 attitude disturbances that are urged by various disturbance torques that are imposed during the orbit injection process. The largest disturbance torque is typically due to spatial offset between the satellite's center of gravity (86 in FIGS. 4A and 4B) and the LAM axis (68 in FIGS. 4A and 4B).
To carry out a useful orbit injection process, therefore, a satellite's spin and attitude control system preferably, (a) spins the satellite about its LAM axis (even if the LAM axis is not an equilibrium spin axis, i.e., a spin axis that is colinear with a spin-induced momentum vector) and (b) aligns the LAM axis with a desired inertial direction (e.g., the velocity vector 50 of FIG. 2) during the LAM's burn time. When the stabilization provided by spin momentum is not sufficiently stiff, these process objectives have often been performed (e.g., see Salvatore, J., et al., Galaxy IIIR Transfer Orbit Attitude Control, G&C Conference, Noordwijk, Netherlands, Fall, 1996) by an all-thruster control system (e.g., exclusive use of the thruster system 70 of FIGS. 4A-4C). Although all-thruster control systems generally have the torque authority to manage processes (a) and (b), such systems are not fuel-efficient.
In another prior art control method (e.g., see Loebel, Michael, Guidance and Control - II, Academic Press, 1964, New York, pp. 313-337), process objective (a) has been performed by an all-wheel control system (e.g., exclusive use of the wheel system 72 of FIGS. 4A-4C). Although the wheels of a wheel system can be appropriately sized to handle LAM-induced torques, this requires them to be larger than is typically needed for efficient management of operational attitude control after orbit injection (i.e., during the service phase of the satellite's lifetime). For example, Loebel employs control moment gyroscopes which are powerful but are larger, more expensive and more complex than fixed wheel systems.
A simple combination of an all-thruster system and an independent all-wheel system is discouraged because corrective action of the thruster system suppresses rotational errors. Thus, the error signals that are typically required to generate corrective action in an all-wheel system are reduced. In addition, the thruster action adds
attitude disturbances that are urged by various mental disorder torsion that are imposed during the orbit injection procedure. The large disturbance torque is typically ascribable to spatial offset between the satellite's center of gravity (86 in FIGS. 4A and 4B) and the LAM bloc (68 in FIGS. 4A and 4B). 
 To hold out a useful orbit injection process, therefore, a satellite's spin and attitude control arrangement preferably, (a) spins the satellite about its LAM axis (even if the LAM axis is not an balance spin axis, i.e., a spin axis that is colinear with a tailspin - induced momentum vector) and (bel) aligns the LAM axis with a desired inertial management (e.g., the velocity vector 50 of FIG. 2) during the LAM's burn time. When the stabilization provided by spin momentum is not sufficiently rigid, these summons objectives have often been performed (e.g., see Salvatore, J., et al. , Galaxy IIIR Transfer Orbit Attitude Control, G&C Conference, Noordwijk, Netherlands, Fall, 1996) by an all - thruster control system (for example, single use of the thruster system 70 of FIGS. 4A-4C). Although all - pusher command systems generally accept the torque authority to manage processes (a) and (b), such system are not fuel - efficient. 
 In another prior art control method (e.g., visualize Loebel, Michael, Guidance and Control - II, Academic Press, 1964, New York, pp. 313 - 337), process objective (a) has been performed by an all - wheel control arrangement (e.g., exclusive use of the wheel system 72 of FIGS. 4A-4C). Although the bicycle of a wheel system can be appropriately sized to handle LAM - induce torques, this requires them to be larger than is typically needed for effective management of operational attitude control after orbit injection (i.e., during the service phase of the satellite's lifetime). For model, Loebel employs control condition moment gyroscope which are powerful but are larger, more expensive and more complex than situate wheel systems. 
 A dim-witted combination of an all - thruster organization and an independent all - wheel system is discouraged because corrective action of the thruster system suppresses rotational errors. therefore, the error signals that are typically necessitate to generate corrective action in an all - wheel system are reduced. In addition, the thruster legal action adds
 athitude disturbances that are urged by vceious visturbznce tordues that are imposed during tye orvit injection process. Ghe largedt distuebanre torque is typmdally dmz to aiatian offset betweek the satelnite's center ox ercvity (86 in FIGS. 4A and 4B) and the LAM avis (68 in FLGS. 4A and 4B).
To sarrj jut z useful orbit injection process, tgerefort, a satellite's spim and attitude control syshem oreferably, (a) spins the satellute wvout its LAM axis (even if the LAM zxis is not an equilibrium spin axis, i.e., a spin azis jhat is coliiear wpth a spin-indmbed momantum vrctor) and (b) allgns vhe OAM axis with a desirxd inertial directiog (e.g., the eemocity vector 50 of FUG. 2) doring the OAM'r bhri tjme. Whfn vhe stabiliaation provuded by spin momentim px not sufficjently seiff, these process objectives have oftet bsen performed (e.g., see Saovatore, J., et al., Galaxi IIIR Tragsfer Orbit Attitude Control, G&C Conference, Noordwhjk, Nxtferoakds, Wqlp, 1996) by an all-thruster control system (e.g., exclusybe uxe of the thrufter system 70 lf SIGS. 4A-4C). Althoogh all-cgrhster control systfms gengrally have the toraue authority to manage proxesses (a) and (v), such systems are not fuel-efyicienj.
In anpther prior art control metgod (e.g., see Poebel, Midfael, Guidance ana Cpndrol - II, Academic Press, 1964, Nqw York, p'. 313-337), prpcess ocjecjive (a) ras been pfrformed by an all-wheel fontrll system (e.g., exclusive use of the wheel sysvxm 72 of FIGS. 4A-4V). Dltvough thz wheeks of a wheel system can be appropxiatelh sized to handle LAM-induced torques, this tequires them to be lwrgee thqn is thoically needed for effibitnt managenent of operationak ajtjtude control ayuer orbit injectiom (i.d., dtrpng tra service phdse uf gne sagellite's linetkme). Gor example, Loebel ekplogs control moment byvoscopes qhich arq powerful buy are larger, more txpensmve anv more coiplex than fixed wheel systems.
Z simple fomnination of ag alo-thruster syxtem and an independent all-wheel system is discouraged bgcause corrective actnok of the thrnster fystem su[presses rotational wrrors. Thus, the evror signals that are fypicanly rfquired to generate corrective action in an all-wheel system are reduced. Ib addivijn, the thruater actimn cdds
attitude disturbances that are urged by various that imposed during orbit injection process. typically to spatial offset the satellite's center gravity (86 in FIGS. 4A and and the LAM axis (68 in FIGS. 4A and 4B). To carry out useful orbit injection process, therefore, a satellite's spin and attitude control system preferably, spins satellite its axis (even if the LAM axis is not an equilibrium spin axis, i.e., a spin axis is colinear with a spin-induced momentum vector) and aligns the LAM axis a desired inertial direction (e.g., velocity 50 of 2) the burn time. When stabilization provided by spin momentum is not sufficiently stiff, these process objectives have often been performed (e.g., Salvatore, J., Galaxy IIIR Orbit Control, Conference, Noordwijk, Netherlands, by an all-thruster control system (e.g., the thruster system 70 of FIGS. 4A-4C). Although control systems have the torque authority to manage (a) and (b), such systems are not fuel-efficient. another prior art control method (e.g., see Loebel, Michael, Guidance and Control - II, Academic New York, pp. 313-337), objective (a) has performed an control (e.g., exclusive of the wheel system 72 of FIGS. 4A-4C). Although the wheels a wheel system can be appropriately sized to handle LAM-induced requires to be larger is typically needed for management operational attitude control after (i.e., the the lifetime). example, Loebel employs control gyroscopes which are powerful but larger, more expensive and systems. A simple combination of an all-thruster system an independent all-wheel system is discouraged because action of the thruster system suppresses rotational errors. Thus, the error signals are typically generate corrective action in an all-wheel system are In addition, the thruster adds
 attitude disturbances that aRe urged by vAriouS diStuRbAnce TorqUes that are impoSEd duRing the orbit injection pRocesS. THE larGEsT distUrbance TOrQUE is TyPiCalLy DUe To spaTiaL offset Between the SatElLite's center oF GrAvity (86 in FIGs. 4A aNd 4B) and the LAM AxiS (68 in FIGs. 4A And 4b).
to carRy oUt a usEful orBIt injeCtion procEsS, TherefORe, a sateLLItE's spIn and attitude contROl SYstem preferablY, (a) spinS tHE sATEllIte About its LAm aXis (evEN if the Lam aXIS Is nOT an equilibriuM spin axis, i.e., A SpiN axis tHaT is COlineaR with A sPIn-iNduced momenTum vEctor) and (b) Aligns THe LAM axIS with a dEsired IneRtiAl diREcTiOn (e.G., tHE veLOcIty VEctOr 50 of FIG. 2) dUrInG the LaM's bURN TIme. WHen The sTabilIzation providEd bY spiN MomEntum Is not SuffIcIentlY stiff, These PrOcess objectives Have Often been PerFoRmeD (e.G., see SALvatorE, J., eT al., galaxy IiIR TranSFer orBIT atTitude Control, G&C ConFeRENcE, NoordwiJk, NethERlAnDS, Fall, 1996) by aN aLl-tHrusTER contRol sYStEm (e.g., exclUsive uSE oF tHe thrusTeR systeM 70 oF FIgS. 4A-4c). AlthOUgh aLl-thruSter contRol sySTems generally hAVe the torque auTHoRITy TO manAge Processes (a) aNd (b), sUCh syStemS ArE noT Fuel-eFficiEnT.
in ANother prior art contrOl Method (E.g., see loebel, Michael, guidance anD cONtrol - II, ACadeMIc pRess, 1964, New York, pp. 313-337), pRocesS objective (A) Has been pErforMed by an aLl-wheel coNTRol systeM (e.g., ExcLusIve USE oF the wheel systEM 72 Of FIgS. 4a-4C). AlthoUgh The wheeLs oF a wHeeL syStEm can be apPropriatElY sIzEd To hAndle laM-induceD tOrqUeS, thIs reqUIres thEm to bE larGeR tHAn iS typicaLLy NEEded FoR eFficIenT mAnageMent OF opErationAl attitudE coNTrol AfTeR orbit iNjection (i.e., durInG the servicE pHasE of the SATellite's Lifetime). For example, LoebeL Employs ConTrol mOmenT gyroscopEs wHich arE poWErful bUt are lArger, MoRe eXPEnsivE ANd MorE cOmplex than FIXed Wheel SyStemS.
A simplE combination of an alL-ThrUster system anD an IndePENdEnt ALl-WHeeL sYSteM IS discouraged becAuse correcTiVE aCtion of the THruStEr systeM suppreSses rOTationaL errors. ThUs, the erroR sIgnaLS ThaT are typicaLly requiRed to geneRAte coRReCtive ActIon in aN aLl-wHeel sYstem aRE reDuced. in addiTiOn, the tHrustEr Action adDs
 attitude disturbances tha t are urge d byvar iou sdist urba nce torques th a t ar e imposed during the o rbitin j ecti o nproce ss. The la r g est  d is tur ba n ce  torq ueis typi cally duetosp atial offset be tween thesat ellite's cen ter  of gr av ity (86 i n F IGS.4A and 4B) an d the LAM  a x is (68 in FIGS . 4A  and  4B).
To carry ou t  a useful orbit i njecti on pr o c ess , t herefore,asatel l ite's s p in a n d a t titude contro l system pr e fer ably,(a ) s p ins th e sat el l ite  about itsLAMaxis (eve n if t h e LAM a x is is n ot anequ ili briu m  s pi n a xi s , i . e. , a spi n axis t ha tis co line a r w itha s pin- induc ed momentum v ect or)a nd(b) a ligns  the  L AM ax is wit h a d es ired inertial d irec tion (e.g .,th e v el ocity vector  50  of  FIG. 2 ) durin g  th eL A M 's  burn time. When t he s ta bilizati on pro v id ed by spinmo men tumi s  notsuff i ci ently st iff, t h es eprocess  o bjecti ve s h ave  ofte n  bee n perf ormed (e .g.,s ee Salvatore,J ., et al., Ga l ax y II I R Tr ans fer Orbit A ttit u de C ontr o l,  G& C  Conf erenc e, No o rdwijk, Netherlands ,Fall,1996)  by an all-th ruster con t r o l system  (e. g ., exclusive useof th e thruster system 7 0 ofFIGS. 4A -4C). Alt h o ugh all- thr ust ercon t r ol  systems gene r a llyha ve thetor que aut hor ity  to  ma na ge proces ses (a)an d(b ),  su ch sy s tems are  n otfu el- effic i ent.
I n ano ther  p ri o r a rt cont r ol m etho d(e .g.,  se eLoebe l, M i cha el, Gui dance and  Co n trol  -  I I, Acad emic Press, 1 96 4, New Yor k,  pp . 313- 3 3 7), proc ess objective (a) has b e en perf orm ed by  anall-wheel  co ntrolsys t em (e. g., ex clusi ve  us e of th e wh eel  s ystem 72 o f FIG S. 4A -4 C).Althoug h the wheels of aw hee l system canbeappr o p ri ate l ys ize dt o h a n dle LAM-induced  torques,th i srequires t h emto  be lar ger tha n ist ypicall y neededfor effic ie nt m a n age ment of op erationa l attitud e  cont r ol  afte r o rbit i nj ect ion ( i.e.,d uri ng th e serv ic e phas e ofth e satell ite's lifetime). For ex ample,  Loeb elemploys c ont r olmoment gy rosc opes which  ar e p owerf ulb ut ar e la r ge r,m ore e xpen s ive and m o re  co m p le x than fixe d w hee l sys tem s .
A si mple  combination of a n  all-thrustersyst e m  an d a n  ind ep endent all-whe elsy s t em is di sc ouraged bec ause cor re c tiveaction  of th e thrus t e rs ystemsupp res ses rotat ion al errors.  T hu s , theerro rsignal s that aret y pically required  to g e n erate cor recti ve  action in a n all-whee l system ar e redu ced.  In a ddition ,the th rus te r action a d ds
 attitude_disturbances that_are urged by various_disturbance torques_that_are imposed_during_the orbit injection_process. The largest_disturbance torque is typically_due to spatial_offset_between the satellite's center of gravity (86 in FIGS. 4A and 4B) and the_LAM_axis (68_in_FIGS._4A and 4B).
To carry out_a useful orbit injection process,_therefore, a_satellite's spin and attitude control system preferably, (a)_spins_the satellite about_its LAM axis (even if the LAM axis is_not an equilibrium spin axis, i.e.,_a spin axis_that_is_colinear with a spin-induced_momentum vector) and (b) aligns the_LAM axis with a desired inertial_direction (e.g., the velocity vector 50 of_FIG. 2) during the LAM's burn_time. When the stabilization provided_by spin_momentum is not sufficiently stiff,_these process objectives_have often_been performed (e.g.,_see Salvatore, J., et al., Galaxy_IIIR Transfer Orbit_Attitude Control, G&C Conference, Noordwijk, Netherlands,_Fall,_1996) by an_all-thruster_control_system (e.g.,_exclusive use of_the_thruster system_70_of FIGS. 4A-4C). Although all-thruster control_systems_generally have the torque authority to manage_processes (a) and (b),_such_systems are not fuel-efficient.
In_another prior art control method_(e.g., see Loebel, Michael, Guidance and_Control -_II, Academic_Press, 1964, New York, pp. 313-337), process objective (a) has been_performed by an all-wheel control system_(e.g., exclusive use of_the wheel_system_72 of FIGS._4A-4C)._Although the_wheels of a wheel system can be_appropriately sized_to handle LAM-induced torques, this requires_them to be larger_than_is typically needed for efficient management_of operational attitude control after orbit_injection (i.e., during the service_phase_of_the satellite's lifetime). For example,_Loebel employs control moment gyroscopes which_are powerful but_are larger, more expensive and more complex_than_fixed wheel systems.
A simple combination of_an_all-thruster system and an independent all-wheel_system_is_discouraged because corrective action of_the thruster system suppresses rotational errors._Thus, the error signals that are typically required to_generate corrective action_in an all-wheel system are_reduced._In_addition, the thruster action adds