurality of satellites operate in a service area in a synchronized manner, with identical ground tracks and consistent phasing, to provide continuous coverage to the service area. The satellites generate a plurality of beams with variable beamwidths to obtain a substantially uniform cell size covering the service area. A user terminal within the service area receives communication signals from the satellites.
One feature of the present invention is that the plurality of satellites providing an initial system capacity with minimum time-to-market and investment risk. The capacity can be easily supplemented with more satellites as the desire for system capacity increases.
In a further aspect of the invention, a method of providing a system of inclined eccentric sub-geosynchronous satellite orbits includes the steps of:
An advantage is that the satellite system provides continuous coverage by having at least a predetermined elevation angle that allows the use of the system in a majority of the coverage area. This elevation angle covers the most highly populated areas. The elevation angle may for example be about 30 degrees. Another advantage of the invention is that the tracking angles from the Earth stations or user terminals are relatively small compared with LEO and MEO systems.
The objects, advantages and features of the present invention are readily apparent from the following detailed description of the best mode for carrying out the invention when taken in connection with the accompanying drawings and appended claims.
A more complete appreciation of the invention and many of the attendant advantages and features thereof may be readily obtained by reference to the following detailed description when considered with the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters indicate corresponding parts in all the views, wherein:
The present invention is illustrated herein in terms of a satellite orbit system using various inclination angles, eccentricity values and other values. It should be understood that specific numerical values are introduced as examples and not as final design values. Also, the preferred embodiment includes one satellite per orbit. However, more than one satellite could be employed.
The essence of the invention is the establishment of a satellite communication system that employs satellites that allow satellite communications for various types of services including mobile and fixed satellite coverage. The satellite system has inclined, eccentric sub-geosynchronous orbits with identical repeating ground tracks.
In the present invention, inclined elliptic sub-geosynchronous orbits (SGSO) satellites with altitudes below the geosynchronous-belt enable operation to service for a predetermined service region on a landmass with possible spectrum re-use of frequencies with the geostationary belt in a non-blocking manner. The SGSO system is non-geosynchronous as well in that they do not have a sidereal day period. The overall optimization in land coverage may be obtained with a few satellites. This reduces the cost and time-to-market of the system.
Referring now to
Earth 10 is also shown with a medium earth orbit (MEO) satellite 20 that has a medium earth orbit 20 and a low earth orbit satellite 21 with a low earth orbit 22. A MEO orbit altitude may range from about 10,000 km to about 20,000 km. A low earth orbit satellite system (not illustrated) is typically, deployed at an altitude below 1,500 km. Typically, several satellites are employed to form a system MEO or LEO system. MEO systems typically have 15 or greater satellites while LEO systems may have many times that number.
Referring now to
A comparison of
Although only illustrated on one orbit, each SGSO orbit 34 has an apogee 36 being set at the northernmost point of the orbit when viewed with respect to the Earth and an perigee 38 being the southernmost point of the orbit when viewed with respect to the Earth. The altitude of apogee 36 is greater than the altitude of a MEO satellite and may range from about 30,000 km to 50,000 km. The perigee 38 is preferably at least 500 km to avoid atmospheric drag.
Although four satellites are illustrated in
Referring now to
Satellites 42a, 42b, and 44a, 44b, are preferably in the inclined eccentric sub-geosynchronous orbit as described above. Although two satellites are illustrated for each service area, more than two satellites may be provided. Typically, only one satellite will provide coverage for a particular cell at a time. As illustrated, satellites 42a and 44a are providing coverage to cells 48 and 52, respectively. The system is designed so that when the elevation angle of satellites 42a and 44a become low, satellites 42b and 44b are at a proper elevation angle. A handover occurs and satellites 42b, 44b provide communication signals 46 and 50, respectively.
Communications system 40 is illustrated with ground stations 54 and 56. Ground stations 54 and 56 may be coupled to the terrestrial infrastructure such as an internet service provider 58, a broadcast TV center 60, or a corporate intranet 62. Of course, other terrestrial type communications may also be coupled to communications system 40 such as telephone networks or cellular telephone networks. One skilled in the art would recognize that ground stations 54 and 56 may be incorporated into a single centralized ground station or single location to provide common content and information for interactive data communications.
Communication system may employ a GSO satellite or satellites in addition to satellites 44a, 44b, 42a, 42b. The use of a GSO satellite depends on the overall use of the system as would be evident to those in the art.
Satellites 44a, 44b, 42a, 42b preferably have a phase array antenna 64. Various phase array antennae would be known to those skilled in the art. The advantage of the phase array antenna 64 is that beams with variable beamwidths may be used to obtain a substantially uniform cell size 48, 52 covering the respective service area. Thus, as the satellite moves within the service area the altitude and angle changes. The individual elements of the phase array antenna 64 may be reconfigured to keep the cell size on the face of the earth from each beam uniform. This feature is further described below.
Referring now to
An initial deployment SGSO system may be categorized into three classes based on the nature of the coverage. These classes are defined as (1) regional, (2) primary-market, and (3) landmass-optimized. The second and third classes are also known as the near-global (in contrast to the first) systems, their coverage expend to all longitudes from 180θW to 180θE. A true global (covering every longitude and latitude) system including pole coverage requires more satellites deployed than is needed by an SGSO system. The following paragraphs provide detail discussion of the three classes of initial deployment SGSO systems.
1. Regional
If the business requires only coverage to local/regional areas, say a country or a few neighboring countries, an SGSO system may provide coverage only to these areas. The simplest SGSO solution may use just one satellite in an inclined geosynchronous orbit to provide service. However, a better solution would apply at least two satellites, each of these satellites provides service through a repeatable ground track within an active period as a fraction of a day. When the active satellite is about to drop below the minimum elevation angle or is approaching the GSO satellite avoidance zone, a new active satellite will replace it. This process is called satellite handover. The constellation is defined by the joint constraints of coverage area, Doppler, minimum elevation, and the altitude of perigee.
2. Primary-Market
If the business requires primary-market coverage, for example the popular developing/developed countries, an SGSO system that achieves primary-market coverage may start from only 3 SGSO satellites. These satellites will provide coverage concentrating to America and Asia As will be further described below, a better solution is a 5 satellites system, which provides both GSO arc avoidance and coverage concentrated to North America, Europe, and East Asia. These systems can be fine tune to provide coverage only to a few desired geo-locations. The resulting coverage is illustrated in
3. Landmass Optimized
At last, if the business requires optimized-landmass coverage, say most of the world, an SGSO system that achieves landmass-optimized coverage starts from 4 SGSO satellites as will be described below to cover all landmasses and requires much less satellites compared to a typical LEO or MEO system. The resulting coverage is illustrated in
One parameter is the Orbit Period (or Period) which is defined as the time for a satellite to circulate one revolution in its orbit. The Period also determines whether the coverage is to be regional or global. Since the present invention is targeting simplicity, the selections introduced below are limited to orbits with repeatable ground tracks. To achieve repeatable ground tracks, Period is limited to be a rational fraction of a sidereal day (23.934469594 hours) and Period is given by,
P(Period)=N/M*100%*S;M,N□{1, 2, 3, 4, . . . }, and N<M [1]
where M and N are integers, S is the length of a sidereal day, and N is smaller than M.
The number of repeatable ground tracks is the least common multiples (LCM) of M and N given by:
Number of Repeatable Patterns, K=LCM(M,N) [2]
For simplicity, the numerator in equation [1] is equal to one (N=1). The Period is simplified to be a fraction of a sidereal day (1/M*S). As a result, the number of repeatable sub-tracks (K) is M, in the ground track pattern plot. It is assumed that at least one active satellite is present at each sub-track.
The minimum number of required satellites is given by:
Minimum Required Number of Satellite K=LCM(1,M)=M [3]
Assuming that the number of total satellites is defined as X. X includes K minimum required satellites and Y redundant satellites that fill the gaps between adjacent active arc. The number of total satellites can be summarized as:
Number of Total Satellites X=K(minimum required)+Y(redundant) [4]
The percentage of time in active arc (Active Period) is equivalent to the ratio of number of active satellites over all satellites if the Active Period is defined to provide no redundancy (one active satellite only in each arc). This ratio is calculated by:
Active Period Percentage=Active_Period/Period*100%=K/X*100% [5]
In a preferred embodiment, a few constellation design constraints are applied in the selection of SGSO constellations. These constraints limit the selection of SGSO constellation under a few sub-sets of all SGSO constellations. These constraints include:
[4] Total number of spacecraft should be a number that provides sufficient coverage at specific elevation angles. In preferred systems, the total number is less than less than 8.
Other secondary constraints may not be achieved at all time compared to the primary constraints. These constrains are listed below as secondary constraints and serve as objectives for quality of service:
[5] Non-interfering with GSO links: the constellation is designed to avoid main-beam-to-main-beam interference with GSO networks/systems, typical solution is to achieve satellite diversity with GSO arc.
[6] Van Allen Belt Avoidance: there are two zones with highly dense radiating articles, such as protons and electrons, trapped at certain altitudes called Van Allen Belts. The considered SGSO satellite may fly through these areas from time-to-time, special protection to payload electronics are required if the orbit pass one of the Van Allen Belts or both. As is illustrated in the table, preferably the system of the present invention employs less than nine satellites and more preferably uses four or five satellites.
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Another advantage of the present invention is that the terminals track satellites in a semi-geostationary manner using scanning angles of less than 20°.
As shown, the landmasses of the earth may be separated as three zones [1] North and South America, [2] Europe, Africa, Mid-East and India, and [3] China, East Asia, Australia, and New Zealand. Each zone would have only a dedicated active satellite at each moment. For business, which involves geographically closer communication, this arrangement would be a great benefit since a satellite can see the whole landmass in each zone and no inter-satellite link is necessary. For business which involves transoceanic communication (US-Asia, US-Europe, and Europe-Asia), the inter-continent traffic may be carried either through partnering with the undersea cable or the long-haul fiber companies. An optical intersatellite link (ISL) may also be used. Inter-satellite-links (ISL) however, may not be considered because of a correspondingly long development time. If the constraint of short “time-to-market” period is present, the undersea cable aspect may be more easily implemented than an ISL.
Referring now to
With 5 satellites, 8-hour period, and 3 active zones, the altitude within each zone varies from about 18000 km to about 27,270 km. One advantage of the system is that the scanning angle decreases from +/−16θ to +/−11θ, while the satellite altitude increases from 18,000 km to 27,025 km. The region 92′ in the center of the map represents the region with at least 10 degrees of elevation angle. As is illustrated, this includes nearly all the primary markets. Another region 94′ directly adjacent to region 90′ illustrates the region between 10 degrees of elevation angle and zero degrees of elevation angle. A no service region 96′ is illustrated directly adjacent to region 96′. The no service region 96′ is directly adjacent to each pole.
Referring now to
Another comparison is shown below in
As is illustrated, each cell is not only equal in size but also is fixed relative to the motion of satellites. The cell size selection may vary in each system when balanced with design tradeoffs in EIRP, antenna complexity, and intended coverage areas. To implement such a system, a phase array based satellite antenna with 500 to 1500 elements may be used.
Referring now to
SGSO is one of the simplest solutions to achieve GSO Crossing Zone Avoidance. Assuming a system with 5 SGSO satellites is considered, the active arc is outside the GSO Crossing Zone. This means the SGSO satellite sidelobe would not interfere any GSO Earth station at its mainbeam. The active SGSO satellite is widely separated from the GSO satellite seen from anywhere on the earth surface.
While the invention has been described in detail, those familiar with the art to which this invention relates will recognize various alternative designs and embodiments for practicing the invention as defined by the following claims.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3497807 | Newton | Feb 1970 | A |
| 4126865 | Longhurst et al. | Nov 1978 | A |
| 4689625 | Barmat | Aug 1987 | A |
| 4691882 | Young | Sep 1987 | A |
| 4809935 | Draim | Mar 1989 | A |
| 4819002 | Reboullet | Apr 1989 | A |
| 4875052 | Anderson et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
| 5075682 | Dehnert | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5077561 | Gorton et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5117240 | Anderson et al. | May 1992 | A |
| 5119225 | Grant et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5120007 | Pocha et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5151706 | Roederer et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5326054 | Turner | Jul 1994 | A |
| 5439190 | Horstein et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5473601 | Rosen et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
| 5551624 | Horstein et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5553816 | Perrotta | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5561837 | Muller et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5619211 | Horkin et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5641134 | Vatt | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5655005 | Wiedeman et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5669585 | Castiel et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5678175 | Stuart et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5736959 | Patterson et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5738309 | Fowell | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5765098 | Bella | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5788187 | Castiel et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5793813 | Cleave | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5805067 | Bradley et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5810292 | Garcia et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5810297 | Basuthakur et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5845206 | Castiel et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5867783 | Horstein et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5871181 | Mass | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5884866 | Steinmeyer et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5918157 | Wiedeman et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5930680 | Lusignan | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5931417 | Castiel | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5940739 | Conrad et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5957409 | Castiel et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5961077 | Koppel et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5971324 | Williams et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5979830 | Kellermeier | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5979832 | Draim | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5990883 | Byrne et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5991279 | Haugli | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5999797 | Zancho et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6007027 | Diekelman et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6019318 | Cellier et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6059233 | Koppel et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6073011 | Horstein | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6116545 | Salvatore et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6122596 | Castiel | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6126116 | Cellier | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6135389 | Fowell | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6149103 | Salvatore | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6175719 | Sarraf et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6198907 | Torkington et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| RE37140 | Schloemer | Apr 2001 | E |
| 6219617 | Dreischer et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6223019 | Briskman et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6229500 | Caille et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6257526 | Taormina et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6263188 | Castiel et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6325332 | Cellier et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6327523 | Cellier | Dec 2001 | B2 |
| 6333924 | Porcelli et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6336612 | Taormina et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6339707 | Wainfan et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6389336 | Cellier | May 2002 | B2 |
| 6460808 | Taormina et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
| 6515617 | Demers et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6564053 | Briskman et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6684056 | Emmons et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6778810 | Anderson | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6813492 | Hammill et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 20010012759 | Castiel et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20020160710 | Castiel et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0 792 799 | Mar 1997 | EP |
| 0 959 573 | Nov 1999 | EP |
| WO 9851022 | Nov 1998 | WO |