Orbit Your Own Satellite For $8,000

RobGoldsmith sends word of Interorbital's TubeSat Personal Satellite Kit, which allows anyone to send a half-pound payload to low-earth orbit for $8,000. Your satellite will fly to orbit from Tonga atop an Interorbital Systems NEPTUNE 30 rocket along with 31 other TubeSats. It will function for several weeks, then its orbit will decay and it will burn up in the atmosphere. Interorbital plans to send up a load of 32 TubeSats every month. If you pay in full in advance, you get slotted onto a particular scheduled launch. Here are Interorbital's product page and brochure (PDF).

Comments

Weeks?

[Entropy98]

How much for years?
 

Re:Weeks?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

You mean, how is a half-pound thingy going to last in low orbit? The same way as a half-ton thingy, perhaps - using thrusters?

Re:Weeks?

[Entropy98]

Or it could, you know, start off higher.

Re:Weeks?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't the extra distance hurt the resolution of the observations it makes, or the strength of the radio signals it emits?

Re:Weeks?

[lgw]

One reason it's cheap is that it's not very high. Just launch a new one each month - this price is remarkably low, if real.

Re:Weeks?

[Tubal-Cain]

Somewhat, but that's a problem for the customer to deal with.

Re:Weeks?

[dvice_null]

Could you build a satellite with very small ion thrusters that would allow it to climb up and perhaps eventually even exit from the orbit? I know ESA used this with Smart 1 to get it to the Moon.

Re:Weeks?

[sopssa]

Here's how much it would cost to send CmdrTaco to orbit earth:

1 pound = 0.45359237 kilograms
0.45359237 / 2 = 0.22679685
90kg / 0.22679685 = 396.830908
396.830908 * $8000 = 3174647.26

Result is $3 174 647

Anyone know if they allow that as a whole package or if you need it as 227g chunks? That might cause problems. :)

Re:Weeks?

[caerwyn]

Doubtful in that mass budget. You couldn't just stick a thruster on it- you'd need a full attitude control system to make sure you were actually pointed in the right direction, and thruster(s), reaction wheels, etc would pretty rapidly use up all your mass.

Re:Weeks?

[caerwyn]

Actually, I was really far to tentative with that response. I think the real answer is "no way in hell." Just too much energy that you'd need to store in that half pound somehow.

Re:Weeks?

[davester666]

Chunks are only a problem if you're squeamish.

Re:Weeks?

[MichaelSmith]

Its at 310 km altitude which is not bad at all. Drag might be low enough for a high ISP thruster to operate. Maybe a solar thermal system with a dense reaction mass.

Re:Weeks?

[Savior_on_a_Stick]

The only ways I can dimly imagine a half pound payload being able to elevate it's own orbit replies on multiple technologies enjoying at least a couple of orders of magnitude in improvement.

Too many layers of magic would be required to make this even a fun mental exercise.

Re:Weeks?

[fractoid]

Yes, but on the flip side, it would delay that pesky crashing-into-the-planet problem.

Re:Weeks?

[fractoid]

True, it'd be somewhat difficult to build something that small. Then again, you may not have to. From TFA:

TubeSats are also available as Double TubeSats, Triple TubeSats, or Quadruple TubeSats. The length, volume, and mass of these expanded TubeSats are based on the multiplying factor.

So for $32k you could send almost a kilogram into orbit. I bet you could pack a miniature ion drive into that size, and it'd last a lot more than four times the length of a single TubeSat orbit.

Re:Weeks?

[rs79]

"Too many layers of magic would be required to make this even a fun mental exercise."

True, which means the most interesting question now is "how long". 5 years? 50 years? The answer there of course, is, "it depends".

For now though, it's cool we can even be talking about this.

Re:Weeks?

[caerwyn]

That's true. However, I doubt that the half-pound payload is more than a small fraction of the total mass of the satellite, so strapping four together and giving you additional payload for thrust isn't really going to improve the payload/fuel balance very much. I still think it highly unlikely (if not impossible.)

Re:Weeks?

[caerwyn]

Well, to be honest, I think that matter/antimatter annihilation is going to be close to the only thing that would give you the appropriate energy density, unless you somehow managed to get a miniature (and featherweight) nuclear reactor on there. I don't see this being feasibly anytime soon.

Getting out of orbit is *hard*.

Re:Weeks?

[caerwyn]

If you've got a dense reaction mass, you're not under your half-pound mass budget. That's the problem. There are probably ways to compress the necessary reactant into that amount of *volume*, but I don't think there's any way to do it in that amount of *mass*.

It's not just drag you're worried about- it's the simple amount of energy necessary to get you into higher orbits even ignoring drag- even worse if the request is (as dvice_null asked) to get *out* of orbit.

Re:Weeks?

[fractoid]

I'm not sure I follow - I read it as them launching your TubeSat thingy into orbit and sending it on its merry way, not keeping them as a cluster. Maybe you just can't make a self-powered orbital module in a half-pound package along with an ion motor, a useful payload and sufficient reaction mass to achieve a permanent orbit. If you can fit everything but the reaction mass in the package, though, I can't see why it's so implausible that with an extra pound and a half of reaction mass, you could achieve your goals. The total mass of launch vehicle is irrelevant, after separation only your module matters.

Re:Weeks?

[MichaelSmith]

Dense doesn't have to mean massive. Energy supply from the sun is available at a constant rate. High ISP engines are available (an LED for example) but their thrust is very low, almost certainly below drag from the atmosphere at that altitude. Definitely for the LED example. Yeah you are right. Its not going to work.

Re:Weeks?

[caerwyn]

I'm not talking about the mass of the launch vehicle- I'm talking about the mass of the satellite in general. If you look at each "TubeSat", it contains the main satellite body, the bus electronics, etc. These things are not mass-free- in particular, the body itself is probably several kilograms at a minimum. Your payload only resides within that body. Therefore, even if the entirety of the payload of 4 TubeSats is propellant, you may have less than a 1:1 fuel/mass ratio- which isn't going to get you out of earth orbit.

To be more specific- It's not like you can take on satellite, and strap 4 raw blocks of fuel next to it. There's some level of overhead, and that only makes an already less-than-feasible proposition *more* infeasible.

Re:Weeks?

[fractoid]

OK, I think I get you now. I had interpreted TFA as meaning that the entire satellite including the 'tube' was a half pound. If it's just a half-pound payload inside a much bulkier cannister, then I can see why you're saying it won't work.

Re:Weeks?

[SlashWombat]

One wonders about this. To orbit some AD HOC electronics package does not sound like a very good idea to me! At the very least, the packages would need to pass stringent EMI/EMC testing, the likes of which would undoubtedly cost more than $8k alone!

Mind you, would be great for making annoying messages to broadcast down upon unsuspecting populations. (I am sure I could easily build a low power TV transmitter + annoying several hours of program material (set to repeat) in less than 220 grams!) (how many 50 gram 4 gig MPEG players are around that would suffice for just the program material!)

Re:Weeks?

[lgw]

But the total mas isn't the issue, right? Everything's easier when it's small (assuming you're not below where parts can easily be made) because the cube-square rule benefits you on structural elements. Hmm, I guess the cube-square thing is not your friend when it comes to drag.

Re:Weeks?

[JTsyo]

ahh but how about you use the other 29 to help this one into a higher orbit. Maybe 10 of them can just hold fuel and a few others the control systems, ect.

I forsee

[$RANDOMLUSER]

A big new trend for "burials in space".

Re:I forsee

[sakdoctor]

its orbit will decay and it will burn up in the atmosphere

That's just a ridiculously elaborate cremation.

Re:I forsee

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, the average cost of a funeral is 10,000 so...its 2000 profit to the survivors. And the grand kids will think its great fun to watch Grandma finally return to where everyone knew she came from

Re:I forsee

[Brian Gordon]

Hey, at $3,200,000, 400 payloads is a steal.

Re:I forsee

[aywwts4]

Also, how do you decide Which half pound of grandma to hack off and put in a tube? And who gets that fine job.

Re:I forsee

[Ambvai]

Lessie... at 150lb, that means I'd cost ~2,400,000USD to cremate in such a fashion. A quick Google search indicates that a funeral would cost ~5,000USD and cremation, ~1,000USD. Or, you could just send up a few choice bits ("He's watching us from above..." or a testicle or two [I'll leave a line to your imagination...]) and have it at that.

Re:I forsee

[Razalhague]

or a testicle or two [I'll leave a line to your imagination...]

Spaceballs!

Re:I forsee

[Angeliqe]

Not really burials in space, but a nice way to scatter (burn / dispose of) ashes. It's not too expensive for the middle class to do once for a funeral. I know a lot of video gamers, star trek/wars fans, ect that would request it if they knew about it. I even think it's a better idea than the person who wanted their ashes scattered about the haunted mansion in Disney World.

Re:I forsee

[miggyb]

Most of the old people I know weigh considerably less than 150lbs. Plus, don't they drain all your fluids after you die, but before you get cremated? or is that only for burials?

Re:I forsee

[Anonymous Coward]

Panspermia

Re:I forsee

[OrangeTide]

fine, then you get to chop up the body into half-pound chunks.

Re:I forsee

[porky_pig_jr]

I wonder if you can send the whole body, and they will cut it into smaller pieces and launch in multiple satellites.

I hope those Tonga natives are not cannibals/necrofiliacs.

Re:I forsee

[BluBrick]

In the immortal words of Jim Carrey:

"Your entrance was good - His was better!"

Re:I forsee

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

its orbit will decay and it will burn up in the atmosphere

That's just a ridiculously elaborate cremation.

... that's totally awesome!!!

Re:I forsee

[braedan51]

Also, how do you decide Which half pound of grandma to hack off and put in a tube? And who gets that fine job.

Obviously the head goes in the tube and I get to hack it off. HEADS.....IN.....SPAAAAAACE

Pirates in Space!

[Anonymous Coward]

Low earth orbit is above the law, literally, isn't it? Send up a few gigabytes of flash memory and a transmitter. Torrents from space!

Re:Pirates in Space!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't work that well unless it's in geostationary orbit. The problem being that the satellite is only in view for a few minutes every time it passes over which doesn't give you much time to transfer data. I doubt geostationary orbit could be done this cheaply.

Amateur radio users have been doing it for many years using voice and data via packet radio. Very low bandwidth though.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[Rijnzael]

Except the data has to enter the Internet somewhere, on some company's network, and that company can always be slapped with an injunction.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[Tubal-Cain]

...on some company's network...

No it doesn't.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[tagno25]

the IRLP Stilltransmits via the internet which means traffic goes over one or more internet providers.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[rm999]

If it's bit torrent with enough people in the swarm, each person only needs to download a small part of the file, and then share that part with everyone else.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[Tubal-Cain]

the IRLP Still transmits via the internet...

It doesn't need to. And regardless, I just wanted to point out that radio wireless networks are practical.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[Dan541]

What?

You honestly expect that to stop the RIAA?

Re:Pirates in Space!

[i.r.id10t]

Even with a massive pipe and unlimited peers, if it takes you 10 min to do a full download at instant on to full capacity and each peer hosting just the right part, etc. , the satellite is only in your FOV long enough to do less than half of the download from. May as well just swarm it from terra firma.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[fractoid]

Low earth orbit is above the law, literally, isn't it? Send up a few gigabytes of flash memory and a transmitter. Torrents from space!

Maybe not so practical for your run-of-the-mill movie downloads, but for *very* sensitive political stuff, the sort of thing that tinfoil-wearing X-Files enthusiasts can only dream of proving, I can definitely see it being the go.

That, or just use it to screw with SETI. ;)

Re:Pirates in Space!

[roystgnr]

Low earth orbit is above the law, literally, isn't it?

Yes, I think I can safely assure you that your pirate satellite will not be arrested. This may be small consolation to the people who build and launch it, who themselves will inconveniently not be in LEO.

Re:Pirates in Space!

[Anonymous Coward]

IANAE (Aerospace Engineer) but a telecom engineer with interest in aerospace. You do not need geostationary orbit. You can go with low earth orbit and a number of satellites, each working as a mobile base station, or a Node B in case of UMTS. The difference from mobile network is that the base stations are in motion and the subscriber devices are relatively static. Then, the satellite base stations carry the handovers as in usual terrestrial network.

Anyway, the idea that the outer space might be RIAA free is really exciting. I just got an idea for orbital hosting services. This would be kind of cool. However, rather than having the server farm on a satellite I would put in on a ship or drilling platform on international water and use satellite for connectivity. Satellite bandwidth is however very expensive (Spectrum use, long distance, poor SNR, and finally costs of launch).

Re:Pirates in Space!

[tokul]

Low earth orbit is above the law, literally, isn't it? Send up a few gigabytes of flash memory and a transmitter. Torrents from space!

1. Latency will suck
2. Radiation will kill that flash faster than it burns in atmosphere
3. You will have to launch other sat in one month
4. It is traceable. riaa won't have to go to space. They just contact TubeSat

Commercial applications

[JoshuaZ]

The sign that a technology has really matured enough to be taken seriously is when it starts to have commercial applications. Moreover, the presence of businesses like this will help provide further incentive for the improvement of space related technologies.

However, it isn't clear to me who would use a half-pound satellite that can only last a few weeks. TFA lists the following possible applications:

Earth-from-space video imaging. Earth magnetic field measurement. Satellite orientation detection (horizon sensor, gyros, accelerometers, etc.). Orbital environment measurements (temperature, pressure, radiation, etc.). On-orbit hardware and software component testing (microprocessors, etc.). Tracking migratory animals from orbit. Testing satellite stabilization methods. Biological experiments. On-orbit advertising. Private e-mail

Honestly, I don't see much use of most of those as a general use. Certainly scientists will benefit from this sort of technology but I doubt anyone would try to use this for private e-mail systems. You would just use the internet and encrypt your stuff. The idea of using this sort of thing for low cost climate and weather data gathering is interesting. I suspect that as with many technologies, new uses will be developed that we cannot easily anticipate now that the technology is still young.

Re:Commercial applications

[themacks]

It would be nice for a company to be able to test satellite equipment (long term uses) in a short run, inexpensive, environment. 8000 is pretty reasonable compared to the cost of putting a full size satellite in orbit then realizing something doesn't work quite right.

Re:Commercial applications

[TorKlingberg]

Satellite technology has had commercial applications for decades.

Re:Commercial applications

[bendodge]

How about broadcasting democratic information via FM/AM radio to restricted countries? I'd think it'd be low enough to work.

Re:Commercial applications

[Dan541]

However, it isn't clear to me who would use a half-pound satellite that can only last a few weeks. TFA lists the following possible applications:

Earth-from-space video imaging. Earth magnetic field measurement. Satellite orientation detection (horizon sensor, gyros, accelerometers, etc.). Orbital environment measurements (temperature, pressure, radiation, etc.). On-orbit hardware and software component testing (microprocessors, etc.). Tracking migratory animals from orbit. Testing satellite stabilization methods. Biological experiments. On-orbit advertising. Private e-mail

I think "because we can" will become quite common.

Re:Commercial applications

[mustafap]

>How about broadcasting democratic information via FM/AM radio to restricted countries?

What, you mean like to the USA?

Re:Commercial applications

[MichaelSmith]

You can put a lot of technology into half a pound these days.

Re:Commercial applications

[MichaelSmith]

How about broadcasting democratic information via FM/AM radio to restricted countries? I'd think it'd be low enough to work.

FM yes, AM not really. The frequency is too low to get through the ionosphere. Also you need big antennas for low frequencies.

Re:Commercial applications

[DerekLyons]

The sign that a technology has really matured enough to be taken seriously is when it starts to have commercial applications.

Satellites have had commercial applications for decades - it's a multibillion dollar business and has been for decades.

planetes?

[martas]

it's good that the orbit isn't sable, but i'm starting to think there should be some international law regulating space junk. i'd hate to see earth's orbit becoming so cluttered that sending anything up there just ends up generating more junk due to high speed collisions. that could really be the end of space exploration, at least until we make a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_gun and pull all the debris down from the surface.

Re:planetes?

[Brian Gordon]

I don't think we have to go to quite that extreme. There are more realistic options to consider first.

Re:planetes?

[machine321]

it's good that the orbit isn't sable

Yeah, fur (or Mercury automobiles) would never last in space.

Re:planetes?

[sketerpot]

Gravity guns are science fiction, but laser brooms could bring down space junk. You fire a laser into space from the earth, and any space junk in its path gets partially ablated, which thrusts it into a more eccentric orbit, which increases atmospheric drag and makes its orbit decay faster.

Re:planetes?

[Lumpy]

Oh yeah, I dont see that going horribly wrong....

Every time I see someone talk of that all I can think of is really cheezy Japanese SciFi from the 80's that angers and awakens moth-ra.

Re:planetes?

[mustafap]

I thought that too, until I read further. They don't put it high enough to be remain in orbit.

But of course the day will come soon when they will be able to put it into a stable orbit, and then it will become a concern.

I recently saw a simulation showing all the currently unclassified object being tracked in orbit around the earth. My instant reaction was "how the hell will we ever get another rocket through that lot?" Alien observers must think we are building a metal sphere to hide behind. Bit like a global tin foil hat :o)

Re:planetes?

[StripedCow]

Alien observers must think we are building a metal sphere to hide behind.

They probably have one themselves already... to prevent global warming :-)

Ashes in space business

[davidwr]

240 grams for $8,000? At less than $35/gram this is a great way to send a piece of yourself into space, and you don't even have to die and be cremated first.

If anyone starts a "fingernail clippings/hair/teeth/etc. in space" program for under $50/gram let me know.

Sounds like a great birthday party for a rich kid who loves space: Parents can fork over a few $hundred to send a baby tooth into space for a few weeks.

Re:Ashes in space business

[monkeySauce]

Remains are one thing, but sending your kid's teeth or whatever to space??

Wait... actually I'll do it for $25/gram. I assure you I will deliver your parcel to "space" --I've got space in my garage, heh-- and you can get the kid a telescope and tell him to look for it. No need for a wasteful rocket launch. I get paid, the kid gets a thrill and you get plausible deniability (I paid to send it to space, I swear!). Everybody wins.

Re:Ashes in space business

[Brian Gordon]

I think there are people who can get you that high for even less per gram. Well, for your first hit anyway.

Re:Ashes in space business

[Kral_Blbec]

You could partner up with the people that name stars and give a combo discount!

Re:Ashes in space business

[mustafap]

>If anyone starts a "fingernail clippings/hair/teeth/etc. in space" program for under $50/gram let me know.

I've just registered www.fingernail-clippings-hair-teeth-etc-in-space.com, now where's your 50 bucks?

Propoganda?

[yoman82]

Could this be used to send information, specifically protected or censored information from low earth orbit, specifically to Iran and other countries in turmoil/ with oppressive regimes?

Re:Propoganda?

[belmolis]

I don't see why this would help. They can jam it like anything else. It isn't as if their jamming methods rely on blocking line-of-sight. And you aren't going to get much power from a transmitter in one of these.

Re:Propoganda?

[asdf7890]

Potentially. But how are you going to let people know the information is available there? If you are broadcasting the information back down then people will need to be listening on the right frequencies as your sat passes over as you are not going to have a transmitter powerful enough to drown out a common frequency use by other transmissions.

And that is ignoring the fact that the orbit is not going to be anything like geostationary so there will only be specific time windows when your target audience have give "line of sight" to pick up your information. You won't find a mass audience with the right equipment (probably expensive equipment) pointed the right way at the right time, especially under a regime where being found to have possession of such equipment without correct license to do so may net you and your family a severe case if lead poisoning.

Re:Propoganda?

[LWATCDR]

Too small and too hard to pick up.
If anything if you really wanted to do that you would want to launch a Really large satellite with a huge dish. Maybe set it up to broadcast UHF TV or even FM radio. Such a bird would break every international law on the books probably but it would be really cool.

Re:Propoganda?

[Brianwa]

There are numerous stories about people using existing satellites covertly to do this. Apparently many older communications birds, including TV satellites, are more or less dumb repeaters with directional antennas. With the right equipment and during the right time windows, it's possible to start your own personal little TV station or broadcast. I don't have any links but some searching should turn up an article or two.

Re:Propoganda?

[MichaelSmith]

At wavelengths low enough to use a high gain antenna it can be very hard to jam a signal coming straight down. Of course the bird may be easy to damage.

Re:Propoganda?

[u38cg]

Hi, I'd like to introduce you to this new really cool thing called the Internet.

Will falling space debris be a problem?

[rolfwind]

Is this getting anyone else worried?

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[Sir_Lewk]

Half pound chunks that burn up on reentry aren't going to hurt anything.

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[Brian Gordon]

/me hides half-pound ball of nickel-cobalt cement reinforced with titantium carbide behind his back

What was that?

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[Tubal-Cain]

Not really. Our best plan for artificial weaponized meteors is telephone-pole-to-crowbar sized rods of tungsten. Somehow I doubt that much tungsten weighs less than 0.5 pounds.

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[BitZtream]

A marble that isn't going to hurt anyone.

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[lwsimon]

I would guess they put an explosive charge behind the bars, and push against the satellite. With a limited capacity, the fact that it would eventually deorbit the carrier isn't a deal killer.

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[rs79]

" half-pound ball of nickel-cobalt cement reinforced with titantium carbide" "

Aren't you going to need a zirconium oxide layer on the outside as heat shield?

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[amateur6]

Given all of the positively-modded responses this has gotten, isn't it a good question? C'mon, mod parent up.

Plus, I'd wonder about the possibility of sticking radioactive isotopes into it. A half-pound of Cesium 137 would cause some trouble, wouldn't it? Not targeted, obviously, but in a "tainted tylenol" sense.

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[geogob]

I'd like to see you get it by a supersonic marble. Should be interesting to see how not hurt you'll get.

Re:Will falling space debris be a problem?

[Tubal-Cain]

I thought they would just release the rods up there, sans satellite. A small rocket would bring it down.

What's the point?

[Hurricane78]

If it only survives for some weeks? I'd expect at least a decade of life and to roll my own satellite.
Yes. For that price!

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

Laws of diminishing returns. Suppose your project is to image a lake at 123.456 nm. Once you got that done, surviving longer means that you can reobserve the same lake n times or look at m other lakes, but the value of that isn't n+m times that of the original mission.

Re:What's the point?

[Kral_Blbec]

If I wanted to look at a lake at 123.456 nanometers, I'd look for a really good microscope before using a satellite.

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a wavelength, not a distance.

Re:What's the point?

[Kral_Blbec]

how do you spell "whoosh"?

Pizza's and beers

[sopssa]

It doesn't need to last. Personally I will just use this to send myself pizza's and beers in here. And some WoW subscription cards, please.

More space junk

[richardkelleher]

Like there isn't already enough crap floating around up there that someone needs to clean up!

the alternatives are overwhelming!

[Youngbull]

how cool wouldn't it be to send up an apple! or you know something of other peculiar interest like I china bowl or a teddy bear.... and for a mear 8 grand it does make for the ultimate DIY project even if it is only for a couple of weeks! It would be cool to show that you do understand it so much that you can make one of your own!

Burials schmurials...

[denzacar]

Try to imagine what this means for the Smurf population.

They don't call this planet the "Blue Marble" for nothing, you know.

Re:Burials schmurials...

[EdIII]

Try to imagine what this means for the Smurf population.

Sorry, but I have not been quite that high in years......

Hazardous material.

[WarJolt]

I understand that the volume is currently small, but they are commercializing the burn-up of potentially hazardous material in earth atmosphere. Circuit boards contain many things that shouldn't be burned. I hope that they screen for hazardous material that shouldn't be put into the atmosphere.

Re:Hazardous material.

[LiquidFire_HK]

Will it really matter if it's only half a pound?

Do I...

[Johnny Mnemonic]

...get to chose where it comes down? I really don't know, but I wonder if one could design a .5 pound satellite with the express intention of surviving re-entry, like a 1/2 pound slug of lead in the shape of a dart or a sphere.

I don't need much mass to survive the heat of re-entry. A few grams at orbital velocity, in the right place, would be enough to give my enemies pause...

Re:Do I...

[R2.0]

"Do I get to chose where it comes down?"

Sure - 1/4# payload, 1/4# guidance system.

Of course, if you are THAT much into preemptive self defense, you could just buy 2 and have them attached - one for payload and 1 for guidance.

Now, all you need is a spinning mirror...

Re:Do I...

[Hadlock]

It says you can link up to four together at a time. I guess the first unit would have the antennas, thrusters and deployment, with up to three separate payloads.

Re:Do I...

[Narnie]

...get to chose where it comes down? I really don't know, but I wonder if one could design a .5 pound satellite with the express intention of surviving re-entry, like a 1/2 pound slug of lead in the shape of a dart or a sphere.

That's one heck of a way to commit suicide.

Re:Do I...

[BitZtream]

Except the re-entry part turns orbital velocity into something closer to terminal velocity since the atmosphere tends to slow things down while its heating them up.

A few grams of anything falling isn't deadly to a person under all but most extreme cases.

You aren't building a weapon of any consequence with this service, you just don't have enough mass to work with.

Re:Do I...

[onepoint]

Antennas covered:
Just buy a tape measure, that will snap out in a heart beat, to the right length for transmitting and should have very minimal weight.

Server covered:
somewhere in slashdot, there is a report of a full server on a 2" x 2" x 2" cube ( I think that's the size )

Deployment covered:
spring loaded like a jack in the box

thruster and guidance: got an idea
Electrodynamic tether using fishing line specifically fireline or spiderwire or spectra , if the tether can make the juice we have a chance at a small lightweight gyro and some sort of electric thrust

I know that I have exceeded 2 lbs, but this is slashdot, someone can reduce the weight.

Re:Tonga vs. the atmosphere

[Sir_Lewk]

A couple of rockets is piss compared to the millions of cars, factories, and volcanoes in the world. "Straw that breaks the camel's back" is just a strawman (pun not intended :/) argument used by ludites that have something against cool technologies for some reason.

Expensive.

[Repossessed]

Isn't the cost to put junk in orbit through existing channels just 2000/pound? That puts this at 16 times the existing rate and you don't even get a stable orbit.

Re:Expensive.

[nwmann]

8k for 1/2lb = 16k for 1lb... 16k/2k = 8. That puts this at 8 EIGHT times the existing rate. if you choose to post on a geek site at the very least have some basic math skills.

I Call BS

[Anonymous Coward]

32 satellites at $8K each is only $256,000. Subtract the cost of the materials used to build the satellites. (I'm assuming they're not using class S parts, but solar panels, etc still ain't cheap.) They're seriously planning to deploy a working delivery system to space for that kind of money?

Re:I Call BS

[MarkRose]

If you figure it costs about $10,000/lb to launch stuff into space, launching 16 pounds would leave $96,000 for administration and profit. The numbers are plausible. And if they start launching from a Virgin space plane, then the launch costs could do down dramatically.

Re:I Call BS

[BuR4N]

They seem to base their ideas on what the OTRAG project tested and worked on in the late 70s. The idea is that the rocket is made up of inexpensive paralell coupled "segments".

The idea behind the OTRAG design was that if each segment where identical, the manufacturing process could be streamlined to a very cost effective level, much like how cars are made.

More on the OTRAG project here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTRAG
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/otrag.htm

Re:I Call BS

[Hadlock]

You didn't RTFA. For $8,000 this comes with a turnkey satellite + satellite development software environment,
 

• Casing, Endplates, and Mounting Hardware
• A Transceiver
• A Battery Pack
• Solar Cells
• A Power Management Control System (PMCS)
• Microcomputer
• Software
• Antennas
• Safety Switches
• Complete Instructions

 
with equipment that's already gone through R&D, and warrantied against failure during the trip into space, with space for additional cargo of up to 0.2kg. I'm sure they'd sell you the empty casing plus space on the rocket for less than $8 large (maybe as low as 4K? judging from their pricing model, it looks like the 4K is for the actual propellant/overhead costs), but it's going to cost a business a whole lot more than 8K to develop space-worthy electronics + software to put in the canister.

Re: I Call BS

[abushga]

It's not BS. Last I checked you could put 1 KG into LEO for $25K. http://www.cubesatkit.com/

Cubesats typically hitch a ride with larger projects for cost efficiency.

http://cubesat.ece.uiuc.edu/
http://mtech.dk/thomsen/space/cubesat.php
http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/cubesats.php

Re:I Call BS

[misexistentialist]

They might lose money with each launch, but they'll become profitable if there is enough demand for 100+ launches/year.

Re:I Call BS

[Bones3D_mac]

"For $8,000 this comes with a turnkey satellite + satellite development software environment..."

This sounds awesome... almost like a Lego Mindstorms kit, except it goes into outer-freakin'-space!

Pay in advance?

[devaudio]

what are other people doing, impulse buying a satellite launch?

Was anyone else thinking...

[whereiswaldo]

- Can I put a 1/2 pound of magnesium up there?

- How about a 1/2 pound of liquid oxy-acetylene?

- Where'd I put my AOL CD collection?

It would be fun if they just set up a space dock you could stand on and throw shit into the atmosphere to see what happens.

Re:Was anyone else thinking...

[MichaelSmith]

- Where'd I put my AOL CD collection?

Imagine a CD with a microprocessor, solar power and LCD shutters. It can change attitude by contollling its albedo selectively. It can change orbit by reflecting sunlight. You could put a stack of them on a platform like this.

Just what we need...

[bjustice]

Commoditized space junk. Lovely. And for only $800 I will personally throw a piece of plastic into the North Pacific Gyre on your behalf.

I need a rocket scientist...

[Baron_Yam]

Given that you'd need electronics on board and three thrusters, I doubt you could get a reentry-survivable slug of any appreciable mass up there under this program.

Still, its neat to think about wiping my enemies out with artificial meteorites.

Space Spam

[Tablizer]

On-orbit advertising.

Girl: "Ahhh, Isn't the moon sooo romantic?"

Boy: "Yes, it is sweetums....Uh, I have something to ask you."

Space Spam Pops in View: "Bob's Penis Enhancer, for the nervous times in your life. $99.95"

Girl: "Yes darling, what is it?"

Boy: "Oh, never mind."

Re:Tonga vs. the atmosphere

[LWATCDR]

Ummm what are you talking about? This will be a tiny fraction of what the cars and probably the electric generators on Tonga put out. Honestly if you really are worried about I wouldn't be. This company is pushing an untried rocket and will probably never put a pound into orbit. This seems alike a money grab for to me along with some publicity.

McSputnik

[Tablizer]

catchy name. MySputnik? Sputniklets? Sputninnies? Sputmites? Spuklings? Spuklites?

Re:McSputnik

[ickleberry]

Sputbook.

Re:McSputnik

[ralfg33k]

SpaceSpam! (See "Pirates in Space" thread, above.)

Re:McSputnik

[Sumbius]

iSput

Re:McSputnik

[wisdom_brewing]

Spunklings

Re:Personal Spy Satellite?

[Tablizer]

But you have to know Natalie Portman's swimming cycle.
   

CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[Hadlock]

How many high pressure CO2 cartridges can you fit in one of those, and would they provide enough thrust to get your device out of earth's orbit? Maybe stick it in a figure 8 orbital pattern between the moon and earth, or shoot it off towards Mars. I would imagine you need substantially less thrust to break from earth's orbit for a lowly half-pound payload than say, a space shuttle, not to mention, the pressure differential is substantially greater.

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[Hadlock]

Hmm I looked at this some more. It looks like there is only a 2,900 joule requirement to leave earth's orbit from LEO for a 1kg object. So you're looking at 1450 joules to leave earth's orbit at full weight; a CO2 cartridge provides about 150 joules of energy. You should be able to fit at least three CO2 cartridges in that canister, so you're already 40% of the way to deep space exploration using off the shelf technology! Plus each cartridge uses 12g of CO2, so the probe becomes lighter as it uses it's fuel. 60g of liquid oxygen/hydrogen peroxide should be enough to slingshot the probe around the moon towards the planet of your choice.
 
The PDF says you can link up to 4 of these together; in theory you could have two pressurized canisters of fuel, one canister functioning as the nozzle and flight computer, with the fourth canister holding your scientific instrument payload.

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[RocketRocketship]

That's a neat thought, but how are you planning on communicating with your experiment once it gets out into deep space?

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, no. 2.9kJ is nothing. It's less than the biochemical energy in 0.1g of fat, only enough energy to lift 1kg 300m against gravity.

2.9kJ is certainly not sufficient for accelerating 1kg from 8km/s (LEO orbit) to 11km/s (escape velocity) or even just about 10km/s (geostationary transfer orbit perigee).

1J=1Nm=(1kg*m/s^2)*1m=1kg*(m/s)^2

Kinetic energy of 1kg at 8km/s: 0.5*1kg*(8000m/s)^2=32MJ

Kinetic energy of 1kg at 10km/s:
0.5*1kg*(10000m/s)^2=50MJ

That's a difference of 18MJ to get 1kg from LEO to a geostationary transfer orbit (and some more to turn that into a geostationary orbit).

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[MichaelSmith]

I can buy real solid fuel rocket engines at my local modelling shop.

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[Hadlock]

I took the joules measurement from a CO2 cartridge based BB gun, so that should be real world energy thrust (TM), not theoretical.

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[DerekLyons]

How many high pressure CO2 cartridges can you fit in one of those, and would they provide enough thrust to get your device out of earth's orbit?

Not enough, and no. (Note to mention you'll need a guidance and stabilization system weighing much more than the payload available.)

I would imagine you need substantially less thrust to break from earth's orbit for a lowly half-pound payload than say, a space shuttle,

You could break the Shuttle out of Earth's orbit with as little as a half pound of thrust (if you wanted to take a couple of years to do it) - it's total velocity change that matters, not thrust. The velocity change required is identical regardless of size.

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[GargamelSpaceman]

Someone said you could link up to four of these together, so that's 2 pounds. If you can put a thruster on board, of any kind then what about just lifting a pound of BBs up high enough that the orbit won't decay any time soon? Call it the flying saucer defense system. they have to fly in through a hail of BBs.

Re:CO2 cartridges to break earth's orbit?

[Hythlodaeus]

You probably would not be able to get even to geosynchronous altitude - Space Is Big. They do provide the option for up to 4 tubesats to be linked, so I'm thinking the best route to boost a tubesat to the highest possible orbit would be two flash-in-the-pan solid rocket stages followed by an electric propulsion stage, and finally your electronics on top. How high that orbit would actually be I couldn't guess, but still probably not geosynchronous.

Cheaper "Memorable" Options

[Narnie]

Hmm... I think there's some cheaper "memorable" options out there.

Option 1 (Daddy is Forever)
~1000USD to be cremated and then ~8,000USD** to be pressed into a half-carat loose diamond.

Option 2 (Daddy was an Astronaut-Burnt-Up-on-Reentry)
~1000USD to be cremated and then ~8000USD to be shot into space.

**ashes to diamonds

Re:Cheaper "Memorable" Options

[flyneye]

I could see some "pimpin" dude have his diamond shot into space w/ cocaine and weed making up the leftover weight.
It could happen.
*cue "Shaft" theme*

Re:Cheaper "Memorable" Options

[fractoid]

Option 2 (Daddy was an Astronaut-Burnt-Up-on-Reentry)
~1000USD to be cremated and then ~8000USD to be shot into space.

I'm so tempted to request that in my will. Sure, maybe I won't *see* space but at least I'll get to visit it.

Re:Tonga vs. the atmosphere

[mdwh2]

Perhaps you should practice what you preach, and switch your computer off.

Finally

[oljanx]

We'll soon have the worlds first twittering satellite.

Do they give Octopussy discounts?

[Lumpy]

I would like to commission all spots on a launch. I have some very special orchids I have been growing that I need to launch into space and have orbit the planet...

Now where did I put my evil lap kitty....

Dutch Nano satellite company

[subroutine]

oke basically iam just to laze to type in my own story, but check this company. (www.isispace.nl) I copied the text from their website. so if you need to test out your space equipment(startrackers, gyoscopes or some doomsday device :) ) this is the place to do it kinda cheap :) *** Quote**** Vision Bringing space down to Earth. With miniaturization of electronics and breakthrough technologies from the IT-sector and consumer electronics, satellites and spacebased systems can be designed and developed in a different way. With faster, parallel development of standardized systems and system modules it is possible to perform space missions with very small satellites. By using swarms or constellations of these small spacecraft, operation and financial risk can be reduced. Based on these technological developments and combined with an increasing number of launch possibilities for these small satellites it is possible to make space systems and mission more accessible for a larger number of users. Mission * Develop miniaturized, modular satellite (sub)systems that meet customer requirements, * Develop, maintain and expand a strategic position in the field of small satellite (sub)systems, * Promoting and stimulation the development of small satellite missions. ***** end Quote***

800,000

[Illender]

weeellll. By my calculation, it would cost almost 800,000 to send my ex-wife.

Re:800,000

[BitZtream]

Your ex-wife weighs 50 pounds?

Something makes me think you did the math wrong.

Re:800,000

[GodfatherofSoul]

Great idea, but way too late for Reiser.

TPB

[Jordan711]

If The Pirate Bay hosted their site on one of those satellites, the law can't get them because there's no space court!

Re:TPB

[richardkelleher]

Yet...

What is a "Self Decaying Orbit"?

[suburbanmediocrity]

0.5kg, if it is dense enough shuold stay up there a lot longer than a few weeks at 300km.

Don't tell the Taliban

[spyder-implee]

They will put an IED in one.

Please realize the scale of the atmosphere

[Anonymous Coward]

The atmosphere is huge. Let me repeat that, because people tend to forget scale when it comes to things like the Earth (I blame teachers trying to explain how big the universe is, but forgetting to explain exactly how small atoms and people are): The Atmosphere Is Huge. Something on the order of 2.2 * 10 ^ 44 atoms. Burning up a few hundred grams of plutonium wouldn't even be all that scary. If you burned up a mole of plutonium on one of these things, it'd be less than one part per trillion trillion in the atmosphere. You'd have to be a homeopathic doctor to claim those kinds of concentrations are scary.

There's not any material I'd be afraid to launch on one of these things. If you started talking about launching a thousand of these things carrying plutonium, you might start to scare the nuclear freaks (same people who were afraid of Cassini and the sky falling), but most people wouldn't even notice. You wouldn't even raise the background radiation of the planet. And let's be realistic, a few micrograms to a few grams of cobalt (lithium ion) or cadmium (NiCd batteries) is probably the worst you'd expect to see on one of these things.

Re:Please realize the scale of the atmosphere

[wvmarle]

This river running next to my factory is huge, and the sea it runs to is even bigger... so who will notice if I dump a barrel of waste arsenic in that river?

Now look in what kind of mess this attitude has gotten us.

Marriage Proposal

[Captain Chad]

What a neat way to propose. I can see it now... "Honey, let's see what's on the HAM radio tonight. Oh! Listen to this, it's for you."

Re:800,000(late nites and bad math)

[Illender]

lol, you sir, are correct.
It's a function where x = 3, y = 7, 3 is the universal number for scotch whiskey, and 7 is the universal number for the coolest man alive(thats me), and I was all sorts of high on some "3". I believe it looks like this

x + y = lack of brain function
Actually it's more like 3.2 mil or so, depending on breakfast.
Although, I'm pretty sure I could hear her nagging from orbit.
Do you think she'd get cell reception up there?
Maybe I could just send myself, and "forget" my phone.

longer duration of the LEO

[webanish]

Isn't there any way to sustain the LEO for a longer duration. Using ion thrusters or something similar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster. I guess with a little more money, this could be accomplished. WhatSayU???

Just send one satellite up to serve all

[jokkebk]

If they have a standardized satellite template, it would be a rather clever "hoax" to just launch one ~5 pound satellite that would have enough horsepower to emulate all the 1 pound ones, so people would think that their very own satellite was launched, when actually there's just one with many antennas. It would make a great Slashdot meme:

• Offer to send a beowulf cluster of DIY satellites to space
• Charge for them
• Only send one virtualized satellite
• ... (this point was intentionally left blank)
• Profit!

Re:Above the Law.

[GargamelSpaceman]

That is one thing space can do that antarctica can't... You can do whatever you damn please up there because in the end if you're willing to never come home, there will be no consequences.

Odin12345

[odin84gk]

Or for $288,000, you can own 72% of the spaceship. Seems shady to me. http://interorbital.com/StorePage1.htm

Didn't NASA used to do this?

[GodfatherofSoul]

I recall reading (back in the 80s) that NASA had payload space reserved for simple experiments that were attached to the sides of the payload bay. They had to be self-contained and require no interaction from the crew and cost about $3K at the time.

Re:Didn't NASA used to do this?

[mmontour]

I recall reading (back in the 80s) that NASA had payload space reserved for simple experiments that were attached to the sides of the payload bay.

That was the Getaway Special program.

Re:fail

[mustafap]

You lost me there. Could you explain?

Re:fail

[mustafap]

Scratch that. I just got it. :o)