New satellies / Shuttle question
Hi Edward / group.
Most current construction or feasility study is centered on P3E / Eagle / Intelsat /HEO where launch opportunities are rare and costs are high.
Perhaps we should look at this problem from another viewpoint. Start with what launch opportunities AMSAT can afford and then retake the technology initative and investigate what minaturised payloads can we launch for that price?
For example. Imagine a 2 or 3U cubesat type structure, or even one half the size of AO-51 on last weeks Russian launch to 1500km. With payloads reduced to transponders and a basic onboard computer and an Electrical Power System, it would be feasable to put RF comms equipment into a decent orbit on 29MHz 145MHz 435MHz with an RX on 1269. For bands higher than 13cm doppler is a problem and path loss is quite high. It may not be possible to provide the necessary DC power for transmitters in a small structure.
Talking of DC power, the number of cubesats that fail due to power problems is huge. The answer is to get inventive with deployable solar arrays. With the engineering excellence AMSAT possesses it should not be impossible to arrange a structure where the entire outer layer contains extra solar cells that are deployed after seperation from the launcher. Imagine a 3U cube which in orbit becomes a 3U box of electronics covered in cells, with an extended outer 3U shell that deploys forming a 6U structure producing nearly double the DC power. The 6U structure also makes antenna design easier
For a slightly more risky idea.....small satellite propulsion. Again, perhaps 3U cube, with the last section comprising a small motor. A single burn unit could provide a really nice elliptical LEO orbit, perhaps 680km to 2000km. Wouldn't that be interesting. I notice that there is an Austrian university team who have developed a cubesat sized ion propulsion system asking if anyone would like to try it. So, while this may initially seem a 'wild idea' it is based on technology that is very nearly a reality.
Worth investigating?
David G0MRF
In a message dated 30/05/2008 23:22:37 GMT Standard Time, vk3jed@gmail.com writes:
At 12:15 AM 5/31/2008, Edward Cole wrote:
Once you total the costs it may actually be cheaper to build a new satellite and launch it! Back the effort for P3E and Eagle/P4.
That too, yes, a new bird would be the easiest approach indeed. Still, as I said, it was interesting contemplating how such a recovery might be achieved with today's technology. :)
73 de VK3JED
Hello David,
A very sound suggestion.with which I agree 200%.
It appears that Eagle is languishing in inactivity and Intelsat needs multi-millions which I don't see in the coffers for some time, if ever.. Pardon my pessimism, but I don't see AMSAT-NA launching a satellite, using the current game plan, for at least 5 years, if then.
Your approach puts the "horse before the cart" so to speak and offers the best chance of launching an new satellite within 2 years, if that is what the satellite user folks want, and I sense they do.
Speaking of the (this time) "cart before the horse", AMSAT-NA has now starting an ACP ground station initiative without knowing what the satellite looks like it will have to work with.
I see your suggestion as positive and constructive and not one to be construed as negative and counter productive and thanks for putting it forward. I wonder what the rest of the reflector readers think?
Regards...Bill - N6GHz
G0MRF@aol.com wrote:
Hi Edward / group.
Most current construction or feasility study is centered on P3E / Eagle / Intelsat /HEO where launch opportunities are rare and costs are high.
Perhaps we should look at this problem from another viewpoint. Start with what launch opportunities AMSAT can afford and then retake the technology initative and investigate what minaturised payloads can we launch for that price?
For example. Imagine a 2 or 3U cubesat type structure, or even one half the size of AO-51 on last weeks Russian launch to 1500km. With payloads reduced to transponders and a basic onboard computer and an Electrical Power System, it would be feasable to put RF comms equipment into a decent orbit on 29MHz 145MHz 435MHz with an RX on 1269. For bands higher than 13cm doppler is a problem and path loss is quite high. It may not be possible to provide the necessary DC power for transmitters in a small structure.
Talking of DC power, the number of cubesats that fail due to power problems is huge. The answer is to get inventive with deployable solar arrays. With the engineering excellence AMSAT possesses it should not be impossible to arrange a structure where the entire outer layer contains extra solar cells that are deployed after seperation from the launcher. Imagine a 3U cube which in orbit becomes a 3U box of electronics covered in cells, with an extended outer 3U shell that deploys forming a 6U structure producing nearly double the DC power. The 6U structure also makes antenna design easier
For a slightly more risky idea.....small satellite propulsion. Again, perhaps 3U cube, with the last section comprising a small motor. A single burn unit could provide a really nice elliptical LEO orbit, perhaps 680km to 2000km. Wouldn't that be interesting. I notice that there is an Austrian university team who have developed a cubesat sized ion propulsion system asking if anyone would like to try it. So, while this may initially seem a 'wild idea' it is based on technology that is very nearly a reality.
Worth investigating?
David G0MRF
In a message dated 30/05/2008 23:22:37 GMT Standard Time, vk3jed@gmail.com writes:
At 12:15 AM 5/31/2008, Edward Cole wrote:
Once you total the costs it may actually be cheaper to build a new satellite and launch it! Back the effort for P3E and Eagle/P4.
That too, yes, a new bird would be the easiest approach indeed. Still, as I said, it was interesting contemplating how such a recovery might be achieved with today's technology. :)
73 de VK3JED
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 5:40 AM, G0MRF@aol.com wrote:
Hi Edward / group.
Most current construction or feasility study is centered on P3E / Eagle / Intelsat /HEO where launch opportunities are rare and costs are high.
Perhaps we should look at this problem from another viewpoint. Start with what launch opportunities AMSAT can afford and then retake the technology initative and investigate what minaturised payloads can we launch for that price?
For example. Imagine a 2 or 3U cubesat type structure, or even one half the size of AO-51 on last weeks Russian launch to 1500km. With payloads reduced to transponders and a basic onboard computer and an Electrical Power System, it would be feasable to put RF comms equipment into a decent orbit on 29MHz 145MHz 435MHz with an RX on 1269. For bands higher than 13cm doppler is a problem and path loss is quite high. It may not be possible to provide the necessary DC power for transmitters in a small structure.
David:
I asked the same question at the end of a thread decrying the lack of HEO satellites, hoping to start a conversation on the topic. Let's have one here. The best of this group is when we bat around ideas such as this.
First, very soon we will have a great basis for future discussion in Delfi C3. Already, though, it shows that a 3x cube can hold transponder and deploy enough solar for a good transponder U/V (judging by its fantastic downlink now). Could we replace the science on board D C3 with a battery of chargeable cells and still stay within the cubesat weight requirements? Or, even more radically, can we do without batteries, given how we can live with AO-7 and D C3?
My guess is that deploying a 29MHz antenna could be hard with that limited space. But it would represent a fascinating challenge.
Perhaps the hardest part would be finding a ride to high LEO without propulsion. My sense is that Cubesats work economically because there are lots of them. Won't university groups interested in remote sensing see this as something worse than what they have with low LEO, for a greater cost? Maybe we could get a bunch of projects interested in high LEO together for one launch. Or, perhaps we could help one of the national groups that still have access to their countries' launch facilities, such as Japan or India or China. These might include a p-pod or two in a high LEO launch as a charitable act: much cheaper than a micro-sat.
Talking of DC power, the number of cubesats that fail due to power problems is huge. The answer is to get inventive with deployable solar arrays. With the engineering excellence AMSAT possesses it should not be impossible to arrange a structure where the entire outer layer contains extra solar cells that are deployed after seperation from the launcher. Imagine a 3U cube which in orbit becomes a 3U box of electronics covered in cells, with an extended outer 3U shell that deploys forming a 6U structure producing nearly double the DC power. The 6U structure also makes antenna design easier
A neat idea. What about film solar panels that would be unfurled once in orbit? I think these probably have such a lower efficiency that they wouldn't be worth the extra area they might cover. In any case, Delfi C3 gives a pretty great worst-case scenario.
For a slightly more risky idea.....small satellite propulsion. Again, perhaps 3U cube, with the last section comprising a small motor. A single burn unit could provide a really nice elliptical LEO orbit, perhaps 680km to 2000km. Wouldn't that be interesting. I notice that there is an Austrian university team who have developed a cubesat sized ion propulsion system asking if anyone would like to try it. So, while this may initially seem a 'wild idea' it is based on technology that is very nearly a reality.
Regarding the ion propulsion, what if we were willing to wait a year or two before use, so that all solar energy went into boosting the orbit for that time?
And then there's the transponder. How efficient could a SDX be? William, PE1RAH, is working on cubesat format UV transponders, I think.
Worth investigating?
I really think we should look into S-band downlink, too. The stats on s-band in HEO might be scary, but I think in LEO it would still be high enough signal to be great fun. And we'd be colonizing an important band.
David G0MRF
In a message dated 30/05/2008 23:22:37 GMT Standard Time, vk3jed@gmail.com writes:
At 12:15 AM 5/31/2008, Edward Cole wrote:
Once you total the costs it may actually be cheaper to build a new satellite and launch it! Back the effort for P3E and Eagle/P4.
That too, yes, a new bird would be the easiest approach indeed. Still, as I said, it was interesting contemplating how such a recovery might be achieved with today's technology. :)
73 de VK3JED
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
participants (3)
-
Bill Ress
-
Bruce Robertson
-
G0MRF@aol.com