PDA

View Full Version : Nanosats are go, purchase yours today



Horn
25th July 2014, 08:10 AM
ALTHOUGH widely used, satellites are expensive to build and to launch. That began to change last year. On November 19th Orbital Sciences, an American company, launched a rocket from the Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. It carried 29 satellites aloft and released them into low-Earth orbit, a record for a single mission. Thirty hours later, Kosmotras, a Russian joint-venture, carried 32 satellites into a similar orbit. Then, in January 2014, Orbital Sciences carried 33 satellites up to the International Space Station (ISS), where they were cast off a month later.

Many of these 94 satellites were built in a standard format known as a CubeSat, a 10cm (4 inch) cube weighing 1.3kg (2.9lb) or less. Some comprised units of two or three cubes. After a decade of fits and starts, during which some 75 CubeSats were launched, satellites of this scale and other small satellites are moving from being experimental kit to delivering useful scientific data and commercial services.

In the next five years or so some 1,000 nanosats, as small satellites of 1-10kg are called, are expected to be launched. Some will be smaller than a CubeSat; others bigger and heavier. Some are like a matryoshka doll: the Russian launch included a satellite that launched eight smaller ones, including four PocketQubes (a 5cm cube format). One of these smaller satellites, developed in Peru, released its own tiny bird.

There will be upsets along the way. In April, as part of a mission by SpaceX, an American company, to resupply the ISS, a small mothership was placed in orbit carrying 104 “sprites” (pictured below). Not much larger than a postage stamp, these contain all the basic elements of a satellite, such as a radio, aerials, a solar cell and instruments. Developed as part of a crowd-funded project called KickSat at Cornell University, each sprite cost just $25 in parts. Their launch was free, courtesy of NASA, the American space agency. The sprites were designed to remain in orbit for a few weeks collecting data before burning up on re-entry. Unfortunately, due to a fault with a timer, the mothership failed to release them before it burned up on re-entry. A second mission is now being planned.


No going back
Despite that setback, the way ahead for satellite technology is clear. “You can now, with a single chip, create most of the capabilities that you would have found in Sputnik, but, of course, orders of magnitude faster,” says Mason Peck, a former chief technologist at NASA and now a professor at Cornell University.
The most ambitious project to date is a flock of 28 nanosats, each one three CubeSats in size (ie, 30cm long). These were carried to the ISS in January and released in batches (pictured at the beginning of this article) through a sort of satellite shooter developed by NanoRacks, an American company. These nanosats came from Planet Labs, a firm based in San Francisco. The satellites now take pictures as they scan the Earth more frequently than traditional ones and at a fraction of the cost, albeit at a lower resolution.

Planet Labs, funded modestly with $65m of private investment, says its nanosats provide much of the performance of a conventional satellite for a fraction of the cost. That reflects a lot of antiquated technology in the space business, much of which can be bettered by the latest off-the-shelf equipment, says Will Marshall, Planet Labs’ boss. There are other cost-saving measures. Satellites are usually built in elaborate clean rooms, but Planet Labs assembles its nanosats in “clean-enough” rooms in its downtown offices. The company expects to put another 100 nanosats into orbit in the next 12 to 18 months.
A few miles away, in another modest San Francisco office, Nanosatisfi is working on its ArduSats. These are open-source platforms and two have already gone up. They will contain an array of sensors and can carry out various missions, such as locating things. More than 250,000 ships, for instance, now broadcast an automatic identification signal than carries about 50 nautical miles. A fleet of small satellites in low orbit could pick up these signals and provide frequent updates about the ships’ positions without the vessels having to use costly dedicated satellite uplinks. Such a system might have been able to track Malaysian Airlines flight MH370, which went missing in March.

Farther south in Mountain View, Skybox captures high-resolution imaging data from its first satellite in orbit as it prepares another 23 to launch in the coming years. Some things, though, can be shrunk only so far and larger satellites are needed for a telescope to obtain the higher resolutions required for the firm’s analysis. While Skybox’s minisatellites weigh around 100kg, a fairly common size for small satellites, the firm proved its concept to investors using CubeSats. “Being able to put something in space at very low cost allows you to demonstrate the technology to get more money,” says Dan Berkenstock, one of the company’s founders.

The CubeSat specification came out of the academic world in the late 1990s. Bob Twiggs, then at Stanford University and now at Morehead State University, was frustrated by long delays on a large-satellite programme and set about thinking how much satellite capability might be crammed into a much smaller craft that could be launched cheaply. Space launches usually comprise one or more primary payloads and require ballast to balance the rocket. CubeSats, reasoned Mr Twiggs, could take the place of some of this ballast, so long as they did not jeopardise the main mission. The optimum size Mr Twiggs came up with was based on a box used to display Beanie Babies. Later, with Jordi Puig-Suari of California Polytechnic State University, it was turned into a full specification. Mr Twiggs also developed the 5cm PocketQube, which has a maximum weight of 180 grammes.

Smartphones and other consumer electronics provide a wealth of ready-made technologies
Small satellites benefit from the constant improvements in price and performance being achieved by the consumer-electronics industry, particularly in smartphones. A typical phone is now likely to contain an accelerometer to measure how fast it is moving, a magnetometer to detect magnetic fields and provide a compass reading, a GPS receiver to pick up satellite data, multiple radios, a gyroscope to measure its position, a barometer to detect pressure, two cameras and much more. (at the link)

6601

http://www.economist.com/news/technology-quarterly/21603240-small-satellites-taking-advantage-smartphones-and-other-consumer-technologies

Horn
3rd October 2014, 04:03 PM
Where Nanosats Will Boldly Go, Business Will Follow


Around 1,000 operational satellites are circling the Earth, some of them the size and weight of a large car. In the past year they have been joined by junior offspring: 100 or so small satellites, some of them made up of one or more 10cm (4-inch) cubes.

They may be tiny, but each is vastly more capable than Sputnik, the first man-made satellite launched by Russia in 1957. And many more are coming.
Space hardware used to cost so much that it was available only to generals, multinationals and the most privileged scientists. No more. Many of these nanosats, as small satellites weighing no more than a few kilograms are called, have been launched for small companies, startups and university departments, sometimes with finance raised on crowdfunding websites.Their construction costs can be down in the tens of thousands of dollars, which makes them thousands of times cheaper than today's big satellites.

Admittedly, there is much they cannot do, but with that sort of price differential, and some ingenious use of the abilities they do have, they could be surprisingly competitive players on a number of fronts. In the next five years another 1,000 nanosats are expected to be launched (see Technology Quarterly).

Two trends are setting up nanosats for further success. Like people working on everything from robots to 3D printers, nanosat builders are harvesting the benefits of ever better, ever cheaper components built for smartphones and other consumer electronics.

Some nanosats even contain complete smartphones, making use of the clever operating systems, radios and cameras which phones now contain. For as long as phones go on getting cheaper and more capable, so will nanosats. The cheapest so far--a tiny chipsat--was assembled for just $25, though it has yet to be successfully launched.

The launch systems too are getting much cheaper. SpaceX, the innovative rocket-maker founded by Elon Musk, has already brought down the costs of getting into space; it and its competitors could reduce them a lot further. The biggest beneficiaries will at first be people who make big satellites. But more big satellites will mean more opportunities for small satellites to piggy-back on their launches.

And some companies are looking at cheap little launch systems tailored specifically to the needs of the nanosatellite. One reason space engineers are notoriously conservative is that the costs of failure are high. As making and launching satellites gets cheaper, it will be ever easier for innovative, risk-taking nanosat-makers to orbit around the lumbering incumbents.

Size does impose limits. Nanosats cannot peer as closely at the Earth or carry out as many experiments as big satellites. But for some jobs that does not matter. The plans that companies already have include using nanosats for monitoring crops, studying the sun and tracking ships and aircraft. Such a system might have been able to track Malaysian Airlines flight MH370, which went missing in March.

Nano can do

Yet not everyone is thrilled. One worry is that constellations of nanosats will mean a big increase in space junk; but, operating in low-Earth orbit, they burn up on re-entry after a year or so. And being cheap, they can soon be replaced with newer models. A more serious concern is that they are a "dual-use" technology: they could be used for military purposes. In America this has led to onerous restrictions.

Barack Obama's administration has sensibly repealed a law of 1999 that required all satellites to be licensed by the State Department as munitions under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). This could mean that most commercial satellites will be removed from ITAR by the end of the year and their export administered by the Commerce Department. But some satellite systems and spacecraft--including anything that can carry people into space--will remain under ITAR.

Care needs to be taken with military kit, but America's regulations still seem excessive. A regular review to distinguish between systems that pose a real threat and ones that don't would be a help, as would better intelligence. Tight restrictions on new technologies will not work, and will damage America's interests: exciting new ventures like nanosats will simply move to countries from which they can be launched with greater ease.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/where-nanosats-will-boldly-go-business-will-follow-2014-6#ixzz3F7cgydyn

crimethink
3rd October 2014, 07:02 PM
More space junk to cause a Kessler Syndrome!

Ponce
3rd October 2014, 08:17 PM
I say..........those nanos don't have to reach all the way down to Earth...covering space in a blanket of nanos all that they have to do is to relay their signals to each other till they reach the mother board in the main satellite which would send the signal to Earth. Or at least ten nanos would work in conjunction as one making the signal stronger the same way that 4 AAA battery works in a flashlight.

V

Carl
3rd October 2014, 08:45 PM
More space junk to cause a Kessler Syndrome!

Kessler Syndrome (http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/space-debris/kessler-syndrome/)


http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/kessler-syndrome-e1410767190583.jpg

Horn
3rd October 2014, 10:00 PM
One worry is that constellations of nanosats will mean a big increase in space junk; but, operating in low-Earth orbit, they burn up on re-entry after a year or so.

Sounds like a steady business of fly then burn, maybe the could tie a tank of compressed acid on them to burn'em up faster.

They sound to result in less space junk then the larger more complex older satellites,,,

crimethink
3rd October 2014, 10:48 PM
Sounds like a steady business of fly then burn, maybe the could tie a tank of compressed acid on them to burn'em up faster.

They sound to result in less space junk then the larger more complex older satellites,,,

So goes the plan...and we know how plans often work out. :)

Since these are so tiny, they'll be subject to much earlier failure and difficulty in tracking...and undoubtedly, a bunch of them will spin off into undesired orbits upwards rather than downwards to re-entry.

Dogman
3rd October 2014, 11:19 PM
So goes the plan...and we know how plans often work out. :)

Since these are so tiny, they'll be subject to much earlier failure and difficulty in tracking...and undoubtedly, a bunch of them will spin off into undesired orbits upwards rather than downwards to re-entry.

Depends on orbital speed, faster=higher!

Unless they have engine's to speed them up, the only thing is to slow down if in low orbit because of drag, (atmospheric) which is thin but extends higher than most think!

The lower the orbit, the quicker they will fall and burn.