Pocket SpaceCraft

[Ucender]

What do you think about Pocket Spacecraft ?

This project ties together space, science and fun, in a Kerbal-like spirit. They sell individual tiny spacecrafts : £99 for a suborbital flight, £199 for a moon crash.

About the equipment of each spacecraft :

a radio transceiver, storage, processor and simple instruments, bonded to a polyimide substrate, plus multiple sensors including a single pixel optical sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, temperature sensor, strain gauges and more printed and bonded to the substrate.

About transmissions :

Scout spacecraft transmit continuously at approximately one bit per second (1 bps) and the Interplanetary CubeSat Mothership is capable of communicating at 1200 bps.

you should probably assume your Earth Scout will average one bit per second and your Lunar Scout one bit per hour.

More info here : http://pocketspacecraft.com/

[Scotius]

I'm...not sure if it's a good idea to send that into space. There is not much to gain from such small platform utility- or science-wise. Wouldn't we be simply cluttering near-Earth space with more obiects to track and worry about?

[NASAFanboy]

I'm...not sure if it's a good idea to send that into space. There is not much to gain from such small platform utility- or science-wise. Wouldn't we be simply cluttering near-Earth space with more obiects to track and worry about?

I think most of them will have to get permission from governments and will be put in a "graveyard" orbit that decays after several months.

[Ucender]

Wouldn't we be simply cluttering near-Earth space with more obiects to track and worry about?

It is not a concern : "Earth scouts" are suborbital, they will land (or burn) quickly. "Lunar scouts" will be launched from unstable orbit, and will crash on the Moon. It is a short term project (~3 years).

My first thoughts :

• The project is fun

• It has many reasons to fail; do not send money there if you want to get something working. Go on if you think it is fun to try to

• The moon transmission rate is too low to make anything interesting

• The "1 pixel" optical sensor is cool

• The Earth scout has interesting transmission rate, may be contacted directly with amateur radio tools, and may be recovered!

[Aethon]

I've thought for a long time, we, as a community should launch something.. I mean c'mon! We have resources and knowledge... we stand upon the shoulders of giants!

[K^2]

If we launch something as a community, we should do a cubesat. Something with basic propulsion, at any rate. It'd still be in the $100k budget range, but it's not going to be just a piece of debris. We could definitely build something with an actual mission and an ability to send at least burst communications back to Earth.

Edit: I did some preliminary calculations. If we can get a ride to GTO with the right timing, a Moon fly-by can be done for about 670m/s. That's within caps of a cubesat with an electrothruster. Though, it might be tough to spec that on a U1, and U3 would cost $100k just for typical launch, GTO being more expensive.

But at any rate, fly-by from GTO entry can give you up to 320m/s in interplanetary. That, plus whatever's left in the tanks is enough to do a near-Earth asteroid mission. On a $100k - $200k budget!

We should all totally try and do that. I doubt we'd be able to collect all of that from community, but something like 10% is definitely doable. Maybe we can get Squad to pitch in another 10-20%. The rest can come from various education grants (we can get some HS/Undergrad students helping out) and maybe some private companies would be willing to help out. (Heck, if we get enough interest, maybe we can get a free GTO ride out of some tele-com company.)

Anyone has interesting targets in mind? On the 300-500m/s we'd get in interplanetary, we can't move far from Earth, so it'd have to be something that passes very close. And the slower it passes near Earth, the better. It would allow for closer approach and better opportunities for pictures. (Landing is probably out of the question, and I wouldn't want to crash into the rock, because we'll need time to burst data back to Earth.)

Edited July 14, 2014 by K^2

[Aethon]

Yeah, cubesat was my first idea. I think NASA will launch it for free.

http://www.nasa.gov/press/2013/november/nasa-helps-launch-student-built-satellites-as-part-of-cubesat-launch-initiative/#.U8MdF_ldUTo

[K^2]

Yeah, a LEO cubesat would also be kind of neat. But it's not terribly exciting in terms of the results. NASA would do all the work for you, basically. We wouldn't be able to get it far from LEO, and in LEO, all you can do is take pictures which anyone on ISS can do without effort. So it's hardly a rocketry mission.

Look at the edit I added above on what can be done with a GTO launch. Budget is going to be higher, but this would be a proper KSP-style challenge.

I know I can design the nav and control portion. If we can get some people who know their space-hardened electronics and a bit more about tele-com than I do, it'd be just a matter of buying the right parts and writing the right code. Totally doable.

Edited July 14, 2014 by K^2

[Aethon]

And the headline reads: Kerbal Space Program put's it's money where it's mouth is.

We could come up with some novel mission objectives. Images. Jettison part of the craft, and do an orbital rendezvous, debris deorbit demmo. Any one of a million things.

[Aethon]

Maybe we can get Squad to pitch in another 10-20%. The rest can come from various education grants (we can get some HS/Undergrad students helping out) and maybe some private companies would be willing to help out. (Heck, if we get enough interest, maybe we can get a free GTO ride out of some tele-com company.)

My thoughts exactly. Those poor people at Squad. Started out as a marketing firm, talked into making a video game, now the guys want to launch an actual freakin' space ship?!?

edit-I think you might find the KSP community is not as destitute as you may believe.

What say the rest of ye?

Edited July 14, 2014 by Aethon

[K^2]

I don't think we can do a deorbit demo. We wouldn't be able to find anything small enough for a cubesat to deorbit quietly, and anything else would produce too much debris.

But yeah, if you can come up with a good LEO mission, I'm all for it. Navs in LEO are very easy. We can get an unlocked GPS for primary navs. Couple that with some optical gyros and a camera to take pictures of the stars to reference against the charts, and you can have position tracking good enough to put you within a few hundred meters of any target.

And since an LEO cube sat has short life time, we don't have to worry about expensive components, either. The whole thing can be done on a few $k budget, plus the launch. If you think we can qualify for a free launch with NASA, then that's all we have to worry about.

Like I said before, there are definitely a few areas where I don't have enough knowledge to build something with sufficient reliability, but if you can get me mission parameters, I can probably do a cost estimate on the components, at least.

Edit: For LEO mission, we definitely want to fit in U1, so I can't promise more than 200m/s delta-V. That means, no inclination changes. Any mission has to be very close to the plane of the launch. It is enough dV to raise/lower orbit to catch up with something that's already in the same plane.

Edited July 14, 2014 by K^2

[Aethon]

Hey the further out the better. I've also recently seen double cubesats. 6'x3' that fit the standard launch tube. Fill that thing fulla dv for all I care. Cram some instruments on. IS THERE AN ENGINEER IN THE HOUSE?? Mission ideas are endless. The sat could have many objectives.. heck fire radio pulses at the Lagrange points. See if we can activate a Bracewell probe. (lol) http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~sverre/LDE/

I'm up for anything.

edit- yeah K^2. Size typo. http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/home/CubeSats_initiative.html#.U8MtevldUTo

Edited July 14, 2014 by Aethon

[Whirligig Girl]

I wonder if we're serious about this. It would be so amazing to have the KSP Community come together and put a thing IN SPACE. I vote we put it in a Geosyncronous Transfer Orbit. I also want to see how an Estes model rocket engine would fire in space. Hook a C6-P motor and igniter to the electical system, and use it to raise the orbit at Apogee.

Edited July 14, 2014 by GregroxMun

[K^2]

You mean 6"x3"? Because 6'x3' is no cubesat. But yeah. These are the 1U, 2U, and 3U. The 1U is a standard cube. But you can have one with double or triple length. Based on electrostat thrusters available on the market, if you want a lot of dV, you have to go with 3U. On a 1U, the weight of a typical thruster + panels just doesn't leave much room for propellant. Still, sacrificing thrust and efficiency, we could maneuver 1U a bit.

Problem with going 2U/3U is that the price scales with the size. You can get 1U into space for about $30k. A 3U is closer to $100k. And I don't know if NASA would launch a 2U/3U for free. So ideally, we should come up with a mission we can pull with a 1U.

I'm all for leaving room to expand the mission, however. The minimal requirement should be getting a 1U into space, taking pictures, and beaming them to Earth. From there, we can scale up. Ultimate goal being an interplanetary space mission, for which a 2U/3U + GTO ride is a minimal requirement. Not to mention much better navs and coms. On the plus side, Lunar fly-by is pretty hard to miss. So even a failure would range from being lost to interplanetary on the wrong escape trajectory or lithobraking into the Moon. Which is pretty spectacular either way.

Edit: Yeah, GregroxMun, fairly serious. If we can find the funds and a launch opportunity, it's something we can actually do. Maybe not the interplanetary space mission, but a LEO one for sure.

[Whirligig Girl]

I really want to see an Estes motor in space. It'd be way more Kerbal, and it's not like we'd need to raise the orbit by much. Electrostat thrusters would add a very large amount to the cost. I think if the computer and guidance system is small enough, we could fit a C6-P motor inside the CubeSat 1U. Also, the outside has to have the Kerbal Space Program logo on it.

[Whirligig Girl]

Really this would be a user-made publicity stunt, so we don't have to go interplanetary. If we do, then at least a 2U sat with an electrostatic prop system would be necessary. going to Venus would be easiest, as it'd require much less Delta-V than going to Mars or further. The Moon would be the easiest extraterrestrial site to visit, and could probably use a 1U Sat if we pack things most efficiently.

Really, GTO is a noble goal for a relatively small community like KSP.

- - - Updated - - -

I suggest we move this discussion to another thread.

[K^2]

There is terrible lack of precision control. I mean, if we end up with no decent mission profile that requires precision, we can just go for broke and fire up a solid booster. Might as well be an Estes motor. (Especially if they contribute to the costs.)

But if we need precise placement of delta-V, there is really no substitute for an electrostat. And they are expensive, but not that expensive. When I was looking for something to get me close to 1km/s on a 3U, just for an estimate, I've found some for under $10k. If all we need is some 1U maneuvering, we can probably find something or even have it custom built for a couple of $k. That's not even the largest expense. We'd have to spend more on space-hardened electronics for nav and control, as well as power. We can't budget for less than $5k - $10k range + launch.

going to Venus

That's almost out of the question. I can find a way to put a cubesat into interplanetary space, but not with enough delta-V left over for an interplanetary transfer. There is just no way to get enough propellant in the volume/weight that can be brought along.

On the other hand, if we could do Venus/Mars fly-by, then there is no reason to stop there. If you can get just one fly-by, you can go anywhere in the Solar System. I'll do the math, but I don't think it can be done.

Edited July 14, 2014 by K^2

[Whirligig Girl]

How about a small container filled with a diet soft drink, and another container filled with a mint candy. To begin thrust, simply put them together.

An Electrostat thruster for 3U would increase the price by about a third. We'd definitely need some serious Kickstart to get this done.

[Moss]

Definitely will support. K^2, do you want to make a Kickstarter page? You seem to be the most knowledgable about these things.

[Whirligig Girl]

We have to make sure it's well known that this is a Kerbal Community project, and hope that it gets endorsed by Squad.

[Whirligig Girl]

We have to make sure it's well known that this is a Kerbal Community project, and hope that it gets endorsed by Squad.

There's about 1.5k forumers on the KSP forum at any one time, so if everyone contributed 10 dollars we'd get somewhere around 10k to 20k. I'll be contributing my fair share.

[Aethon]

I think we need some more clearly defined objectives before we start a kickstart. We're not in any hurry. We wanna try to look like we know what we're doing.

I'd be in for a heck of a lot more than $10.

[K^2]

Definitely will support. K^2, do you want to make a Kickstarter page? You seem to be the most knowledgable about these things.

I want to get some more ideas, run some more numbers, and put up a page here first.

We still need a basic mission. Something we can definitely get done. Preferably something interesting and Kerbalish. But as I've pointed out, our baseline mission would have minimal delta-V, an ok camera, and ability to send a picture via series of bursts every once in a while. The two most likely rides we'd be able to catch are either GTO or ISS mission. Based on that, is there anything more interesting we can do than just shoot a few pictures of Earth?

If we do manage a 3U + GTO, I can come up with things to do. And I might be able to get us proper telemetry. There are some radio-astronomy education projects we could tap to get a radio telescope for tracking. But that's a huge stretch goal. Basic mission is still needed.

[Moss]

Sounds fantastic. I'm excited!

Edited July 14, 2014 by Moss
Ninja'd

[Rakaydos]

Didnt the Rosetta probe use an interplanetary launch followed by a solar-orbit earth flyby to increase it's D/V?

Possible mission (low funding) send the sat to LEO and fire an esties engine, and have a transmitter to track the results.

Possible missions (High funding)

Moon flyby!

Slingshot chain! how far can we go with (X) D/V

save ICEE 3!

"plant" the Kerbal flag in the L2 lagrange halo orbit.

lithobreak a kerbal flag into the moon.