Back to search
2503.05358

Design of a low-thrust gravity-assisted rendezvous trajectory to Halley’s comet

R. Flores, A. Beolchi, E. Fantino, C. Pozzi, M. Pontani, I. Bertini, C. Barbieri

correctmedium confidence
Category
math.DS
Journal tier
Specialist/Solid
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper derives ΔV3^2 = K + 2 v∞(d1 cos δ + d2 sin δ cos α + d3 sin δ sin α), then shows the first-order conditions tan α = d3/d2 and tan δ = (d2 cos α + d3 sin α)/d1, and uses second-derivative checks to confirm a minimum; if δopt exceeds the pericenter cap, the boundary δ = δmax is optimal; finally, given t2, the GA geometry is determined by {t2, t4}, reducing the outer search to 1D in t4 (Brent) over the June 2053–May 2061 window. These are precisely the steps and conclusions in the candidate solution, including the α-minimization via T(α)=d2 cos α + d3 sin α, the reduction to a single harmonic in δ, the sign conditions for the Hessian, and the boundary-case logic. The algebra, conditions, and dimensionality reduction match the paper’s Eq. (17)–(26) and the surrounding discussion, as well as the mission-design workflow.

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid

\textbf{Justification:}

The core derivations for optimal GA geometry are correct, concise, and well integrated into a mission design framework that achieves substantial computational savings by reducing the optimization to a single parameter. Assumptions are appropriate for feasibility. Minor clarifications on branch selection and corner cases would improve readability and replicability but do not impact correctness.