Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

European Students to Put Microsatellite Into Orbit

Posted by samzenpus on from the easy-school-project dept.

Astervitude writes "A Frankenstein's microsatellite made out of parts "donated" by university students across Europe will be launched on September 30 atop a Russian booster. Space.com reports that more than 400 students "spread across 23 universities and 12 countries" spent 18 months designing and building the SSETI Express. While its acronym sounds suspiciously similar to that of a project that seeks to uncover signs of intelligent life beyond Earth, the SSETI or Student Space Exploration Technology Initiative mission is actually part of an effort by the European Space Agency "to boost student interest in space technology and offer some hands-on experience." The satellite itself weighs a mere 136 pounds and is the "size of a small washing machine", as shown in this ESA photo. Visitors to the mission site may want to check out the contest page for ham radio operators to help collect data from the satellite."

117 comments

  1. More information by Savantissimo · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the SSETI Express page:

    Payload systems:

    The Attitude Control and Determination System controls the attitude of the spacecraft using a pair of magnetorquers and a passive magnet and determines the attitude of the spacecraft using a magnetometer and a pair of sun-sensors.

    The camera uses CMOS technology and is capable of taking full colour pictures in the visual range at a ground resolution of about 100m per pixel, with an image size of 1280x1024 pixels. It will be used to take images of the Earth.

    The S-Band unit is the secondary communications system. It contains a microwave transmitter and TNC and is capable of 38400bps data downlink, or transponding audio from UHF via three patch antennas (S-Band ANT), acting as a voice repeater for radio amateurs.

    T-PODS - These three pods contain the three Cubesat passengers during the launch and coasting phases. After injection they will act as launcher tubes, ejecting the Cubesats from SSETI Express so that they can pursue their own missions.

    SSETI Express will carry three small nano-satellites into orbit as passengers. These will be ejected from SSETI Express shortly after the launch, and will then undergo their own, separate, missions.
    The three cubesats are:

    NCUBE-2 -Developed by the Andøya Rocket Range, Norway. This Cubesat will track boats around the Norwegian coastline (and one reindeer on land).
    [I, for one, welcome our new reindeer-tracking overlords!]

    UWE-1 - Developed by the University of Würzburg, Germany. This Cubesat will test new communications protocols.

    XI-V Developed by the University of Tokyo, Japan. This Cubesat will test commercial off-the-shelf technology and has a camera to take pictures of the Earth.

    SSETI Express has two 'radios' on-board.

    On UHF 437.250MHz there is a FM transceiver that can transmit and receive the AX25 packet telemetry and payload data at the data rate of 9k6bps. The transceiver produces approx 3 watts of RF output that feeds a canted 1/4 wave whip, which is mounted on the top plate. It incorporates a standard TNC7-Multi to convert the data to and from the OBC. It also has an audio and RSSI feed to the S-Band Tx. It was constructed by Holger Eckardt DF2FQ and is based upon his T7F UHF packet transceiver.

    Communications - On S-Band there is a transmitter on 2401.835MHz which can transmit packet data at a data rate of 38k4bps. It can also be configured to work in a voice transponder configuration. It produces approximately 2.5 watts of RF output which feed a three way splitter to the three patch antennas. The enclosure, power splitter and antennas were provided by the University of Wroclaw SSETI team and the electronics were produced by five members of AMSAT-UK. The unit comprises of a switch mode power supply, exciter board, amplifier board, controller board and a sensor board. The TNC is identical to the TNC7 Multi being used in the UHF transceiver except that it is set for a different baud rate.

    Typical Groundstation:

    To receive data from SSETI Express the requirements are similar to those for previous 9k6 Pacsats.

    To receive UHF telemetry, a steerable circularly polarised yagi with 12dBic gain with, preferably, a masthead preamplifier, should be satisfactory for reception of the data . The receiver must have an IF bandwidth of at least 20kHz and an audio output that is taken from the discriminator before any 'shaping'. This audio is then fed into a suitable KISS-enabled TNC which itself is connected to a PC normally via a serial port. To transmit to the satellite (when 'friendly telecommands' have been enabled) an RF output power of 10 watts on UHF should be sufficient.

    To receive S-Band data, the antenna gain will need to be more than 21dBic and in this case RHCP (right hand circular polarisation) is a must. Again a mast mounted preamplifier will be required. As the data rate is 38k4bps the IF bandwidth will need to be approx 80kHz together with a K

    --
    "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
  2. I sense a connection... by ScaryMonkey · · Score: 2, Funny

    First the Russians, and now a bunch of European college students? Clearly, there is something about communism that makes people want to launch tiny satellites. ;)

    1. Re:I sense a connection... by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, it's not that we build small satelites, it's that Americans always need to build big things. Makes me think you're trying to compensate for something... ;-)

    2. Re:I sense a connection... by Vegard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would not call Europe communist in general. Granted, we *are* more to the left - way more - than the US. But the fundamental difference is that we *do* have ownership rights, can start private companies, and there is a free market.

      However, we do have more things that are deemed to be the responsibility of the society. Things like education. Things like health service. Things that everyone generally need.

      I think this is a good thing. It (tries to) give everyone equal opportunity, regardless if they come from a rich or a poor family. Of course, it's not absolute, there are still private health service, there's private schools. But the general idea is that there are some fundamental rights people have, that the government should provide.

      Other than that, I (as a european) does not feel particularily that I live in a communist country.

      But for a country where everything is so much skewed to the right as in US, I guess that everything else is communist...

    3. Re:I sense a connection... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      hello? i thinnk you can count the communists in europe with both of your hands.
      at lest the parties).
      They are a small minority.
      What makes you think we are communists?
      I don't say the Americans are fascists!

      By the way, a well known german ex-chancellor once said:
      "Communists are red painted Nazi's"
      (Willi Brandt)

    4. Re:I sense a connection... by Urkki · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I would not call Europe communist in general.
      I would not call Europe communist at all, not even current Eastern Europe. If you knew what the actual real totalitarian communism was (and unfortunately still is in some corners of the World), you wouldn't even make the comparison.

    5. Re:I sense a connection... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the joke is that they're university students (who often have a predilection for radical politics), rather than Europeans.

    6. Re:I sense a connection... by Goth+Biker+Babe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And that comment is typically of your insecurity. :-) A. It is countering a post that, goddess forbid, suggests that the US is not best at everything. And B. it's completely factually wrong.

      Even one hundred years ago scientists were collaborating internationally, or at least thinking a long the same lines. An awful lot was driven by UK/US collaboration during WW2.

      If I look at my desk at the gadgets I would think that Northern Europe and Japan was fuelling the current technological age. On it there is a Scandinavian cell phone (SonyEricsson), Japanese monitors (Iiyama), a swiss watch (Tag Heuer), a japanese PDA (Sharp Zaurus - which has a British processor - ARM), a couple of British digital settop boxes (Pace - well mine actually) running an open source operating system (Linux) first developed by a scandinavian (Linus Torsvald) with a Welsh man as his right hand man. I'm listening to German goth (ASP) on my German headphones (Sennheiser). When I drive home it will be in my Scandinavian car (Volvo). I will cook this evenings meal on my German hob, watch TV on a French TV (Thomson) receiving signals from my British Satellite system (Pace/Sky) I will may be vacuum my room with my British designer vacuum cleaner (Dyson).

      The *only* American technology I own are my Apple and SGI computers and the wonderful design from Apple is thanks to a British designer.

    7. Re:I sense a connection... by k4_pacific · · Score: 2, Funny

      I wouldn't get too paranoid. Due to budget constraints, they were only able to put the satellite into orbit around Europe, and not the entire Earth.

      --
      Unknown host pong.
    8. Re:I sense a connection... by xs650 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But for a country where everything is so much skewed to the right as in US, I guess that everything else is communist...

      Please don't assume that all Americans are raving right wing nut cases. Nearly 50% of us aren't.

    9. Re:I sense a connection... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pissing contest!

      Damn near every usefull technological advance in the last 100 years has come from the US.

      Last 100 years? You mean other than the first cloned mammal, microwave ovens, pennicillin, radar, television, the world wide web, mobile phones, xylitol, polyester, bakelite, modern rockets, the diesel engine, the electric car, aspirin, radio communication, the jacuzzi, velcro, cellophane, the helicopter, nuclear fission, relativity theory?

      In addition, let's not forget that many American inventions were made by European scientists, educated in Europe, fleeing world wars (nuclear bomb and reactor) & that Europeans invented most relevant stuff in the decades before 1895 (from combustion engine and battery to light bulb, refridgerator, and vacuum cleaner). Then there are of course the many things disputed because they were invented in multiple places, or people disagree about the first 'modern' X (like the car, computer, 'modern' light bulb, 'modern' radio, etc).

    10. Re:I sense a connection... by Vegard · · Score: 1

      No, I wasn't really referring to that. I was referring to the fact that even the democrats are more to the right than the right-wing politicials here in social-democratic Norway, for example.

      Americans tend to refer to social-democracy as communism. While I was just stating that there are fundamental differences.

      What lies in social-democracy, is that a certain, pretty large, part of society is under government-control because it's deemed to be a fundamental right for people. Things like health care and education. Of course this means higher taxes to pay for this, thus the rich sponsor the educations and health care of the poor people who don't pay much taxes anyways.

      Personally, I don't really mind paying taxes as long as I know it's used sensible. The problem lies in accepting how the money are used. But noone really disputes that health care and education is a fundamental right, here.

    11. Re:I sense a connection... by dajak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, I wasn't really referring to that. I was referring to the fact that even the democrats are more to the right than the right-wing politicials here in social-democratic Norway, for example.

      Americans tend to refer to social-democracy as communism. While I was just stating that there are fundamental differences.

      This is a reflection of different historical development, I believe. It is more about words than political programs.

      Before WWII socialism and communism was considered evil by mainstream media everywhere -- hence the development of fascism as a reactionary force. After WWII the UK and US simply congratulated themselves while the formerly occupied countries generally reappreciated democratic socialism (which had been on the right side all along, and was a victim of the Nazis and therefore good).

      Consequence is that European 'Liberal' parties permanently moved to the moderate right while social-democrats and socialists replaced them on the left side of the spectrum, while US and UK socialist all but disappeared. US Liberals and UK Labour are traditionally considered 'sister' parties by continental social-democrats, but these parties tend to shun the word 'socialism' because it has a negative connotation.

      If the US/UK district system didn't exist we would probably see similar distinctions as in continental Europe. Liberals would split in for instance social liberals, social democrats, socialists, environmentalists, and Conservatives in christian-democrats, christian fundamentalists, conservative liberals, fascists. Since in a two party system both parties compete for the voters in the middle much of the diversity in opinions is nearly invisible from a distance.

      'Neoliberalism' is a much newer thing, which tends to have less (but still too much) influence on continental social-democrats. It is neoliberal market-think that makes it seem nearly the whole US population is right wing.

      Personally, I don't really mind paying taxes as long as I know it's used sensible.

      I am also a happy European social-democratic taxpayer.

    12. Re:I sense a connection... by EiZei · · Score: 1

      Ha, democrats would qualify as laissez-faire conservatives here.

    13. Re:I sense a connection... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans are good at wars...

    14. Re:I sense a connection... by Moraelin · · Score: 0

      "And maybe by constantly building small things YOU'RE really trying to compensate for something?"

      Well, in fact, yes. Such as compensating for having a realistic budget. I doubt that those schools could afford to build a bloody huge space shuttle, and the fuel to lift off all those hundreds of tons, just to put something washing-machine sized into orbit. It's basically like packing a half a pound chocolate bar in a few hundred pounds of hi-tech packaging before sending it by UPS: you're paying a lot more than you have to.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    15. Re:I sense a connection... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, it's not that we build small satelites, it's that Americans always need to build big things. Makes me think you're trying to compensate for something...

      Not at all, we have some really huge pricks in government.

    16. Re:I sense a connection... by twostar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Funny but the CubeSat concept was by a Stanford professor and is coordinated by another California university, Cal Poly.

      It's just that the international schools don't have the ITAR restrictions so they can actually get their satellites launched.

      CubeSat has a bunch of American CubeSats ready to go, just waiting on the Russians to launch it now. http://www.cubesat.org/

    17. Re:I sense a connection... by mcb · · Score: 0

      You're definitely right that a big part of the problem in the US is the two party system.

      But education is another huge issue. Frankly, American public education is pretty horrible. The average American can't even define socialism, let alone understand the positives and negatives of a social welfare state compared to our current situation. The average American doesn't vote because they believe their vote won't count. And who can blame them when they face several hour long lines at election booths, harassment by election officals, and a president who lost the popular vote being voted into office by the supreme court?

      The conservatives want to keep it this way. They thrive on an uneducated population. The socially liberal voice in this country is getting drowned out by the vast amounts of money spent on propaganda by the wealthy conservatives, the hordes of right wing christian zealots in the south and midwest who will vote for whoever their minister tells them to, and the political apathy of the urban poor.

      In all seriousness, the US is become a pretty grim place to live. We could use a major shift to the left, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

    18. Re:I sense a connection... by m50d · · Score: 1
      Please don't assume that all Americans are raving right wing nut cases. Nearly 50% of us aren't.

      In Europe Kerry would be a far-right candidate too.

      --
      I am trolling
    19. Re:I sense a connection... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hows that war of yours working out captalist boy? How many of your countrymen died today?

    20. Re:I sense a connection... by Sipos · · Score: 1

      3 of them are being carried on Express. Unfortunately CubeSats are not really designed by students like SSETI's satellites, their critical sub-systems are based heavily on a design done by professionals. They are not nearly as interesting.

    21. Re:I sense a connection... by twostar · · Score: 1

      Funny, we designed the entire system. Afterwards the so called proffesionals told us there was no way we could fit dual redundant comm, CDH and peak power tracking on a a 4"x4" board. So we pulled the board out and showed them exactly how we did.

      Most if not all of the CubeSats are entirely designed by students, at least the ones I've seen, which includes all of them waiting for launch right now...

  3. To boost interest? by lifterx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Have kids grown out of the idea of becoming astronauts?

    I wish my school had a program like that, the closest we ever got to something like that was seeing who build the tallest free standing structure from a sheet of A4 Paper.

    --
    SonicNonsense.com - Random stuff from a bunch of random people.
    1. Re:To boost interest? by Scarblac · · Score: 1

      Have kids grown out of the idea of becoming astronauts?

      Of course they have. It just isn't glamorous anymore. Manned space flight was done forty years ago. Modern day science fiction isn't about space flight but about computer networked big brother dystopias. Besides, modern media makes all scientists look nerdy and impopular. Why would a kid want to be an astronaut, of all professions?

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
  4. Micro satellite and washing machine by jurt1235 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do not really consider a satellite the size of a washing machine micro. Maybe it should be called mini satellite, so we can make the step to micro a bit later, once it is for example big tower PC sized, so we don't have to step to nano satellites to fast to describe satellites the size of a basketball.

    Then again, following Jobs naming scheme: Nano follows on mini.

    --

    My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
    1. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by Ray+Alloc · · Score: 0

      Nano follows on mini, but that's because the Nintendo Gameboy micro was launched at the same time (on the market, not in space, of course), so it could have led to confusion.

    2. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by Cicero382 · · Score: 1

      You obviously haven't seen the size of more normal satellites (not even including the moon).

      Compared to them, this is definitely micro!

      And, of course, we still have the other prefixes to describe smaller things - nano, pico, femto, err...

    3. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by Cicero382 · · Score: 1

      > Why not send the equipment to the ISS? We did put it up there for a reason, didn't we?

      I thought it was to provide a target for other space junk.

    4. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by donscarletti · · Score: 1, Funny
      Then again, following Jobs naming scheme: Nano follows on mini.

      Clothing designers have similar stereotypes applied to them as apple users. I wonder if they use the same naming schemes.

      /me rubs hands together in anticipation of "nano skirts"

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    5. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by J.+Random+Luser · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, I wondered too about this 136 pound microsatellite
      The first ARRL satellite, Oscar 1 was 10 pounds and the size of a shoe box. Mind you it could only say HI, and couldn't hear your reply, so I guess we've had some progress in 44 years...

    6. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "nano skirts" already out. I followed one home the other day, they are called belts.

      Regards

    7. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought 136 pounds was cheap but TEN? Wow! Even I could afford to build a satellite at this price!

    8. Re:Micro satellite and washing machine by Sipos · · Score: 1

      Satellites this size are usually refered to as micro. Micro satellites have just become the norm.

  5. JP Aerospace's PongSat program by FleaPlus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's not quite orbit (yet), but JP Aerospace has been running a PongSat program for the past few years which does something similar. Some of their past missions have gone above 100,000 feet, and would make great science fair projects for students. The description from their page:

    A PongSat is an experiment that fits inside of a ping pong ball.

    These ping pong ball 'satellites' are flown to the edge of space by balloon or launched in sounding rockets. The PongSats are then returned to the student.

    It's an easy and inexpensive way to get students excited about science and engineering.

    There are endless possibilities for experiments that can fit inside a ping pong ball. PongSat's can be as simple or complex as you want them to be. Experiments can be as simple as comparing how high a ball bounces before and after being exposed to vacuum. The PongSat can carry seeds to see if exposure to cosmic rays effect their growth. Several small inexpensive computers and other electronics can fit inside a PongSat. These can be used to create a wide range of experiments. Whether carrying a marshmallow to see if it puffs up in the vacuum of near space or an entire sophisticated satellite in miniature, PongSat can create motivation, drive
    and passion in the classroom.

    PongSats are flown at no cost to the student or school.

  6. The Russian Boosters share some credit... by Sattwic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    launched on September 30 atop a Russian booster
    Launching on a Russian Rocket & Booster is so cheap that its one of the best kept secrets... Now that these students have found out that Launching isn't that hard compared to building a Satellite, Serious fun is about to begin...

    Let the mass migration of Hackers to hacking and building Satellites begin!

    1. Re:The Russian Boosters share some credit... by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Of course, there's just the small problem of them blowing up and not actually reaching space. Solar sail anyone?

      I'd rather get something into space on a shuttle than on a submarine ICBM.

    2. Re:The Russian Boosters share some credit... by Sipos · · Score: 1

      Believe me getting a launch is not easy. Although I am not going to say it is harder than building a satellite, that is very hard too.

  7. A word about the Russian boosters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah. Russian boosters are so cheap because they were developed, tested and operated by virtual slaves of the communist regime. Would you buy sneakers that you knew were manufactured i sweatshops? If not, then why would you buy services that have been produced by similar slave labor?

    1. Re:A word about the Russian boosters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Of course when you buy expensive American sneakers they still are produced in sweatshops, but there is just a clever American businessman that puts the extra money you pay into his pocket.

    2. Re:A word about the Russian boosters by Vo0k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Would you buy gasoline knowing it comes from oil rigs built by slaves of the Saddam's regime?
      Think this way: Now they are free, but poor. They get a less-than-fair (but always, some) share of the cash in form of pensions, social support etc. Now in the name of shunning the relics of the regime you can let them starve and let all their hard work go to waste, or get the sats to fly, give these people some well-deserved money and understand, the tech as such is not evil nor guilty, and now as the regime is gone, there's no real reason not to use it.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    3. Re:A word about the Russian boosters by lahvak · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Slaves" of a communist regime? I grew up in a communist country, and while there were many things horribly wrong with that, it could hardly be compared to slavery. As a matter of fact, it was sometimes pretty hard to even find somebody working. A popular saying was that "the main principle of communism is simple: people pretend to work and the state pretend to pay them for it".

      If you refer to GULAG and other prison camps, I highly doubt that any of these prisoners contributed in any way to the boosters that are currently in use (or perhaps any boosters at all).

      --
      AccountKiller
    4. Re:A word about the Russian boosters by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 1

      I think he might have been referring to Sergei Korolev, and the captured German scientists who were forced to replicate the V-2. Korelov and Tupelov were both incarcerated and forced to work for the Soviet regime from prison (courtesy of Stalin,) not to speak of the captured Germans. Also, there were at least 15 Gulags that were used for cheap labor for development of nuclear facilities, so I don't have any reason to believe that development of rockets went about in a substantially different way. That the Soviet Union used prison labor is not disputed, and it can be shown that exile cities in Siberia were used to host secret laboratories due to their remoteness and tight control.

  8. Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I really hate to sound like a party pooper, but can we save space for those doing actual science? Space junk is prevalent enough, and competition for orbit space tight enough without adding more useless stuff to the mix. I mean, the most scientific items in the list of tasks are:
    -A camera with a 100m per pixel resolution (ridiculously low res, plenty of other picture taking sats available).
    -A Cubesat that will track boats around the Norwegian coastline, and one reindeer (just one reindeer? And can't we track boats with other means?)
    - A Cubesat testing new communications protocols (why can't this be done terrestrially or with equipment on the ISS?).
    - Another Cubesat that takes pictures and tests some gear (send it to the ISS).

    So, we've got 4 satellites up there, doing tasks which we can do via other means, wasting space. Why not send the equipment to the ISS? We did put it up there for a reason, didn't we?

    1. Re:Oh goody... by narduk · · Score: 2, Funny
      can we save space

      Yes,,,,the ever extending never ending space is going to be filled up soon if we dont stop young knowledge seekers and FAST.

    2. Re:Oh goody... by badfish99 · · Score: 1
      I bet you can't get anything sent to the ISS without paying some vast amount of money. Soaking up money seems to be the main reason that it's there.

      If someone just had a satellite and wanted it launched, they would go to the cheapest vendor. I bet the Russian launchers will quote a price that undercuts anyone else by a substantial margin.

    3. Re:Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 0

      I was referring to near-earth space (you probably knew that anyway).

      Exactly what knowledge are these "young knowledge seekers" seeking, anyway? As I mentioned in my other post, the experiments they're conducting have little to know scientific merit? Are they hoping to learn about any of these topics?:
      - Building a satellite: Probably, but humans already know how to do that.
      - How to build a rocket: They won't learn this, because the Russians are handling it and already know.
      - Rocket and Orbit trajectories: I remember discussing this in Year 12 physics. The theory is well known, and they could learn it better in the classroom.

      I fail to see how they can learn anything from this experiment that can't be learned either in the classroom or by sending a package to the ISS. Do we really have to put a washing machine sized hunk of metal into orbit EVERY TIME some bunch of university students want to do some cool experiments?

    4. Re:Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree that sending something to the ISS via NASA would soak up large sums of money. But the Russians send flights to the ISS too, don't they? I mean, couldn't they just stuff this thing into one of those unmanned supply capsules they send up?

      Last I heard it was something like $20 mil to be sent up to the ISS via the Russian Space Agency. If it's that much for a person and their gear, surely it would be a lot cheaper to send an inanimate object?

    5. Re:Oh goody... by tmortn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ummmm just how do you propose to get it to the ISS this decade? Payload mass on Soyuz is laughable and beyond spoken for. A washing machine sized payload, or even the smaller cube sats has NO chance. Shuttle isn't much better... starting with the simple fact it isn't flying. After that ISS payload space is also spoken for and very behind schedule so again getting these things up there would take a long time and a lot of money clearing NASA's manned certification issues for launching a payload with a crew.

      Frankly if you want to actually get science payloads up and running I would suggest ISS as the LAST possibility till they get their act together.

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
    6. Re:Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 1

      Then just don't send it. As I said in my post, none of it strikes me as particularly scientifically useful, so just leave whatever can't be sent on the ground. Or, get some of the instruments bolted on to someone else's satellite, or have the same satellite sent up the same way but make it do something useful! Sending up a washing machine sized hunk of metal that takes crappy pictures, tracks a reindeer and makes beeping noises is a waste of resources.

    7. Re:Oh goody... by tmortn · · Score: 1

      Tell the kids involved in making this happen that this thing is not useful. Usefulness is not just about the technical sophistication of a project. This is a hands on project of a nature that few people ever actually get to be a part of.

      Space junk is an issue a grant... but why not then just argue that there should be a de-orbit plan that will take it out of orbit. Not argue it shouldn't be up there period.

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
    8. Re:Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 1

      I know what you mean, I'd hate it if I was involved in the project and it got cancelled. But IMHO the line has to be drawn somewhere, and I'd drawn it here. I mean, how many other university satellites are going to be put up? We can't very well refuse them now that this is going.

      I wouldn't mind anywhere near as much if their project was doing something useful. It doesn't have to be development of a warp engine or anything. The reindeer and fishing boat thing could be a decent project if they expanded the scale. But taking pictures with an extremely low res camera is not useful, it's a waste of time.

      A deorbit plan would solve some of the junk problem, but it doesn't stop all the tiny (and really dangerous) pieces of junk that get sent up with every launch. Perhaps they could do some experiments on stopping that?

    9. Re:Oh goody... by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      your just pissed you don't have the talent to do the same. besides the fact that the PROCESS of building and using the satellite is a great learning tool, by your logic we only need to ever build one of everything, since we already have ONE why build another. totally rediculous and i can't believe you got modded informative.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    10. Re:Oh goody... by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      space junk my arse. i suppose you think some governing body should get to say who sends things into space, and i'd be right if i guessed it'd be american dominated, wouldn't i. named the last time anyone or anything was damaged by this rain of death of you seem to fear from space junk.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    11. Re:Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 1

      No, you wouldn't be right. Because I'M NOT AMERICAN (OMG!). I don't think there should be a governing body, I just think that people and space agencies together should decide to limit what goes up.

      And you know what, nobody has ever been killed by exploding the sun before, right? So why don't we just go and do that?

      Oh, and check out the nice 500 pound piece of junk in this article that almost hit some guy's house in Texas, as an example of something that was almost damaged. In any case, I know it's unlikely junk will kill people down here, but debris in orbit could be a serious problem to satellites and other space exploration.

    12. Re:Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 1

      FFS, I know I don't have the talent to do it, and good on them if they have the knowledge to do so. I'm happy for them, really. But can't they send up something useful instead of wasting resources? My objection is not to sending up stuff, it's sending up stuff that does not do useful science, and just adds to an increasingly serious problem. Most of this project IMHO does not perform useful science (the reindeer thing could be useful if scaled up, but low res images of Earth that we already have?). If they're going to design and send up a satellite, let it do something really cool (like track more than ONE FRICKIN REINDEER). In any case, why not have just one satellite, instead of 4? That would be much easier to track and prevent collisions.

      I mean, does sending up 4 satellities for every, say, 5 universities sound like a good idea to you? Does sending up 1 satellite for each reindeer in Norway sound like a good idea?

    13. Re:Oh goody... by Troglodyt · · Score: 0

      I fail to see how this thing would take up more space in orbit than down here on the surface.
      Granted, I know nothing at all about how much junk is in orbit.
      But if they've managed to get it crowded like traffic in rush hour up there I'm really impressed and I'd like to know much lighter the earth is now.

    14. Re:Oh goody... by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 1

      Yes, the satellite itself retains the same volume, but junk comes from lots of other places. The rocket boosters that send it up shed bolts and various other pieces of foam, paint and metal on their way up and during stage seperation, and the satellite itself, it it gets hit by something, could also shed some debris. Furthermore, the satellite itself splits into 4 pieces when up there, so each one is whizzing around, and has to be tracked individually.

      The problem isn't so much about mass, it's about all the individual pieces, because even something as small as a bolt is travelling fast enough to cause major damage. 1 ton of solid metal is far better than 1 ton of loose debris, because it's easier to track and easier to avoid than a cloud of junk.

      Here's some graphical representations of junk:
      Junk in low orbit.
      Junk in higher orbits.

    15. Re:Oh goody... by Marauder2 · · Score: 1

      "debris in orbit could be a serious problem to satellites and other space exploration."

      It is a huge problem. NORAD tracks countless pieces of space junk but there are plenty of things that are too small for NORAD to track, and those are the ones the we really fear. A collision, even with something very small, at orbital velocities can be catostrophic.

    16. Re:Oh goody... by GileadGreene · · Score: 2, Informative
      how many other university satellites are going to be put up?

      Uh, I hate to break it to you, but there are already a bunch up there. And more on the way. In the US alone, Stanford has launched a couple of satellites (Sapphire being the only one I can remember off the top of my head), Utah State & Weber State have launched one (NUsat), the Air Force Academy has put up several (FalconSat), and the University of Colorado has launched at least one (SNOE) - I've probably missed a bunch because I'm doing this oof the top of my head. The Air Force and Naval Academies have several student-built satellites manifested already. There a bunch of schools building CubeSats. And around a dozen schools competing in the NASA/AFRL University Nanosat competition.

      Outside the US, a number of European universities have worked on CubeSats, the University of Stellanbosch in South Africa has done one or two satellites, and, of course, the University of Surrey (and their spinoff Surrey Satellite Technologies Ltd) have launched around 25 satellites in the last 20 years. Again, I've probably missed a bunch that I can't remember right now - these are just the ones that immediately leap to mind.

      That horse has left the barn already.

    17. Re:Oh goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to invent a ship that could float around in orbit and produce a huge magentic cone. I'd just fly it round-n-round until all the space junk was sucked up. And, for the bolts and things that are magentic, I'd just have a regular old fashioned funnel.

    18. Re:Oh goody... by Threni · · Score: 1

      > So, we've got 4 satellites up there, doing tasks which we can do via other means,
      > wasting space

      It's called Space for a reason...because there's shit-loads of it! When it becomes a problem someone will send up another sat to bump the old crap ones out of earth orbit (or towards the earth if they want a fireworks display).

    19. Re:Oh goody... by tmortn · · Score: 1

      Yes but the collisions are really only an issue at great differences in relative velocities. IE something traveling at 17,500 mph isn't going to have much of a problem with something traveling 17,499 if they are in the same orbit.

      Furthermore speed determines your orbit altitude so anything in a more or less eastward orbit at the same altitude has essentially the same speed. Now there are issues with stuff in different orbits like say a 45 degree offset of intersecting orbits at which the relative velocities can be fairly high.. I think at 45 degrees it is roughly half.. so for 17,500mpg orbits that would be about a 8500mph collision. Which is nothing to sneeze at.

      However most people discussing this tend to forget something... that is that space is big. For example Saturn has far more space debris in its ring system than earth is even close to having. Yet when we send satellites through it we really don't do anything sepcial to avoid debris in the rings. Statisticlly its just open space. Same for all the junk in orbit around earth.

      If worse comes to worse for most man made debris I imagine we could develop large electromagnetic systems for collecting metallic debris.

      As for the guy that almost got hit in texas... he has about as much chance just being hit by 'natural' space debris as man made. You run more risk of hitting other planes in the air every time you fly than a sattelite runs of being hit by a piece of man made space debris. Also sooner or later all of that debris will come back to earth as its orbit will decay.

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
    20. Re:Oh goody... by tmortn · · Score: 1

      It is useful at providing hands on astronatical engineering experience for students. And I have little problem allowing all universities doing similar experiments... especially if they are all collaborative excercises like this one.

      As for the utility of the rez of the camera it may surprise you to discover that many pictures provided by ISS ops are of similar or lower resolution. Neither are of any real significance when talking about high rez sattelite photography. Hell we don't even know what state of the art is there as it is classified... we do know they have had cameras that could id a pack of smokes from orbit since the 70's. But that sort of optic technology is beyond the budget of an activity like this.

      However this rez is useful for stuff like weather systems, ice coverage, algea blooms, drought impacts, and any number of other large scale studies. Again it dosn't have to cover new territory to be useful.

      I really don't think the space debris issues is as big a deal as you make it out to be. I think it is worth consideration... but not worth denying universities access for projects of this nature.

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
    21. Re:Oh goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The word "bump" makes this sound like a small quantity. Do some math and you'll see it takes a lot more "bump" to change the angular momentum enough for the satellite to change its orbit significantly in a place as large as space.

    22. Re:Oh goody... by Sipos · · Score: 1

      None of the satellites you have mentioned are designed completely by students. Express is not based on any designs made by professionals like CubeSats are.

  9. Re:Fratenities send offspring to space by Vo0k · · Score: 1

    I wonder what kind of weird creatures would it breed when applied to a woman after some 5000 years of being exposed to space radiation.
    Actually, I wonder what kind of weird creatures would it breed when applied to a woman now and here, without being launched into orbit...

    --
    Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  10. My Microsatellite by ZendarPC · · Score: 2, Funny

    My microsatellites are potatoes, launched from a highly effective PVC pipe, powered by environmentally friendly hair spray. :)

  11. Radio Amateur by SonOfSengaya · · Score: 1

    It's a really interesting idea to use the radio amateurs as a network of ground stations. Maybe I should search my 9k6 packet radio equipment...

    --
    My spirit takes a journey through my mind...
  12. Re:Very "interesting" by Ray+Alloc · · Score: 1, Funny

    High resolution photos of your girlfriend, relaxing on the beach.

    Oh wait, you don't have a girlfriend. Never mind, and mod this post down, as always.

  13. My school has a MicroSat program too by nintendo_is_a_cereal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is that deserving of a slashdot story?
    http://microsat.usc.edu/

    1. Re:My school has a MicroSat program too by GileadGreene · · Score: 1
      See also ... and many more that I don't have time to dig up links for right now.
    2. Re:My school has a MicroSat program too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      University of Toronto http://www.utias-sfl.net/nanosatellites/CanX1/CanX 1Index.html

  14. It IS a washing machine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With some shiny parts glued over it. It's actually an elaborate practical joke...

  15. Re:Very "interesting" by jurt1235 · · Score: 4, Funny

    High resolution photos of your girlfriend, relaxing on the beach.

    Since the resolution of the camera is 100m per pixel, that must be a pretty large girlfriend.

    --

    My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
  16. Where are washing machines on the scale by panurge · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How big is that in terms of the standard SI unit of size (VW Beetles)? How small is it in the standard SI unit of smallness (iPod nanos)? Is that US washing machines, in which case it's pretty big, or European washing machines in which case it could be almost any size?

    Actually, given the dimensions and capability of the first artificial Earth satellite, Sputnik, it would be interesting to know how it compares. It would be amusing if the second space race - the race to be cheap, not to do things regardless of cost - was basically being led by a new generation of Sputniks on top of a new generation of Russian rockets.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    1. Re:Where are washing machines on the scale by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      I thought of this too. Why are satellites always described in terms of washing machines? Probes too, always seem to be compared to the kitchen appliance. I'm looking forward to the first satellite that's as big as a standard fridge/freezer.

  17. Idea for the guy in the cardboard transport box by jurt1235 · · Score: 2, Funny

    A while ago a guy shipped himself in a box. Since this satellite is washing machine sized, I can imagine him fitting in this satellite. Maybe somebody can find his address, and ask if he is in for another, bit longer, but a lot faster trip.

    --

    My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
  18. Some previous references... by Saggi · · Score: 2, Informative

    For reference:

    Previous story on SlashDot about micro satelites:

    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/3 1/0451217&tid=160

    ... and some sattelites lauched before (from russia):

    (30. June 2003)
    http://dtusat.dtu.dk/
    http://www.cubesat.auc.dk/
    http://www.utias-sfl.net/nanosatellites/CanX1/CanX 1Index.html

    --
    -:) Oh no - not again.
    www.rednebula.com
  19. Air cooled satellite??? by nomso · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope that isn't a fan for air cooling I am seeing in the bottom left corner of the thing in this photo.

    --
    there is no spoon
    1. Re:Air cooled satellite??? by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      I hope that isn't a fan for air cooling I am seeing in the bottom left corner of the thing in this photo.

      No, silly, that's an attitude adjustment fan.

    2. Re:Air cooled satellite??? by A_Known_Coward · · Score: 1

      No, no, no. It's an speaker grill that plays the theme to "2001 A Space Odyssey" for the aliens to hear.

      --
      Shameless plug for my band's website.
  20. Re:Mission to mars... by jurt1235 · · Score: 1

    I was just thinking: I believe my cardboard box was from a hollywood movie.

    One thing is sure: You have to be real drunk to do those things those Polish students did, it actually sounds more like something which happens with certain drugs (LSD for example).

    --

    My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
  21. Old men, slow and 'Gattaca' by bananasfalklands · · Score: 2, Interesting
    OK space sounds cool, but the average astronaught it seems to me is some coloniel in an air force - have to join the right army first and move upwards quickly.

    Moving along to funding the taxpayer in america it seems would prefer that his/her children learn how god created the earth in six days.

    To the staff of Nasa - it seems most of them where inspired by the moon landings, or 'rockets'. The book 'October Sky' by ex nasa employee Homer H Hickman sort of implies that.

    How about Burt Rutan and his spaceships. - Space tourism I mean wow is that it.

    It seems that getting in the 'space club' - is very difficult to get into, Kids realise this, hey lets do a business mba instead.

    How many of us are physically perfect? and uber inteligent, not many and quite why you need to have legs in zero g is just plain daft - i mean they dont really work there - so being 'perfect' goes out the window.

    There probably are fun 'space jobs' Most kids probably think that space is not for them.

    --
    Send Peter Clifford Francis Macrae comdoms to 23 Bedford St, St.Neots, PE19 1AX, England
  22. Linux Decode Software by sharkman67 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Funny that the OBDH (On-Board Data Handling System) Core for the ESEO is running Linux with 2.6.9 kernel. However all the decoding software I have found is all UI-View plugins for Windows. Is there (going to be) a Linux decoder out there? I can use Xastir to decode the AX.25 packets but I'd hate to hand decode the packets data.

    1. Re:Linux Decode Software by m50d · · Score: 1

      Is that stable enough? I have enough problems getting my desktop system usable under linux 2.6, and if a satellite crashes you can't just hit the hard reset button.

      --
      I am trolling
    2. Re:Linux Decode Software by phsdv · · Score: 1

      short answer: yes

      long answer: in case of a crash you do not need to push the reset button. You could build in a watchdog card/timer that does that for you.

      I myself have not been able to crash the likux 2.6 kernel. In my 20 years computer experience I have crashed many systems, even commercial unix systems. So to me the KERNEL is pritty stable. Maybe you have problems with X11 or other programs on your desktop, but I doubt a satelite would need those....

    3. Re:Linux Decode Software by m50d · · Score: 1
      long answer: in case of a crash you do not need to push the reset button. You could build in a watchdog card/timer that does that for you.

      I haven't tried with a hardware one, but my linux 2.6 instabilities hang it beyond where it'll reboot thanks to the software watchdog.

      Maybe you have problems with X11 or other programs on your desktop,

      Nope, whatever it is is locking it up to where I get no response out of sshd, apache or anything else. X doesn't even have to be running.

      --
      I am trolling
  23. Why are they bothering w/ this... by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

    when they could be working on building the oribting tie-off platform for a space elevator?

  24. Sorry, links got truncated.. by Bad+to+the+Ben · · Score: 1

    Here are the full links:
    http://www.space.com/images/h_space_junk_esa_02.gi f
    http://www.space.com/images/h_space_junk_nasda_02. jpg

    The page they came from is here.

    Sorry for the screwup.

  25. Catching up to the Boy Scouts by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1
    Looks like a Get Away Special box that used to fly on the US Space Shuttles. The Boy Scouts in the USA did a Get Away Special, originally scheduled for launch in 1986. It was put off by the Challenger explosion. It launched in the early 1990s. Nice to see European Universities catching up to the US Boy Scouts 13 years later (They launched theirs for $10,000 USD). See HERE

    I wonder how come the ESA doesn't launch things like this. Russia that hungry for business maybe?

    1. Re:Catching up to the Boy Scouts by dajak · · Score: 1

      I wonder how come the ESA doesn't launch things like this. Russia that hungry for business maybe?

      Russians are much cheaper, but the ESA still owns half the world market because it is more likely to deliver the payload unharmed and in the right orbit. Still ESA itself also sends up payloads on Russian rockets for reasons of economy. Apparently they decided that this payload is not valuable enough to pay for a trip on an Ariane. The students can always build another one.

  26. Please change title by xs650 · · Score: 2

    Please change title to "Russians put Europeon student's satellite in orbit."

    A bunch of students building a satellite is kinda neat, but far short of the neatness of actually putting it in orbit.

    1. Re:Please change title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please change title to "Russians put Europeon student's satellite in orbit."

      Or, maybe... "Russians ATTEMPT to put Europeon students' satellite in orbit." What's their nowadays? 3:2 against?

  27. I, for one.... by sweetnjguy29 · · Score: 1

    ...welcome our SSETI satellite overlords.

  28. Oh damn... by borawjm · · Score: 1

    I first read the title as "European Students Put Microsoft Into Orbit" and got excited...

    ohwell...

  29. US has been doing this for years by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Even high schools have sent up mini satellites.

  30. Re:Mission to mars... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nonsense - people drunk on alcohol tend to behave FAR more stupidly than those under the influence of psychoactive drugs like LSD. Tripping on acid is a great experience, and I'd recommend it to anyone with a stable outlook on life.

  31. Meanwhile american students learn about... by presarioD · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...Intelligent Design, and how abstinence is the way to success. But don't worry all these European students they will end up in American universities anyway, because you see the high NSF science budget can afford to attract...wait...no? It got reduced over the years?...well anyway the easy VISA and immigration laws will allow those students to unfold...wait...no?...there is a VISA/SEVIS hell right now...huh??

    Right, so as I was saying we don't want these liberal scum in our God fearing great country, blessed uniquely by the One and Only True God (TM).

    --
    Yam, yam, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade
  32. facts please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where is the data? Which orbit did they get in? which altitude? How many times did they circle around the earth? And how long did they stay in orbit (micro seconds, hours, days, years)? what measurements did they do? how did they communicate? It is so easy to say I can do that too or I have done that too. But to really do it good, that is a different story!

  33. We beat 'em to it a long time ago by BubbaJonBoy · · Score: 1

    When I was an engineering student at Weber State University in the mid 80's we designed, developed, and built NUSAT for the FAA to monitor radar coverage patterns. The project was successful and we went on to do a couple more.
    It involved our Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, and Mechanical Engineering departments in a multidisciplinary development team.
    Been there - done it. I guess their claim to fame is they built it with scraps and donations...