## 3 Results
### Analysis for a Variable Weight of the Satellite  
The analysis was conducted for several different assumptions. The first one states that the fuel weight is constant, and it is 0.5 kg. The weight of the satellite, however, takes different values. Depending on the quality of the telescope, in may range from 8 to 18 kg (satellite classes: nano and nano+). Table 7 presents the results of the analysis regarding the influence of sensor-related satellite parameters, particularly those associated with satellite mass, on the overflight time above Kampinos National Park. The parameters include the initial and final mass of the satellite, specific impulse, and effective exhaust velocity, which together determine the \(\Delta\
u\) and the impulse duration required for the manoeuvre. The objective of the conducted analysis was to examine the impact of satellite mass, indirectly reflected by the swath width of the onboard sensor, on the overpass time above Kampinos National Park. The results indicate that as the satellite mass increases, the overpass time over the analysed area also extends. This effect does not result directly from the satellite's mass but from the assumption that heavier satellites are capable of carrying more advanced sensors with wider swath widths. Such sensors enable longer imaging times for a given area, which translates into an extended observation time. The results of analyses performed using STK 12.7.1 (Systems Tool Kit) software for a low circular Earth orbit (altitude: 482 km, inclination: 97\({}^{\circ}\)) are close to the values calculated analytically, confirming the correctness of the adopted assumptions and equations describing the satellite's overpass time over the area of interest. This is illustrated in Figure 5, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline
**Parameter** & **Symbol** & **Value** & **Unit** \\ \hline Power consumption in the stable state (1000 RPM) & P & 0.45 & [W] \\ Charging power of the solar panels & PI & 70 & [W] \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: _Cont._ \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline
**Initial** & **End Weight** & **Specific** & **Effective** & **Increase in** & **Impulse** & **Swath** & **Duration of the** \\
**Weight of** & **of the** & **Membulse** & **Exhaust Velocity** & **Av [\(\frac{m}{s}\)]** & **Impulse** & **Swath** & **Satellite’s Flight** \\
**the Satellite** & **Satellite m\({}_{\text{k}}\)** & **1g [s]** & **1g [s]** & **Av [\(\frac{m}{s}\)]** & **Av [\(\frac{m}{s}\)]** & **Duration** & **Width** & **Membulse** \\
**m\({}_{\text{p}}\)** [kg]** & **1g [kg]** & **1g [s]** & **1g [s]** & **Av [\(\frac{m}{s}\)]** & **Av [\(\frac{m}{s}\)]** & **Av [\(\frac{m}{s}\)]** & **Av [\(\frac{m}{s}\)]** \\ \hline
8 & 7.5 & 180 & 1528.20 & 98.63 & 764.10 & 15.0 & 2.44 \\
9 & 8.5 & 190 & 1613.10 & 92.20 & 806.55 & 16.0 & 2.61 \\
10 & 9.5 & 200 & 1698.00 & 87.10 & 849.00 & 17.0 & 2.77 \\
11 & 10.5 & 210 & 1782.90 & 82.94 & 891.45 & 17.5 & 2.85 \\
12 & 11.5 & 215 & 1825.35 & 77.69 & 912.67 & 18.0 & 2.93 \\
13 & 12.5 & 220 & 1867.80 & 73.26 & 933.90 & 18.5 & 3.01 \\
14 & 13.5 & 225 & 1910.25 & 69.47 & 955.13 & 19.0 & 3.10 \\
15 & 14.5 & 230 & 1952.70 & 66.20 & 976.35 & 19.4 & 3.16 \\
16 & 15.5 & 235 & 1995.15 & 63.34 & 997.58 & 19.8 & 3.23 \\
17 & 16.5 & 240 & 2037.60 & 60.83 & 1018.80 & 20.2 & 3.29 \\
18 & 17.5 & 250 & 2122.50 & 59.79 & 1061.25 & 21.0 & 3.42 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Presentation of the analysis results on the impact of sensor parameters (related to the satellite’s mass) on the overflight time above Kampinos National Park. which presents a visualisation of the satellite's observation swath during a single pass over Kampinos National Park. For instance, for a satellite with a mass of 13 kg and a sensor swath width of 18.5 km, the analytically calculated overpass time was 3.01 s, while the STK 12.7.1 simulation indicated 2.65 s (total coverage: 13.26 s).