UT Student-Built Spacecraft Separate and Communicate

BJ_Covert_Action writes "Some students from the Cockrell School of Engineering in Austin, Texas have built, developed, launched, and operated two historic satellites. The FASTRAC satellites make up the first small-scale satellite system which is composed of two separate spacecraft that can communicate to each other. On March 22, the single FASTRAC satellite successfully separated into two smaller spacecraft that are currently operating and communicating with each other. While separation and communication has occurred between paired satellites before, this is the first time it has been done with such a small platform (the FASTRAC spacecraft weigh approximately 60 lbs.). Furthermore, this is the first time a student-designed and built space system has been composed of two separate spacecraft that can interact with each other. One of the most impressive things about this mission is that it was done incredibly cheap, at $250,000, which is far below the costs associated with traditional spacecraft."

Comments

Sure it's cheaper

[santax]

Now count the hours spend, add the costs of this being a project done by people are/have learned the ropes along the way of this project. Replace those factors with the hourly cost of a team of engineers and don't forget to call a insurance company for liability issues if your are offering this as a commercial service and all of a sudden we come to realize that education, labour and insurance cost more than the components your satellite + spaceship were made out of. This part wasn't exactly rocket science.

Re:Sure it's cheaper

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Who cares about another shitty satellite in orbit.

Anyone who builds satellites does. Something that a lot of folk seem to miss in the space industry is that risk is a determining factor in most spacecraft development costs. The managerial board in charge of any design will dog its engineers about how risky a particular program is. Every piece of technology that has not been tested on orbit adds a very significant amount of risk to any risk model. Essentially it adds one big, "Oh crap this has a high chance of failing," component to an otherwise proven design.

Thus, in order for the spacecraft industry to progress, some entity needs to take on high-risk test missions. These missions are known as tech-demonstrators. Essentially, their sole purpose is to put something in the space environment that has never been done before just to show that it will perform on-orbit the same as it did in a lab on the ground. The problem is, there is almost no profit in the very small tech-demo missions. Thus, the large companies often have to gloss over new, but small leaps in technology in favor of 30 year old proven designs.

A mission like this is far beyond just another "shitty satellite." While I didn't work on this mission, I can promise you that there are coding techniques, chips, and control devices on these spacecraft that have never been flown before. I can guarantee that because a mission of this nature, on this scale, has never been flown before. So its overall design is going to be incredibly unique. As a result of this project, however, commercial companies will now start looking into adopting micro-scale satellite networks as a viable solution to many problems that customers want to solve since the concept, and at least one design, has been shown to work. Hell, right now there is a Canadian company that is trying to put together a a network of 78 nanosats to solve a real world problem. I'd bet my bollocks to a barn dance that company (MSCI) is watching this mission intently, and they may very well be in communication with the UT students who are working on FASTRAC in an attempt to reduce their own R&D costs.

That's a lot of real-world progress that comes from just another shitty satellite in space. Don't rain down on small, incremental progress. It pays off in leaps and bounds with patience.

Also a Ham relay

[Anonymous Coward]

Both craft are also radio relays. You can talk via them if overhead. http://fastrac.ae.utexas.edu/for_radio_operators/users/phpBB3/predictedorbit.php

FASTRAC 1 2M UP LINK / 440 DOWN LINK
FASTRAC 2 440 UP LINK / 2M DOWN LINK
AX-25 1200 AND 9600 BAUD

considering one epsiode of Law and Order is

[decora]

one million american dollars, yeah it is kind of cheap.

There is a great book about the Soviet side of the early space days. One of their test V7 rockets blew up, the chief designer and his friend were almost crying about the massive amount of money they had just wasted, enough to support whole villages several times over.

When Sputnik launched, it captured the human imagination so powerfully that even the communist apparatchiks of Kruschev's regime had to pay respect to Korolev, and even the children of the imperialists were out in their backyards tuning their radios to the transmissions of the godless communist enemy. The man Korolev, though they would not know the man's name for another couple dozens years, as he was kept a secret so the CIA would not assassinate him, and his team, inspired the whole world.

And now, this feat costs $250,000... less than the price of a fighter jet, or a hollywood movie, or a TV show episode, and it can be done by civilians. It is truly remarkable, and a great story for slashdot.

IMHO

Re:considering one epsiode of Law and Order is

[Alex Belits]

Sputnik itself was just a simple sealed, battery-powered radio beacon. The hard part was to launch it in orbit.

This thing is much more complex than Sputnik, but it had to be launched on someone else's rocket, so it does not reproduce the part that is actually impressive. The success in building something that can be launched into an orbit and do something useful there (even if it is just relaying radio signals) is valuable, however this is not anywhere close to the amount of engineering that goes into a satellite launch -- in Sputnik time or now.

Re:considering one epsiode of Law and Order is

[Alex Belits]

Actually, some of security measures were designed to prevent just that (or stealing the documentation that was shared with ICBM development, or obtaining the maps of the launch site -- remember, it was the first satellite, so no one had satellite photos yet).

It is the launch costs that kills you

[prakslash]

The satellites were launched by a Minotaur IV rocket from Alaska.
These rockets are derived from converted old Minuteman/Peacekeeper ICBMs.
Despite that, the launch costs of such a rocket can still be $40-50 million
So, unless you can score a free ride for your doohickey, it ain't so cheap.

Re:It is the launch costs that kills you

[Lazareth]

Exactly this. While I agree that what the students did was both an achievement and a valuable educational process, much of the cost of sending stuff into orbit is, not surprisingly, sending stuff into orbit. They got to do that for free*.

*Hidden costs 101: get somebody else to pay for it and say you did everything amazingly cheap.

Communication log

[ikarys]

FASTRAC 1: Hey sibling FASTRAC, anything happening over there?
FASTRAC A: Nope - it's space fool.
FASTRAC 1: Well, at least we have each other.
FASTRAC A: I hate you.

Re:Space Trash

[John Meacham]

Yes, and the hubble is also in low earth orbit and will decay. That is why they have to periodically boost it with a space shuttle if they want it to stay there.