Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839

www.elsevier.com/locate/actaastro

A constant gain Kalman filter approach for the prediction

of re-entry of risk objects
A.K. Anilkumara,∗ , M.R. Ananthasayanamb , P.V. Subba Raoc
a Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Indian Space Research Organization, Trivandrum 695 022, India
b Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560 012, India
c Applied Mathematics Division, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Indian Space Research Organization, Trivandrum 695 022, India

Received 28 June 2005; received in revised form 16 November 2006; accepted 25 January 2007
Available online 30 April 2007

Abstract
The accurate estimation of the predicted re-entry time of decaying space debris objects is very important for proper planning
of mitigation strategies and hazard assessment. This paper highlights the implementation strategies adopted for the online re-
entry prediction using Kalman filter approach with constant gains with the states being the semi-major axis, eccentricity and
ballistic coefficient and using the measurements of the apogee height and perigee height derived from the Two Line Elements
provided by agencies like USSPACECOM. Only a very simple model is utilised for the orbit propagation and a basic feature
of the present approach is that any unmodellable state and measurement errors can be accounted for by adjusting the Kalman
gains which are chosen based on a suitable cost function. In this paper we provide the details of validating this approach by
utilising three re-entries of debris objects, namely, US Sat. No. 25947, SROSS-C2 Satellite and COSMOS 1043 rocket body.
These three objects re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere on 4th March 2000, 12th July 2001 and 19th January 2002, respectively.
© 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction on the TLE sets provided in [3] are the orbital

The accurate estimation of the final orbital character-
istics of decaying objects is of considerable importance
for predicting the re-entry time to plan mitigation strate-
gies and hazard assessment. Space debris studies [1,2]
demand assessment of orbital life times of a large num-
ber of objects resulting from on-orbit fragmentation or
collision. The usual database available for the re-entry
time or the orbital lifetime prediction of large debris ob-
jects is the set of Two Line Elements (TLEs) provided by
the agencies like USSPACECOM [3]. The information
∗ Corresponding author. Fax: +91 471 270 4134.
E-mail addresses: anilk_ak@yahoo.com (A.K. Anilkumar),
sayanam@aero.iisc.ernet.in (M.R. Ananthasayanam),
pulipakasrao@yahoo.co.in (P.V. Subba Rao).
0094-5765/$ - see front matter © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2007.01.063
parameters together with rate of mean motion decay
and an equivalent ballistic coefficient B ∗ . The physical
parameters of the objects like mass, area of cross sec-
tion, shape and dimensions are not accurately available
and further any modelling of the atmosphere in which
the objects decay is also uncertain and variable. Also,
due to the tumbling of the bodies and the complex
gas–surface molecular interaction the changing ballis-
tic coefficient B ∗ further complicates the prediction of
re-entry time.
The orbital propagator utilised in this study is a very
simple model [4,5], as provided in Appendix A, which
accounts for only the atmospheric drag effect on the
orbital decay of the object. This model estimates only
the semi-major axis and eccentricity decay in one revo-
lution by considering only constant scale height during
832 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839

Nomenclature v measurement noise

w process noise
a semi-major axis in km
X state vector
A/m area to mass ratio
Z measurement vector
B ballistic coefficient (=CD × A/m)
B∗ drag term in TLE data, related to B Greek letters
CD non-dimensional drag coefficient  innovation
e eccentricity  density
ha apogee height  state transition matrix
hp perigee height
H measurement matrix Superscripts
J normalised innovation cost function ∼ value before update
K Kalman gain matrix ˆ value after update
N number of measurements T transpose of a matrix
P0 initial state covariance −1 inverse of a matrix
Q process noise covariance
Subscripts
R measurement noise covariance
R innovation covariance 0 initial condition
t time k discrete time index

the revolution. Such a mean atmospheric model from
[6] is utilised to demonstrate the effectiveness of the
proposed approach. However, more sophisticated orbit
propagators with high fidelity atmospheric models like
MSIS-86 [7] can be implemented with the present pro-
cedure to make the re-entry prediction more accurate
for high end users.
Though the Inter Agency Debris Co-ordination Com-
mittee (IADC) conducts many re-entry campaigns the
procedures that have been adopted by the various groups
are not available in the open literature. The present tech-
nique for the re-entry prediction uses the Kalman fil-
ter approach with constant gains [1,8]. Gelb [9] and
Sugiyama [10] consider constant gain Kalman filter ap-
proaches but their method of tuning the desired filter
parameters is manual as against the present rational pro-
cedure based on a suitable normalised innovation cost
function as in Anilkumar et al. [11].
In the present problem the filter states are the semi-
major axis, eccentricity and the ballistic coefficient (B =
CD ×A/m) denoted by (a, e, B), and the measurements
are the apogee height and perigee height (equivalent
to semi-major axis and eccentricity) derived from the
TLEs provided by agencies like USSPACECOM. The
constant Kalman gains as chosen in the present proce-
dure are able to account for both the unmodelled and
unmodellable state and measurement errors. In this pa-
per we validate our present approach based on three
typical re-entries of debris objects, namely, US Sat. No.
25947, SROSS-C2 Satellite and COSMOS 1043 rocket
body by comparing the observed re-entry with the pre-
dicted re-entry. These objects re-entered the Earth’s at-
mosphere on 4th March 2000, 12th July 2001 and 19th
January 2002, respectively.
2. Filter world scenario: state equations
The state equations governing the variables (a, e, B),
are
ak = ak−1 + ak−1 + w1
= ak−1 + 1 (ak−1 , ek−1 )Bk−1 + w1 , (1)
ek = ek−1 + ek−1 + w2
= ek−1 + 2 (ak−1 , ek−1 )Bk−1 + w2 , (2)
Bk = Bk−1 + w3 , (3)
where w1 , w2 and w3 denote the process noise. The
functional forms for 1 and 2 are the expressions given
in King-Hele [4] which depend on a, e and B. The suffix
‘k’ denotes the time instant. The detailed expressions
for 1 and 2 are provided in Appendix A.
3. Filter world scenario: measurement equations
The measurements are available in terms of the orbital
parameters ‘a’ and ‘e’, in the tracked TLEs. But in the
filter the predicted apogee and perigee heights in terms
of the above are
(h−
a )k = ak (1 + ek )
 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839 833

and function J fundamental to the Kalman filter as suggested

by Sorenson [12] is defined as in [13,14]
(h−
p )k = ak (1 − ek ). (4) 
J = (1/N ) Tk [HPHT + R]−1 k
The measurements at time tk are of the form 
= (1/N ) Tk [R]−1 k, (8)
(ha )k = (h−
a )k + v 1
where the innovation k = (measurement–model
and output), and R is the covariance matrix of the innova-
tion written as HPHT +R, where H is the measurement
(hp )k = (h−
p )k + v 2 , (5)
matrix, relating the state to the measurement as
where v1 , v2 are, respectively, the measurement noises Z = HX. (9)
in apogee height and perigee height. Since no infor-
mation is available regarding the characteristics of the P is the state covariance and R is the measurement
above measurement noises in apogee height and perigee noise covariance matrix. Though there are many tech-
height values derived from the mean motion and eccen- niques for tuning the filter statistics, the heuristic ap-
tricity in TLE sets, we assume them to be white Gaus- proach of Myers and Tapley for Q and R [15] and of
sian distribution represented by Gemson and Ananthasayanam [14] for P0 is perhaps
the simplest. In general, R varies as a function of time
[v1 , v2 ]T ∼ N(0, R) (6) depending on the choice of P0 , Q and R.
Presently, it was found to be adequate to obtain P0 by
with R the measurement noise covariance matrix as-
utilising the deviations of the assumed initial conditions
sumed as constant.
of the states (a, e) with those obtained from the first
The predicted values of the apogee and perigee
TLE set under consideration and for the state B, the
heights and the ballistic coefficient useful in the state
deviation of initially assumed B0 with that of the derived
equations are updated by utilising the measured values
value of B from B ∗ is used. The values of B ∗ are B are
of the above heights as
related as
⎛ +⎞ ⎛ −⎞ ⎡ ⎤
ha ha k11 k12  − B ∗ = (ref /2)B, (10)
⎜ h+ ⎟ ⎜ h− ⎟ ⎢ ⎥ ha − h a
⎝ p ⎠ = ⎝ p ⎠+⎣ k21 k22 ⎦ . (7)
hp − h −
p k where ref is the atmospheric density at a reference
B k+ −
B k k31 k32 altitude.
The superscript (+) corresponds to the updated values, However, for Q and R we have utilised the heuristic
the superscript (−) for the predicted values and suffix estimators of Myers and Tapley [15]. These estimators
k denotes the time instant. are constructed from the statistics of the state and mea-
surement samples generated in the Kalman filter algo-
rithm. The present approximate structure for the noise
4. Adaptive Kalman filtering approach with time
statistics in one filter pass through the data are given
varying gains
below.
Measurement noise covariance
Before applying the constant Kalman gain approach
N
extensive studies have been conducted using the adap- 1 
tive technique. It turned out that generally after a tran- r̂ = rk ,
N
sient the Kalman gain matrix elements tend to constant k=1
values. This observation provides a possible approach N
1 
in which instead of tuning the usual Kalman filter statis- R̂ = [(rk − r̂)(rk − r̂)T ]. (11)
tics for the initial state, process and measurement noise N −1
k=1
covariances P0 , Q and R, a smaller number of Kalman State noise covariance
gain elements can be worked out. A good statistical con-
N
sistency of the results from the adaptive technique and 1 
q̂ = qk ,
the constant Kalman gain approach provided the confi- N
k=1
dence in the latter approach.
Assuming that the measurements are available at N 1 
Q̂ = [(qk − q̂)(qk − q̂)T ], (12)
discrete time instants, the normalised innovation cost N −1
834 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839
where
rk = Zk − Hk X̂k−1 ,
qk = X̂k − X̂k−1 (13)
are the state and observation samples,  is the state
transition matrix, H is the measurement matrix, X and
X̂ are, respectively, the predicted and updated state
estimates. Further details of iteratively obtaining all
the filter statistics are available in Gemson and Anan-
thasayanam [14].
5. Constant Kalman gain approach
Generally after the initial transients the Kalman Gain
matrix tends to a constant value as has been noticed
in the rendezvous and docking [16], evolution and ex-
pansion of the space debris scenario [11] problems, it
was also noticed in the present case as well. These con-
stant gains can be obtained by making the above nor-
malised innovation cost function equal to the number
of measurements in the present algorithm to handle the
re-entry problem. Further, it is assumed that the above
R is a constant as in [17]. Thus, the R can be estimated
similar to the estimation of the pure measurement noise
only as is the case in the Method of Maximum Likeli-
hood Estimation [17]. For this purpose we have utilised
the Genetic Algorithm [18,19] in the present work.
There could be slight differences in the gain values
obtained from the adaptive and the constant gain ap-
proaches due to the relative periods of transients and
the steady state conditions. The advantage of the con-
stant Kalman gain approach based on utilising the cost
function J is that one need not propagate the covariance
equations at all, thus enormously reducing the compu-
tational load.
6. Genetic algorithm
The steps to implement the genetic algorithm [18,19]
are as follows.
Step 1: Choose a suitable coding to represent the
unknown parameters in the problem.
Step 2: Select the criteria for Reproduction (Mating
pool generation)/Cross Over/Mutation. Input the initial
population size, probabilities of cross over and muta-
tion, search domain of the variables, termination criteria
(TC) or Maximum allowable iterations (Tmax ).
Step 3: Set T = 0.
Step 4: Evaluate each string of the population for
fitness J.
Step 5: If T > Tmax or satisfies TC: terminate perform
reproduction, cross over, mutation on the population.
Table 1
Parameters utilised in the implementation of GA for the re-entry
problem
Parameter Values
Population size 100
Bit length 20
Probability of cross over 0.90
Probability of mutation 0.05
Number of generations for convergence 50
Alternate tolerance for convergence: change in J 0.0001
between generations
Step 6: Evaluate the strings of the new population.
Step 7: T = T + 1, go to step 5.
Table 1 provides the parameter values for the present
study arrived after some trials.
7. Performance of the algorithm in different case
studies
This section provides the results obtained by the
present algorithm for three different re-entry objects.
7.1. Case study with US Sat. No. 25947, Soyuz
The Sat. No. 25947, with international designation
1999-058E, is a rocket body (Starsem Soyuz—Ikar third
stage, block 1 of Soyuz 11A511 U launcher), launched
on 18th October 1999. Its mass is about 2300 kg and is
nearly cylindrical in shape, with end domes, of 2.7 m
diameter and 8.1 m long. A set of 72 orbital elements
was made available for re-entry prediction between 2nd
February and 3rd March 2000. The actual re-entry of
this body occurred on 4th March 2000 at 5 h 50 min,
64.243 days calculated from 1st January 2000.
In all the prediction studies, the object was assumed
to re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere when its semi-major
axis is below 120 km above the Earth. This is because
diffusive equilibrium predominates above 120 km with
significant variations in the atmospheric properties with
solar, magnetic activity and local time [20].
Starting from the 22nd TLE set, the present algorithm
is utilised for the prediction of the re-entry time. The
present algorithm utilises six constant Kalman gains
two each for the three states, namely, apogee height,
perigee height and ballistic coefficient with respect to
the apogee and perigee height measurements. An im-
portant parameter in this implementation is the initial
assumed value of the ballistic coefficient (B0 ).
Starting with different B0 values, the performance of
the algorithm is provided in Fig. 1 by considering a set
 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839
Fig. 1. Re-entry predictions with different B0 values (Sat. No.
25947).
Fig. 2. Estimates of time varying B with different B0 values (Sat.
No. 25947).
of constant values for Kalman gains. From this figure it
is clear that the value 0.040 as B0 provides the minimum
variance in the re-entry prediction time with respect to
the TLEs.
Fig. 2 provides the ballistic coefficient update in each
of the above cases as the available TLE set numbers
increase. As already discussed, the ballistic coefficient
as a state gets updated online. This is to be expected
since starting from an initial value the filter estimates
are improved, and also it accounts for the effect of tum-
bling motion, and with varying gas–surface interaction.
Also, it may be noted that the model utilised here for
the propagation of the orbital characteristics is a very
simple one, which considers only the atmospheric drag
835
Fig. 3. Re-entry prediction with different sets of Kalman gains (Sat.
No. 25947).
effect that too based on mean atmospheric conditions.
The uncertainty in such an environmental model is also
contained in the predicted ballistic coefficient. Fig. 2
clearly brings out the robustness of the present constant
Kalman gain approach though beginning with different
values of B0 the ballistic coefficients seem to converge
towards a single value after filtering through some TLE
measurements.
The procedure for fixing the approximate B0 can be
extended to obtain the set of constant Kalman gains as
well. Fig. 3 provides the performance of the algorithm
with different sets of Kalman gains. This figure also
indicates very subtly the robustness of the filter per-
formance in terms of different sets of constant Kalman
gains. Such a variation of the Kalman filter statistics
would have led to much larger performance variations.
A careful study of the normalised innovation cost func-
tion for each set provided a set of constant gains as 0.6,
0.2, 0.2, 0.6, 0.00014 and 0.0001, as just about the best
possible choice. Hence, a final prediction is made on
the re-entry of Sat. No. 25947 with the above Kalman
gains and with B0 equal to 0.04. A graphical represen-
tation of this final prediction is provided in Fig. 4 and
the other details of the results are as given below.
Near optimal B0 = 0.040.
Actual re-entry
= 64.243 days from 1st January 2000
= 4th March 2000 at 5 h 50 min .
Near optimal Kalman gains, K
= [k11 k12 k21 k22 k31 k32]
= [0.6 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.00014 0.0001].
836 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839

Fig. 4. Final prediction of re-entry time with near optimal Kalman

gains (Sat. No. 25947). Fig. 5. The B and cost J for prediction with optimal gains (Sat. No.
25947).

Prediction with latest elset

= 64.3257 days from 1st January 2000
= 4th March 2000 at 7 h 35 min .

The prediction depends on the epoch at which the

last TLE is available at which the re-entry is predicted.
In principle, the optimal gains can be found out as and
when the data are available. The present approach is
exercised from TLE set number 22 (about 12 days prior
to actual re-entry) to the last available TLE by predicting
the re-entry. The summary of the results is

mean prediction
= 64.2323 days from 1st January 2000
= 4th March 2000 at 5 h 35 min ;

RSS error on prediction from actual = 1 h 51 min;
standard deviation on prediction = 2 h 09 min.
Further the noise in the measurements and the states
are estimated using the adaptive procedure outlined
above based on the cost function J. The ballistic co-
efficient estimated sequentially and the corresponding
cost J are provided in Fig. 5. The Fig. 6 brings out
the estimated measurement noise levels by adaptive
estimation of the noises. The estimated process noise
values for the three states namely the semi-major axis,
eccentricity and the ballistic coefficient are given in
Fig. 7. The Fig. 8 provides the measurement updates
with the observations in the present approach.
Fig. 6. Sat. No. 25947 re-entry predictions: measurement noise
estimates in apogee and perigee heights from the adaptive filtering
technique.
7.1.1. Remarks on statistical behaviour of genetic
algorithm populations
The statistical behaviour of the constant gains, tuned
through genetic algorithm, was also studied. It is found
that even after 100 iterations the populations have not
converged close to a single set but there was a scatter.
But the dispersion band of the parameters had narrowed
down as the iteration progresses.
 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839
Fig. 7. Sat. No. 25947 re-entry prediction: process noise estimates
in a, e and B from the adaptive filtering technique.
Fig. 8. Observed measurements and estimated values of apogee and
perigee heights from the constant gain approach.
7.2. Case study with SROSS-C2 Satellite
Sat. No. 23099 is India’s SROSS-C2 Satellite (inter-
national designation 1994-027A) launched on 4th May
1994 initially into an orbit of 430 × 620 km size at
nearly 46◦ inclination. Its weight is about 113 kg and
it is cylindrical in shape with a diameter of 0.32 m and
length of 0.86 m. It is understood that its re-entry has
occurred on 12th July 2001 at 3 h 6 min—193.129 days
837
reckoned from 1st January 2001. A total of 28 TLE sets
were available for the present analysis.
Starting from the second TLE set, the present algo-
rithm is utilised for prediction of the re-entry time. As
in the case of Sat. No. 25947, here also a detailed study
was carried out on the sensitivities of B0 parameter and
the Kalman gains. The details of the results are as given
below.
Near optimal B0 = 0.014.
Actual re-entry
= 193.129 days from 1st January 2001
= 12th July 2001 at 3 h 06 min .
Near optimal Kalman gains, K
= [k11 k12 k21 k22 k31 k32]
= [0.5 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.0006 0.0006].
Prediction with latest elset
= 193.1488 days from 1st January 2001
= 12th July 2001 at 3 h 36 min .
7.3. Case study with COSMOS 1043 object
This is a Russian Vostok (SL-3/A-1) Upper Stage
1043 R (USSPACECOM Catalog No. 11056), started
on 10th January 2002. The object was of cylindrical
shape (diameter 2.6 m, length 3.0 m) having a dry mass
of 1400 kg. The COSPAR ID No. of this rocket body is
1978-094B. It deployed its payload (COSMOS 1043)
into an initial orbit of 622 km × 635 km at 81.2◦ incli-
nation on 10th October 1978. Fifty TLE sets for this ob-
ject were available for offline predictions, which were
downloaded from the Internet.
As in the earlier cases, the present algorithm is
utilised for prediction of the re-entry time. A complete
analysis was made on the sensitivities of B0 parameter
and the Kalman gains. The details of the results are as
given below.
Near optimal B0 = 0.010.
Actual re-entry
= 19.923 days from 1st January 2002
= 19th January 2002 at 22 h 09 min .
Near optimal Kalman gains, K
= [k11 k12 k21 k22 k31 k32]
= [0.6 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.0004 0.0004].
838 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839

Prediction with latest elset The orbital parameters are now liable to change. By
= 19.942 days from 1st January 2002 differentiating the energy equations and introducing the
drag forces as the perturbation force f, we obtain fol-
= 19th January 2002 at 22 h 35 min. lowing King-Hele [4]:
 2
8. Conclusions (1 + e cos E)3/2
a = −a  2
 dE
0 (1 − e cos E)1/2
A novel approach by utilising the Kalman filter for- and
malism with constant gains for an efficient online pre-  2  
diction of the re-entry time of space objects has been 1 + e cos E 1/2
x = −a  2
(cos E + e) dE,
presented. Illustrative examples, which show the effi- 0 1 − e cos E
ciency of the proposed methodology with actual re-
where x = ae.
entries of three space objects, are also provided. This
Expanding the above in a power series of e cos(E)
methodology utilised only a mean atmosphere and a
(for e < 0.2), we obtain modified Bessel functions Jj
simple propagator considering only atmospheric drag
of the first kind of order j, defined as
effects. In particular, even the atmosphere characteris-
 2
tics as in the latest MSIS-86 model [7] can also be used. 1
However, the robustness of the constant gains have the Jj (c) = cos(j ) exp(c cos()) d.
2 0
ability to handle this mismatch as well, just as the inac-
curacies in modelling B, as well as both the unmodelled Hence utilising the modified Bessel functions and a
and unmodellable state and measurement noise charac- simple model for air density, assuming the density
teristics. depends solely on the distance r from the Earth’s cen-
tre and varies exponentially with r, we get the rate of
change over one revolution in the elements due only to
Appendix A
drag as
A.1. Basic equations of orbital decay due to air drag arev = − 2a 2 p
⎧ 3e2 ⎫
Consider an object S moving due to an attractive ⎪
⎨ J0 + 2eJ 1 + (J0 + J2 ) ⎪
⎬
4
force which varies inversely with the square of the dis- × exp−c
tance r from the centre of attraction. If the position vec- ⎪
⎩ e 3 ⎪
⎭
+ (3J1 + J3 ) + O(e4 )
tor of the particle relative to the centre of attraction is 4
r, we have erev
r = −2ap
r̈ + =0
r3 ⎧ ⎫
⎪ e e2
and the angular momentum h is given by ⎨ J1 + (J0 + J2 ) − (5J1 + J3 ) ⎪ ⎬
2 8
× exp−c ,
h = (p)1/2 n, ⎪
⎩ e3 ⎪
⎭
− (5J0 + 4J2 − J4 ) + O(e4 )
16
where ‘n’ is the unit vector perpendicular to the orbit
where p is the density at perigee, c = ae/H , H
plane and ‘p’ is the semi-latus rectum defined as
is the density scale height,  = (QC D )A/m, Q the
p = a(1 − e2 ) = h/2 . factor which includes the rotation of the atmosphere
(0.9 < Q < 1.1), m the mass of the satellite, Jj the
The energy equation is modified Bessel function of first kind of order j , in all
  cases having argument c, CD the drag coefficient usu-
1 1 1
ṙ • ṙ =  − , ally taken as ≈ 2.2, and A the effective reference area.
2 |r| 2a Hence at kth revolution
where the dot (·) denotes the scalar product. ak = ak−1 + ak−1 ,
Suppose now that the orbit is perturbed by a force f
per unit mass, so that ek = ek−1 + ek−1 ,

r where aj , ej stands for semi-major axis and eccentricity

r̈ + = f. at time instant tj , j = k − 1, k.
r3
 A.K. Anilkumar et al. / Acta Astronautica 61 (2007) 831 – 839
A.2. The model for the density variation in the
atmosphere
The model of the atmosphere used here assumes
a spherically symmetrical distribution of particles in
which the density  varies exponentially according to
 
(h − h0 )
 = 0 exp − , debris scenario, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 43 (2006)
H
where h is the height above the surface of the Earth, 0
the density at height h0 , and H the scale height.
References
[1] A.K. Anilkumar, New perspectives for analyzing the breakup,
environment, evolution, collision risk and reentry of space
debris objects, Ph.D. Thesis, http://etd.ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/handle/
2005/80, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian
Institute of Science, Bangalore, India, 2004.
[2] N.L. Johnson, D.S. McKnight, Artificial Space Debris, Orbit
Book Company, 1987.
[3] Web sites for two line element sets http://www.geocities.com/
iss25544/#TLEs or www.wingar.demon.co.uk or http://
www.celestrak.com.
[4] D. King-Hele, Satellite Orbits in an Atmosphere: Theory and
Applications, Blackie, London, 1987.
[5] D.A. Vallado, Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Appli-
cations, Second ed., Microcosm Press, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht, 2001.
[6] US Standard Atmosphere, NOAA, NASA and USAF, U.S.
Government Printing Offices, Washington, DC, 1976.
[7] A.E. Hedin, MSIS-86 thermospheric model, Journal of
Geophysical Research 92 (1987) 4649–4662.
839
[8] A.K. Anilkumar, M.R. Ananthasayanam, P.V. Subba Rao,
Prediction of Re-entry of Space Debris Objects: Constant Gain
Kalman Filter Approach, AIAA-2003-5393, 2003.
[9] A. Gelb (Ed.), Applied Optimal Estimation, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1974.
[10] N. Sugiyama, System identification of jet engines, Journal of
Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power 122 (2000) 19–26.
[11] A.K. Anilkumar, M.R. Ananthasayanam, P.V. Subba Rao,
New approach for the evolution and expansion of space
1271–1282.
[12] H.W. Sorenson, Least squares estimation from Gauss to
Kalman, IEEE Spectrum 7 (1970) 63–68.
[13] R.M.O. Gemson, Estimation of aircraft aerodynamic derivatives
accounting for measurement and process noise by EKF through
adaptive filter tuning, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Aerospace
Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India, 1991.
[14] R.M.O. Gemson, M.R. Ananthasayanam, Importance of Initial
State Covariance Matrix for the Parameter Estimation using
Adaptive Extended Kalman Filter, AIAA-98-4153, 1998.
[15] K.A. Myers, B.D. Tapley, Adaptive sequential estimation with
unknown noise statistics, IEEE Transactions On Automatic
Control 21 (1976) 520–525.
[16] N.K. Philip, M.R. Ananthasayanam, Relative position and
attitude estimation and control schemes for the final phase of an
autonomous docking mission of spacecraft, Acta Astronautica
52 (2003) 511–522.
[17] N.K. Philip, M.R. Ananthasayanam, The method of maximum
likelihood estimation: a generalized computer program, Report
No. 95 FM 3, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian
Institute of Science, Bangalore, 1995.
[18] L.D. Whitley (Ed.), Foundations of Genetic Algorithms, Morgan
Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 1993.
[19] K. Deb, Optimization for Engineering Design: Algorithms and
Examples, Prentice-Hall of India, 1995.
[20] R.C. Whitten, W.W. Vaughan, Guide to Reference and Standard
Atmosphere Models, AIAA-G-003-1988, 1990.