China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Structure of the aerospace industry
Published in Wesley Spreen, The Aerospace Business, 2019
In spite of the decades that have passed since man’s earliest successes in reaching outer space, the space industry remains the exclusive domain of a limited number of major countries that have the financial resources and technological capabilities to design, manufacture, and manage the advanced equipment characteristic of the industry. Nations or international consortia that have successfully launched earth-orbiting satellites of some sort include the USSR, USA, France, Australia, China, Japan, United Kingdom, European Space Agency, Italy, India, Israel, Iran, and Iraq. Many nations not included on this list have significant involvement in space. Pakistan, for example, has designed and manufactured a series of satellites that have been launched by China because Pakistan itself does not have an indigenous launch capability. Brazil has extensively funded a space program, including development of launch rockets and a launch pad, and the country appears destined to eventually become a competitor in the space industry. As satellites decrease in size, numerous small companies and universities worldwide have produced small cubesats for specialized commercial or scientific applications.
The Changing World of Space Program and Project Management
Published in M. Ann Garrison Darrin, Patrick A. Stadter, Aerospace Project Management Handbook, 2017
The CubeSat community today relies on two sources for launch: rideshares and the International Space Station (ISS). NASA offers rides on commercial crew and resupply missions to the ISS, and a commercial firm, Nanoracks, operates what is effectively a CubeSat dispenser from the station. The advantage is economic launch, which would often constitute 80% of a mission’s cost utilizing traditional launchers. The disadvantage is the very limited range of attainable orbits. The second source of launch, sharing the ride with other users, has become the mainstay of the industry. Several rideshare “bundlers” provide listings of costs and schedules. The downside of ridesharing is, of course, being at the mercy of the primary customer’s schedule and orbit. One NewSpace company calculated that to achieve the equivalent of a Walker constellation, by launching on every available rideshare in every nearby orbit, it would take 30% more satellites than if the secondary controlled the launch. The new launch vehicle manufacturers hope to solve the restrictions of both the ISS and rideshares by offering individual launches. Selling points include the ability to put a small sat in the desired orbit and within the desired schedule. Should this prove less expensive than today’s two options, that would be an added benefit.
Humanitarian Emergencies: Causes, Traits, and Impacts as Observed by Remote Sensing
Published in Prasad S. Thenkabail, Remote Sensing Handbook, 2015
Stefan Lang, Füreder Petra, Olaf Kranz, Brittany Card, Roberts Shadrock, Papp Andreas
There is a substantial growing market of small satellites that are designed to reduce costs by minimizing mass. Several categories are distinguished: small satellites (100–500 kg), microsatellites (10–100 kg), and nanosatellites (1–10 kg). Beyond that there are picosatellites (<1 kg) and femtosatellites (10–100 g) in production. In 2013, almost 100 micro- and nanosatellites were launched. Many of them are built in the CubeSat standard format, with a volume of exactly 1 L (10 cm cube) and a mass of no more than 1.33 kg. The spatial resolution is up to 1 m with revisiting times of up to several hours. Companies like Planet Labs, Spire (formerly Nanosatisfi), Surrey Satellite Technology, Dauria Aerospace, or Skybox Imaging are planning to launch many more of their nano- and microsatellites in the upcoming years.
CubeSat project: experience gained and design methodology adopted for a low-cost Electrical Power System
Published in Automatika, 2022
Kamel Djamel Eddine Kerrouche, Abderrahmane Seddjar, Nassima Khorchef, Sidi Ahmed Bendoukha, Lina Wang, Abdelkader Aoudeche
This last decade has seen a significant development of small and nanosatellites launched and put into orbit. These nanosatellites are mostly designed, built, tested, and operated according to the CubeSat standard, which was developed in 2000 by California Polytechnic State University and Stanford University [1]. A nanosatellite with the dimensions of one, two, up to three cubes that can be built and launched is named, a single CubeSat (denoted 1U), a double CubeSat (denoted 2U), or a triple CubeSat (denoted 3U), respectively. To offer more flexible mission profiles (interplanetary missions, communication, astrochemistry, and astrobiology research with larger payload), a sextuple CubeSat (denoted 6U) up to 12U nanosatellite is nowadays being considered, while preserving the advantages offered by standardization, by varying the profile of the CubeSats deployed into orbits [2,3]. Space agencies, especially NASA, are experimenting with using CubeSats to deal with scientific problems, such as 6U nanosatellites launched in 2018 towards Mars for a telecommunications experiment [4]. CubeSats are placed in their orbits using a closed deployer, such as Poly PicoSatellite Orbital Deployer (PPOD), which can be loaded with three-1U CubeSat, one 2U and one 1U or one 3U nanosatellite. While 6U or 12U nanosatellite are generally designed for deployment from International Space Station (ISS) via NanoRacks [5]. Compared with large-scale satellites projects, CubeSats are low-cost for the launch and the hardware, with a short period of development and fast delivery [6].
Deployable lenticular stiffeners for origami-inspired mechanisms
Published in Mechanics Based Design of Structures and Machines, 2018
Alden Yellowhorse, Larry L. Howell
An example of how the principles described previously can be applied to a specific problem is the design of deployable antennas for CubeSats. This application has the need to store large deployables in severely limited spaces. Because the CubeSat is limited to a volume less than 10 × 10 × 10 cm, other needed hardware such as batteries and control equipment quickly consume available space. The antenna requirements of the CubeSat exaggerate these problems. Because of a need for CubeSat antennas to communicate at UHF frequencies, designers are under great pressure to increase antenna sizes (Costantine et al., 2016). Increasing antenna size can also be beneficial because of the relationship between effective aperture and received and transmitted power. A larger effective CubeSat aperture can reduce the needed transmission power (Blake and Long, 2009). Deployable, lenticular stiffeners would allow the antenna to be larger while still allowing it to stow in a small volume. This is demonstrated by the concept for a deployable antenna shown in Fig. 13.