nano-satellite possibilities

[Kirkwood29]

Currently my friends and I are discussing setting up a company to launch nano-satellites cheaper and quicker than previously available.

Would you launch a nano-satellite if it was cheap? For what purpose?

 

[IRstuff]

Depends on how much cheaper, and what your track record is.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[monkeydog]

Faster, Better, Cheaper - I like the concept.

 

[VEBill]

Aren't they normally (often? sometimes?) launched as ballast-equivalent on big rockets?

Are you proposing to set up a new launch system, or broker deals on existing launch systems? (Just curious.)

 

[WKTaylor]

Kirkwood29... You aren't the only one proposing this concept...

I get the 'rosy picture' of WHY micro/nano-satellites are so potentially profound: however, I just can't get over one aspect of the large numbers of micro/nano-satellites constellations that are being proposed.

Adding vast numbers of micro/nano-satellites to the debris-cloud orbiting the earth seems like a really bad idea.

https://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/

Are these micro/nano-satellites all intended for low earth orbit... and intended to be naturally or forcibly to de-orbited after a short period of operation?

Is there a way to ensure that even a satellite that fails [suddenly/totally] can be forcibly/safely de-orbited... using something like the equivalent of a 'dead-mans switch'?

Please explain this inquiry/proposal from the broader perspective of orbital debris.


Regards, Wil Taylor

o Trust - But Verify!
o We believe to be true what we prefer to be true. [Unknown]
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation,Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", Homebuiltairplanes.com forum]

 

[IRstuff]

The nano- and micro-satellites are all in very LEO, which means they are all in naturally decaying orbits, and typically will de-orbit within 3 yrs.

Most of them do not come with propulsion systems.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[WKTaylor]

RB... hmmm...

Timing a launch thru a VLEO nano-sat cloud/constellation will be fun.

I personally believe that micro/nano-sats need to have an assurance of high radar reflectivity... any/all angular aspects... and a unique radar signature to assure their tracking until destruction.

Also, I understand there are non-propulsion schemes being studied to speed-up deorbit of small/micro/nano-Sats, by substantially increasing VLEO drag, such as...

Unspooling/trailing long wire or thread.

Deploying/unfurling a micro-thin Mylar 'sail'.

NOTE. Both of these concepts can include a 'mission completion signal/switch' and a 'dead-Sat-switch' to deploy the drag-method autonomously.

Regards, Wil Taylor

o Trust - But Verify!
o We believe to be true what we prefer to be true. [Unknown]
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation,Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", Homebuiltairplanes.com forum]

 

[IRstuff]

Whilethose mechanisms are certainly possible, they could add considerably to the weight and volume of a cubesat.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[WKTaylor]

RB...

I'm not the only one thinking/concerned about the proliferation of nano/cube sats in LEO...

Could Cubesats Trigger a Space Junk Apocalypse?[/b]

http://www.space.com/36506-cubesats-space-junk-apocalypse.html

Regards, Wil Taylor

o Trust - But Verify!
o We believe to be true what we prefer to be true. [Unknown]
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation,Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", Homebuiltairplanes.com forum]

 

[WKTaylor]

More on the subject of orbital debris hazards...

Experts call for legislation and improved tracking to deal with orbital debris

http://spacenews.com/experts-call-for-legislation-and-improved-tracking-to-deal-with-orbital-debris/

Regards, Wil Taylor

o Trust - But Verify!
o We believe to be true what we prefer to be true. [Unknown]
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation,Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", Homebuiltairplanes.com forum]

 

[itsmoked]

Since Large deformable telescope guide-star technology has gotten so good they're working on using ground based telescopes and high power lasers to retard low orbiting space junk causing it to rapidly de-orbit.

Keith Cress
kcress -

http://www.flaminsystems.com

 

[WKTaylor]

KC...

This ground based laser system is attempting to 'clean-up/de-orbit junk'... not deorbit stuff that is intact and operational at the end of its mission life-cycle. That should be an absolute responsibility of satellite builders/operators.

After thinking about this for awhile...

To be useful, a system as You described would have to be extensively implemented [world-wide] to effectively cover orbital paths [various inclinations] to affect the thousands of pieces of debris already there. To be effective these laser-batteries will have to be located on high altitude sites [above WX effects] and each site will have to have very strict safety protocols for air traffic and space traffic. I presume these sites will be very active, with radar, optics and lasers shuffling-between, then tracking and shooting targets with high accuracy energy... so a reliable source of high density electrical and/or chemical energy will be required... at those remote sites.

A challenge... but doable with adequate funding. After-all Atacama desert is remote/inhospitable... and still has adequate energy for the European observatories.

The cost of this system is likely to be high! I can see where all [nano/micro/small/large] satellite operators, whether they 'rely' on this system, or not, would be required to pay a hefty obligatory 'pre-launch-fee' to have their satellites specifically targeted for positive de-orbit... or 'just-in-case' they shed debris while in mission mode... and still require some sort of optical or electronic transponder to ensure positive tracking.

Hmmm... that last criteria is likely to cause DOD/NSA some heartburn.





Regards, Wil Taylor

o Trust - But Verify!
o We believe to be true what we prefer to be true. [Unknown]
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation,Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", Homebuiltairplanes.com forum]

 

[itsmoked]

Points taken.
And, I agree everyone should be required to have de-orbiting included in new launches.

Keith Cress
kcress -

http://www.flaminsystems.com