arxiv: 2604.18140 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Recognition: unknown

Leader-Follower Formation Control Using Differential Drag and Effective Surface Regulation

Alessio Bocci , Jos\'e Juan Corona-S\'anchez , Raymond Kristiansen

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 04:13 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY

keywords satellite formation controldifferential dragbackstepping controlCubeSatsattitude maneuversLyapunov stabilityleader-follower formation

0 comments

The pith

A backstepping control law achieves asymptotic stability for leader-follower satellite formations using only differential drag.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a control system for generic relative positioning between two small satellites in a virtual leader and real follower formation, relying entirely on differential drag from attitude maneuvers. It proposes an integrator backstepping control law that closes with the rotational dynamics to make the system equilibrium points asymptotically stable. Stability is shown using Lyapunov theory, with numerical simulation confirming effectiveness. This approach targets propulsionless CubeSats where active thrust is unavailable.

Core claim

We propose a control law based on the integrator backstepping technique, which, in a closed loop with the rotational dynamics, results in the asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system equilibrium points. We demonstrate the asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system equilibrium points using the Lyapunov theory, and a numerical simulation assesses the effectiveness and accuracy of the control strategy.

What carries the argument

Integrator backstepping control law applied to attitude maneuvers to generate differential drag for relative position regulation.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes attitude maneuvers can be executed precisely enough to produce the required differential drag without unmodeled perturbations dominating the relative motion.

What would settle it

A numerical simulation that includes solar radiation pressure or higher-order gravity effects and shows persistent deviation from the desired relative position would falsify the asymptotic stability result.

read the original abstract

The growing interest in space activities has led to the emergence of new space operators and innovative mission concepts. Small satellites such as CubeSats reduce mission costs and are typically deployed in constellations or formation flights. Since they are often propulsionless, passive orbital control strategies are the standard, primarily through differential drag achieved via attitude control maneuvers. This work develops a control system to achieve a generic relative positioning between two small satellites in a virtual leader and real follower formation flight, relying entirely on differential drag achieved through attitude maneuvers. We propose a control law based on the integrator backstepping technique, which, in a closed loop with the rotational dynamics, results in the asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system equilibrium points. We demonstrate the asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system equilibrium points using the Lyapunov theory, and a numerical simulation assesses the effectiveness and accuracy of the control strategy.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper applies integrator backstepping to differential-drag formation control for a virtual-leader real-follower pair and claims Lyapunov asymptotic stability, but the result holds only under perfect nominal drag with no shown margin against real perturbations.

read the letter

The core contribution is a backstepping law that commands the follower's attitude to produce the exact differential drag needed for relative positioning, then closes the loop with the rotational dynamics and proves the formation equilibrium is asymptotically stable. The abstract and setup are straightforward: they start from the relative orbital equations where drag depends on the effective surface, design the virtual control for the drag force, and backstep to the torque level. The numerical simulation is used to check that the closed-loop trajectories converge as expected under the modeled conditions. That part is clean and follows the standard technique without obvious algebraic errors in the outline given. The main limitation is exactly the one the stress test points out. The Lyapunov derivative is made negative definite only when the commanded attitude produces precisely the modeled drag vector; any additive term from solar radiation pressure, density fluctuations, or higher-order gravity enters as an unmatched disturbance that the proof does not bound. No ISS or ultimate-boundedness argument appears, so the asymptotic claim does not carry over to realistic LEO conditions. The assumption that attitude maneuvers can be executed without those effects dominating is stated but not relaxed. This work is aimed at researchers already doing passive formation control with small satellites. Someone looking for a concrete backstepping example in orbital relative motion will find the derivations and the simulation setup useful as a starting point. It is not a broad new framework, but the specific combination is new enough and the math is grounded enough that it should go to peer review rather than a desk reject. A referee can check the full derivations and ask for a robustness section.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a leader-follower formation control law for propulsionless small satellites that achieves relative positioning solely through differential drag modulated by attitude maneuvers. An integrator-backstepping controller is designed for the translational dynamics; when closed with the rotational dynamics, the equilibrium of the combined system is shown to be asymptotically stable by Lyapunov analysis. Effectiveness is illustrated by numerical simulation.

Significance. If the nominal-model stability result holds, the work supplies a rigorously derived, passive control architecture for CubeSat formations that avoids onboard propulsion. The explicit use of backstepping to interface translational and rotational subsystems, together with a Lyapunov proof and simulation validation, constitutes a concrete contribution to the differential-drag literature.

major comments (2)

[Stability proof and closed-loop equations] The Lyapunov derivative is shown negative definite only under the exact differential-drag model (i.e., the commanded attitude produces precisely the modeled force vector). No input-to-state stability or ultimate-boundedness argument is supplied for additive disturbances (SRP, higher-order gravity, density fluctuations) that enter as unmatched perturbations in the relative orbital equations. Because the central claim is asymptotic stability of the formation equilibrium, this omission is load-bearing; the result does not extend to realistic orbital environments without additional analysis. (Stability proof and closed-loop equations sections.)
[Rotational dynamics and control-law] The rotational dynamics are assumed to track the backstepping attitude commands with sufficient precision that the effective drag coefficient matches the model exactly. No margin is quantified for actuator saturation, attitude estimation error, or unmodeled torques that would alter the realized drag force. This assumption directly underpins the closed-loop stability claim. (Rotational dynamics and control-law sections.)

minor comments (2)

[Notation] Notation for the drag coefficient as a function of attitude should be introduced once and used consistently; several places switch between C_d(·) and an effective-surface variable without explicit redefinition.
[Numerical simulation] The numerical simulation section would benefit from a table listing the orbital elements, initial relative states, and controller gains so that the reported convergence times can be reproduced.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. We address each major point below, clarifying the nominal nature of our analysis while indicating revisions to improve transparency.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The Lyapunov derivative is shown negative definite only under the exact differential-drag model (i.e., the commanded attitude produces precisely the modeled force vector). No input-to-state stability or ultimate-boundedness argument is supplied for additive disturbances (SRP, higher-order gravity, density fluctuations) that enter as unmatched perturbations in the relative orbital equations. Because the central claim is asymptotic stability of the formation equilibrium, this omission is load-bearing; the result does not extend to realistic orbital environments without additional analysis. (Stability proof and closed-loop equations sections.)

Authors: We agree that the Lyapunov proof establishes asymptotic stability only for the exact nominal model without disturbances. The manuscript does not provide ISS or ultimate boundedness results for perturbations such as SRP or density fluctuations, as the contribution centers on the backstepping design and nominal closed-loop stability. We will revise the stability section to explicitly state the ideal-model assumption and add a paragraph in the conclusions discussing this limitation and possible future robustness extensions. revision: partial
Referee: The rotational dynamics are assumed to track the backstepping attitude commands with sufficient precision that the effective drag coefficient matches the model exactly. No margin is quantified for actuator saturation, attitude estimation error, or unmodeled torques that would alter the realized drag force. This assumption directly underpins the closed-loop stability claim. (Rotational dynamics and control-law sections.)

Authors: The referee is correct that the proof relies on the rotational subsystem achieving the commanded attitudes with negligible error so that the modeled drag force is realized. This follows from the standard cascaded-control assumption of timescale separation between fast attitude dynamics and slower orbital motion. We do not quantify margins for saturation or estimation errors because the work prioritizes the integrated Lyapunov proof. We will partially revise by inserting a remark on this assumption and noting that practical attitude controllers must be sufficiently accurate to preserve the result. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper proposes an integrator-backstepping control law whose closed-loop stability with rotational dynamics is shown via standard Lyapunov analysis. No self-definitional reductions, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the abstract or described derivation. The stability claim rests on independent mathematical steps (backstepping design followed by Lyapunov derivative sign check) that do not reduce to the inputs by construction. This is a normal, non-circular control-theoretic argument.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities. The work implicitly relies on standard assumptions from orbital mechanics and nonlinear control theory, but these cannot be audited without the full manuscript.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5452 in / 1062 out tokens · 42938 ms · 2026-05-10T04:13:19.168585+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

[1]

Differential Drag-Based Control of a Leader-Follower Spacecraft Formation via Attitude Maneuvers,

Bocci, A., Sánchez, J. J. C., and Kristiansen, R., “Differential Drag-Based Control of a Leader-Follower Spacecraft Formation via Attitude Maneuvers,” AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Boston, MA, USA, 10-14 August 2025

2025
[2]

Orbital Formationkeeping with Differential Drag,

Leonard, C. L., Hollister, W. M., and Bergmann, E. V ., “Orbital Formationkeeping with Differential Drag,” Journal of Guid- ance, Control, and Dynamics , Vol. 12, No. 1, 1989, pp. 108–113. DOI: 10.2514/3.20374

work page doi:10.2514/3.20374 1989
[3]

Formationkeeping for a Pair of Satellites in a Circular Orbit,

Vassar, R. H., and Sherwood, R. B., “Formationkeeping for a Pair of Satellites in a Circular Orbit,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1985, pp. 235–242. DOI: 10.2514/3.19965

work page doi:10.2514/3.19965 1985
[4]

Linear-Quadratic Stationkeeping for the STS Orbiter,

Redding, D. C., Adams, N. J., and Kubiak, E. T., “Linear-Quadratic Stationkeeping for the STS Orbiter,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1989, pp. 248–255. DOI: 10.2514/3.20398. 18

work page doi:10.2514/3.20398 1989
[5]

Differential Drag as a Means of Spacecraft Formation Control,

Kumar, B. S., Ng, A., Y oshihara, K., and De Ruiter, A., “Differential Drag as a Means of Spacecraft Formation Control,”IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 47, No. 2, 2011, pp. 1125–1135. DOI: 10.1109/AERO.2007.352790

work page doi:10.1109/aero.2007.352790 2011
[6]

Rendezvous Maneuvers of Multiple Spacecraft Using Differential Drag under 𝐽2 Perturba- tion,

Bevilacqua, R., and Romano, M., “Rendezvous Maneuvers of Multiple Spacecraft Using Differential Drag under 𝐽2 Perturba- tion,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics , Vol. 31, No. 6, 2008, pp. 1595–1607. DOI: 10.2514/1.36362

work page doi:10.2514/1.36362 2008
[7]

High-Fidelity Linearized 𝐽2 Model for Satellite Formation Flight,

Schweighart, S. A., and Sedwick, R. J., “High-Fidelity Linearized 𝐽2 Model for Satellite Formation Flight,” Journal of Guid- ance, Control, and Dynamics , Vol. 25, No. 6, 2002, pp. 1073–1080. DOI: 10.2514/2.4986

work page doi:10.2514/2.4986 2002
[8]

Multiple Spacecraft Rendezvous Maneuvers by Differential Drag and Low Thrust Engines,

Bevilacqua, R., Hall, J. S., and Romano, M., “Multiple Spacecraft Rendezvous Maneuvers by Differential Drag and Low Thrust Engines,” Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy , Vol. 106, 2010, pp. 69–88. DOI: 10.1007/s10569-009-9240-3

work page doi:10.1007/s10569-009-9240-3 2010
[9]

An Investigation Into Using Differential Drag for Controlling a Formation of CubeSats,

Horsley, M., “An Investigation Into Using Differential Drag for Controlling a Formation of CubeSats,”Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, Maui, HI, USA, 13-16 September 2011

2011
[10]

Small Satellite Rendezvous Using Differential Lift and Drag,

Horsley, M., Nikolaev, S., and Pertica, A., “Small Satellite Rendezvous Using Differential Lift and Drag,”Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2013, pp. 445–453. DOI: 10.2514/1.57327

work page doi:10.2514/1.57327 2013
[11]

Satellite Rendezvous Using Differential Aerodynamic Forces under 𝐽2 Pertur- bation,

Shao, X., Song, M., Zhang, D., and Sun, R., “Satellite Rendezvous Using Differential Aerodynamic Forces under 𝐽2 Pertur- bation,” Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal , Vol. 87, No. 5, 2015, pp. 427–436. DOI: 10.1108/AEAT-09-2013-0168

work page doi:10.1108/aeat-09-2013-0168 2015
[12]

Satellite Formation Control Using Differential Drag,

Omar, S. R., and Wersinger, J., “Satellite Formation Control Using Differential Drag,”53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, FL, USA, 5-9 January 2015. DOI: 10.2514/6.2015-0002

work page doi:10.2514/6.2015-0002 2015
[13]

Fast Aerodynamic Establishment of a Constellation of CubeSats,

Smith, B., Boyce, R., and Brown, M., “Fast Aerodynamic Establishment of a Constellation of CubeSats,” 7th European Con- ference for Aeronautics and Space Sciences , Milan, Italy, 3-6 July 2017. DOI: 10.13009/EUCASS2017-289

work page doi:10.13009/eucass2017-289 2017
[14]

Long-Term Cluster Flight of Multiple Satellites Using Differential Drag,

Ben- Y aacov, O., and Gurfil, P ., “Long-Term Cluster Flight of Multiple Satellites Using Differential Drag,”Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 36, No. 6, 2013, pp. 1731–1740. DOI: 10.2514/1.61496

work page doi:10.2514/1.61496 2013
[15]

Stability and Performance of Orbital Elements Feedback for Cluster Keeping Using Differential Drag,

Ben- Y aacov, O., and Gurfil, P ., “Stability and Performance of Orbital Elements Feedback for Cluster Keeping Using Differential Drag,” The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences , Vol. 61, No. 2, 2014, pp. 198–226. DOI: 10.1007/s40295-014-0022-0

work page doi:10.1007/s40295-014-0022-0 2014
[16]

Covariance Analysis of Differential Drag-Based Satellite Cluster Flight,

Ben- Y aacov, O., Ivantsov, A., and Gurfil, P ., “Covariance Analysis of Differential Drag-Based Satellite Cluster Flight,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 123, 2016, pp. 387–396. DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2015.12.035

work page doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2015.12.035 2016
[17]

Differential-Drag-Based Roto-Translational Control for Propellant-Less Spacecraft,

Pastorelli, M., Bevilacqua, R., and Pastorelli, S., “Differential-Drag-Based Roto-Translational Control for Propellant-Less Spacecraft,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 114, 2015, pp. 6–21. DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2015.04.014

work page doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2015.04.014 2015
[18]

Roto-Translational Spacecraft Formation Control Using Aerodynamic Forces,

Sun, R., Wang, J., Zhang, D., Jia, Q., and Shao, X., “Roto-Translational Spacecraft Formation Control Using Aerodynamic Forces,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics , Vol. 40, No. 10, 2017, pp. 2556–2568. DOI: 10.2514/1.G003130. 19

work page doi:10.2514/1.g003130 2017
[19]

Study of Satellite Formation Flying Control Using Differential Lift and Drag,

Ivanov, D., Kushniruk, M., and Ovchinnikov, M., “Study of Satellite Formation Flying Control Using Differential Lift and Drag,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 152, 2018, pp. 88–100. DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2018.07.047

work page doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2018.07.047 2018
[20]

Linear Coupled Attitude-Orbit Control Through Aerodynamic Drag,

Harris, A. T., Petersen, C. D., and Schaub, H., “Linear Coupled Attitude-Orbit Control Through Aerodynamic Drag,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics , Vol. 43, No. 1, 2020, pp. 122–131. DOI: 10.2514/1.G004521

work page doi:10.2514/1.g004521 2020
[21]

A Formulation of the Clohessy-Wiltshire Equations to Include Dynamic Atmospheric Drag,

Silva, E., “A Formulation of the Clohessy-Wiltshire Equations to Include Dynamic Atmospheric Drag,” AIAA/AAS Astrody- namics Specialist Conference and Exhibit , Honolulu, HI, USA, 18-21 August 2008. DOI: 10.2514/6.2008-6444

work page doi:10.2514/6.2008-6444 2008
[22]

New CubeSat Missions for a Novel Understanding of MM-Sized Space Debris,

Bocci, A., Sánchez, J. J. C., and Kristiansen, R., “New CubeSat Missions for a Novel Understanding of MM-Sized Space Debris,” 75th International Astronautical Congress, Milan, Italy, 14-18 October 2024

2024
[23]

CubeSats for In Orbit Observation of MM Sized Space Debris,

Ellingsen, P . G., Vierinen, J., Kristiansen, R., and Sánchez, J. J. C., “CubeSats for In Orbit Observation of MM Sized Space Debris,” 2nd NEO and Debris Detection Conference , Darmstadt, Germany, 24-26 January 2023

2023
[24]

Differential Drag-Based Multiple Spacecraft Maneuvering and On- Line Parameter Estimation Using Integral Concurrent Learning,

Riano-Rios, C., Bevilacqua, R., and Dixon, W. E., “Differential Drag-Based Multiple Spacecraft Maneuvering and On- Line Parameter Estimation Using Integral Concurrent Learning,” Acta Astronautica , Vol. 174, 2020, pp. 189–203. DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.04.059

work page doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.04.059 2020
[25]

Relative Navigation Strategy About Unknown and Uncooperative Targets,

Maestrini, M., De Luca, M. A., and Di Lizia, P ., “Relative Navigation Strategy About Unknown and Uncooperative Targets,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics , Vol. 46, No. 9, 2023, pp. 1708–1725. DOI: 10.2514/1.G007337

work page doi:10.2514/1.g007337 2023
[26]

P ., and Massotti, L., Spacecraft Dynamics and Control , Butterworth- Heinemann, 2018, Chaps

Canuto, E., Novara, C., Carlucci, D., Montenegro, C. P ., and Massotti, L., Spacecraft Dynamics and Control , Butterworth- Heinemann, 2018, Chaps. 4,7

2018
[27]

Analytical Technique for Satellite Projected Cross-Sectional Area Calculation,

Ben- Y aacov, O., Edlerman, E., and Gurfil, P ., “Analytical Technique for Satellite Projected Cross-Sectional Area Calculation,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 56, No. 2, 2015, pp. 205–217. DOI: 10.1016/j.asr.2015.04.004

work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2015.04.004 2015
[28]

Using Atmospheric Drag for Constellation Control of Low Earth Orbit Micro-Satellites,

Du-Toit, D. N. J., Du Plessis, J. J., and Steyn, W. H., “Using Atmospheric Drag for Constellation Control of Low Earth Orbit Micro-Satellites,” Small Satellite Conference, Logan, UT, USA, 17-19 September 1996

1996
[29]

L., and Crassidis, J

Markley, F. L., and Crassidis, J. L.,Fundamentals of Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control, Springer New Y ork, 2014, Chap. 3, pp. 107–108

2014
[30]

The Fourier Transform of the Unit Step Function,

Burrows, B., and Colwell, D., “The Fourier Transform of the Unit Step Function,” International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, Vol. 21, No. 4, 1990, pp. 629–635. DOI: 10.1080/0020739900210418

work page doi:10.1080/0020739900210418 1990
[31]

Hybrid Attitude Tracking of Rigid Bodies without Angular Velocity Measurement,

Schlanbusch, R., Grøtli, E. I., Loria, A., and Nicklasson, P . J., “Hybrid Attitude Tracking of Rigid Bodies without Angular Velocity Measurement,” Systems & Control Letters, Vol. 61, No. 4, 2012, pp. 595–601. DOI: 10.1016/j.sysconle.2012.01.008

work page doi:10.1016/j.sysconle.2012.01.008 2012
[32]

Hybrid Certainty Equivalence Control of Rigid Bodies with Quaternion Measurements,

Schlanbusch, R., and Grøtli, E. I., “Hybrid Certainty Equivalence Control of Rigid Bodies with Quaternion Measurements,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 60, No. 9, 2014, pp. 2512–2517. DOI: 10.1109/TAC.2014.2382153. 20

work page doi:10.1109/tac.2014.2382153 2014
[33]

A Singularity Free Analytical Solution of Artificial Satellite Motion With Drag,

Mueller, A., “A Singularity Free Analytical Solution of Artificial Satellite Motion With Drag,” Flight Mechanics/Estimation Theory Symposium, Greenbelt, MD, USA, 18-19 October 1978

1978
[34]

An Analytic Solution to the Classical T wo-Body Problem with Drag,

Mittleman, D., and Jezewski, D., “An Analytic Solution to the Classical T wo-Body Problem with Drag,” Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, Vol. 28, 1982, pp. 401–413. DOI: 10.1007/BF01372122

work page doi:10.1007/bf01372122 1982
[35]

Clohessy-Wiltshire Equations Modified to Include Quadratic Drag,

Carter, T., and Humi, M., “Clohessy-Wiltshire Equations Modified to Include Quadratic Drag,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 25, No. 6, 2002, pp. 1058–1063. DOI: 10.2514/2.5010

work page doi:10.2514/2.5010 2002
[36]

2001, MNRAS, 322, 2,

Xu, G., Tianhe, X., Chen, W., and Y eh, T.-K., “Analytical Solution of a Satellite Orbit Disturbed by Atmospheric Drag,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , Vol. 410, No. 1, 2011, pp. 654–662. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365- 2966.2010.17471.x

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365- 2011
[37]

Linearized J2 and Atmospheric Drag Model for Satellite Relative Motion with Small Eccentricity,

Cao, L., and Misra, A. K., “Linearized J2 and Atmospheric Drag Model for Satellite Relative Motion with Small Eccentricity,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering , Vol. 229, No. 14, 2015, pp. 2718–2736. DOI: 10.1177/0954410015586843

work page doi:10.1177/0954410015586843 2015
[38]

Adaptive Control for Differential Drag-Based Rendezvous Maneuvers with an Unknown Target,

Riano-Rios, C., Bevilacqua, R., and Dixon, W. E., “Adaptive Control for Differential Drag-Based Rendezvous Maneuvers with an Unknown Target,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 181, 2021, pp. 733–740. DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.03.011

work page doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.03.011 2021
[39]

Desensitized Optimal Attitude Guidance for Differential-Drag Rendezvous,

Harris, A., Burnett, E., and Schaub, H., “Desensitized Optimal Attitude Guidance for Differential-Drag Rendezvous,” AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Portland, ME, USA, 11-15 August 2019

2019
[40]

Assessment of New Thermospheric Mass Density Model Using NRLMSISE-00 Model, GRACE, Swarm-C, and APOD Observations,

Calabia, A., Tang, G., and Jin, S., “Assessment of New Thermospheric Mass Density Model Using NRLMSISE-00 Model, GRACE, Swarm-C, and APOD Observations,” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics , Vol. 199, 2020, p. 105207. DOI: 10.1016/j.jastp.2020.105207

work page doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2020.105207 2020
[41]

Gas–Surface Interactions and Satellite Drag Coefficients,

Moe, K., and Moe, M. M., “Gas–Surface Interactions and Satellite Drag Coefficients,” Planetary and Space Science , Vol. 53, No. 8, 2005, pp. 793–801. DOI: 10.1016/j.pss.2005.03.005

work page doi:10.1016/j.pss.2005.03.005 2005
[42]

K., Nonlinear Systems, Prentice Hall, 2002, Chap

Khalil, H. K., Nonlinear Systems, Prentice Hall, 2002, Chap. 14, pp. 589–603

2002
[43]

E., and Ho, Y

Bryson, A. E., and Ho, Y . C., Applied Optimal Control, Taylor & Francis Group, 1975, Chap. 5, p. 149

1975
[44]

LQR Controller Design for Quad-Rotor Heli- copters,

Okyere, E., Bousbaine, A., Poyi, G. T., Joseph, A. K., and Andrade, J. M., “LQR Controller Design for Quad-Rotor Heli- copters,” The Journal of Engineering , Vol. 2019, No. 17, 2019, pp. 4003–4007. DOI: 10.1049/joe.2018.8126

work page doi:10.1049/joe.2018.8126 2019
[45]

R., and Remizov, A

Shafarevich, I. R., and Remizov, A. O., Linear Algebra and Geometry, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012, Chap. 2

2012
[46]

R., Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control , Springer Dordrecht, 1980, Chap

Wertz, J. R., Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control , Springer Dordrecht, 1980, Chap. 17, p. 565

1980
[47]

D., Orbital Mechanics for Engineering Students , Butterworth-Heinemann, 2020, Chaps

Curtis, H. D., Orbital Mechanics for Engineering Students , Butterworth-Heinemann, 2020, Chaps. 4,10. 21

2020