1. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Coordinate systems for the three-degree-of-freedom motion of a spacecraft inside a planet's atmosphere. Adapted from Ref. [12].

2. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of classical Yaroshevskii's, new analytical, and numerical solutions of Yaroshevskii's equation: (a) initial conditions in Eq. (94) and (b) initial conditions in Eq. (95)

3. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of percentage relative errors of the classical Yaroshevskii's and the new analytical solutions: (a) initial conditions in Eq. (94) and (b) initial conditions in Eq. (95)

4. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical and numerical altitude solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

5. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of relative error of analytical altitude solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

6. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical and numerical flight path angle solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

7. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of relative error of analytical flight path angle solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg (b) γ0=−70 deg

8. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical, classical Yaroshevskii's, and numerical altitude solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg (b) γ0=−70 deg

9. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of percentage relative errors of the altitude solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg (b) γ0=−70 deg

10. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of percentage relative errors of the altitude solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

11. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of percentage relative errors of the flight path angle solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

12. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical, classical Yaroshevskii's, and numerical deceleration solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

13. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical, classical Yaroshevskii's, and numerical stagnation-point heat rate solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

14. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical, classical Yaroshevskii's, and numerical stagnation-point heat rate solutions: (a) γ0=−10 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

15. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical, classical Allen–Eggers, and numerical altitude solutions: (a) γ0=−5 deg (b) γ0=−70 deg

16. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of percentage relative errors of the altitude solutions: (a) γ0=−5 deg (b) γ0=−70 deg

17. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical, classical Allen–Eggers, and numerical flight path angle solutions: (a) γ0=−5 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

18. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of percentage relative errors of the flight path angle solutions: (a) γ0=−5 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg

19. Date of download: 11/2/2017
Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
From: Improved Perturbative Solution of Yaroshevskii's Planetary Entry Equation
J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 2016;11(5): doi: /
Figure Legend:
Comparison of analytical, classical Allen–Eggers, and numerical deceleration solutions: (a) γ0=−5 deg and (b) γ0=−70 deg