Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Can Android Revolutionize Spacecraft Design?

Posted by timothy on from the but-wait-for-the-monthly-bill dept.

An anonymous reader writes "NASA's Ames Research Center is working on a new project designed to drastically cut the cost of launching and operating small satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). The project, known as PhoneSat, will see the Android powered Nexus One and Nexus S phones command their very own small scale spacecraft this year in a first of its kind research mission."

15 of 110 comments (clear)

  1. Already happening in the UK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Perhaps try Dr Chris Bridges at Surrey Space Centre in the UK?
    http://www.sstl.co.uk/divisions/earth-observation-science/science-missions/strand-nanosatellite

  2. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No.

  3. Really? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Please, do correct me if I'm wrong; but I was under the impression that the overwhelming majority of the cost of doing space work was in launching the things, with the relatively high salary and R&D costs of building sophisticated precision instruments in very short runs.

    Is the cost of computing anywhere near that significant(especially in situations where you are willing to skip serious rad-hard gear), to the point where you would be better off using a commodity phone(with screen, consumer-pocket-resistant chassis, more GPU than you need for Quake3, etc.) rather than a slightly more expensive, but by no means all that esoteric, ARM SoC board designed for embedded applications? In the same vein, is there an advantage to using an Android environment(whose virtues lie primarily in UI and 3rd party applications) rather than a standard embedded linux or other OS?

    1. Re:Really? by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

      Please, do correct me if I'm wrong; but I was under the impression that the overwhelming majority of the cost of doing space work was in launching the things, ...In the same vein, is there an advantage to using an Android environment(whose virtues lie primarily in UI and 3rd party applications) rather than a standard embedded linux or other OS?

      Android IS Linux. Its just that it has already been trimmed down to the bones and runs on very powerful, but low energy consuming hardware. So it saves them the need of making a linux version to do the same thing.

      As for your other points, it seems from TFA that they will not actually be using the phones as we know them, but rather stripped down models sans screen, case, battery, etc. Probably wrapped in something to compensate for lack of radiation hardened componentry. But then again, the types of short duration, low orbit, small payload missions they are planning this for can probably risk the radiation for the duration.

      In the case of our intrepid Nexus phones, the issue is being tactfully ignored. As these are test missions, NASA isn’t concerned about the long-term viability of these craft, and only expects them to last a few weeks or months. Due to their low orbits and lack of thrusters to increase their altitude during the mission, the Nexus-powered satellites will be falling back down to Earth within a year anyway. Even if they were built to better withstand the extremes of space, they would still just burn up in the atmosphere before too long.

      I doubt they launch these things singly, they probably piggyback on other launches, but being the size of a coffee cup, they might be able to use cheap sounding rockets. There are a number of different models of these relatively cheap rockets that can launch low earth orbit small payloads.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Really? by evilviper · · Score: 5, Informative

      Please, do correct me if I'm wrong; but I was under the impression that the overwhelming majority of the cost of doing space work was in launching the things

      Nope. A quick search shows that cubesats cost $40k to launch, and developing a cubesat reportedly runs from $25-50k, easily a significant fraction of launch price.

          http://www.space.com/308-cubesats-tiny-spacecraft-huge-payoffs.html

      Is the cost of computing anywhere near that significant [...] rather than a slightly more expensive, but by no means all that esoteric, ARM SoC board designed for embedded applications?

      You really should read TFA. Cell phones are perfect because they include a compass, gyro, camera, etc. A LOT more than just an ARM SoC. Hell, they can probably sell the screens on eBay and make back a significant portion of their purchase price.

      Thought TFA didn't say so, the power management in Android phones is probably better than what you'll get anywhere else... Standby and talk time are major advertised features, so manufacturers make sure it's working as well as possible. And with a satellite, electrical limits are a major issue.

      In the same vein, is there an advantage to using an Android environment(whose virtues lie primarily in UI and 3rd party applications) rather than a standard embedded linux or other OS?

      Android is a standard embedded Linux OS... It's basically just got a custom UI instead of X11. From the command-line, you wouldn't know the difference. Many people install Debian on their Android phones...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:Really? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Still seems like a gimmick. You can drop by an off the shelf electronics supplier and get a processor, gyro and accelerometer for a fraction of the cost of a cell phone. Then put something on it smaller and more reliable than Android.

  4. So this means... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The spacecraft's battery will die half way through its rated time, a simple grid UI will lag for its input, your spacecraft will get hijacked by malware from the NASA-Store, each spacecraft will have a different version driving costs up, and software updates in space will be at the mercy of At&t and Verizon?!

    1. Re:So this means... by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Commodity mobile phones aren't safe for flight science systems, end of story, because they're a: not hardened, b: not real time, c: not reliable and d: vulnerable to script kiddy software hacks.

      Really?
      If all your assertions are true, then explain why is it that this program is being done at NASA’s Ames Research Center where they employ real world class ROCKET SCIENTISTS, rather than kids who play them on slashdot?

      Script kiddies in space? Really? You are going with that?
      Not reliable? Did you even read TFA? Its a coffee cup sized payload, in low earth orbit, expected to re-enter in less than a year. How reliable does it have to be?
      Real Time? Seriously? Its monitoring a sensor package, and radioing it back to earth. It has no thrusters to control. Just how much real time is needed?
      Hardended? In low earth orbit (WAY lower than the ISS) protected by the Van Allen belts. Costing maybe a thousand dollars to construct. Who cares if it takes a direct hit? They are cheap enough to send up two dozen on a single sounding rocket.

      At least READ TFA before pontificating on things you obviously know nothing about.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  5. Radiation Tolerant/Radiation Hardened by ajalics · · Score: 2, Informative

    All I can say is these devices are not built to be radiation tolerant to say nothing of radiation hardened. Keep in mind the laptops (not used for safety critical things) on the ISS have to rebooted daily because of Single Event Upset (SEU)s that lock them up.

  6. Re:Or are they? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    We're the Nexus One and One S

    Wow. Take that, Siri. Nexus One and One S have advanced to the point where they can troll Slashdot.

  7. OK, let me get this straight by Compaqt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1. They use touchpads in 2001.

    2. They use PADDs in Star Trek.

    3. Apple copies from #1 and #2.

    4. Android is used to build real versions of #1 and #2.

    5. Apple sues #4.

    6. Profit!

    --
    I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  8. Re:Our devices are a result of space research ... by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

    TFA goes a long way toward answering your concerns.

    They don't care. These are coffee cup sized, low cost, low orbit, short duration missions that will re-enter and burn up within a year.

    They don't care about radiation damage risk, they are well below the radiation belts where the biggest risk is.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  9. Re:Can MacOS Revolutionize Spacecraft Design? by should_be_linear · · Score: 2

    "Your navigation app "Orbiter" was remotely uninstalled, sorry for that, use our new Apple Car Navigation instead".

    --
    839*929
  10. Re:Or are they? by Analog+Penguin · · Score: 2

    The Nexus One was made by HTC, so I doubt Samsung got into any trouble for it.

  11. Re:Or are they? by MacDork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They don't have to buy them in the US. Other markets will still have access to these smartphones. In the US, your choices will be limited by decisions made in kangaroo courts.

    Not that you have much choice in the US anyway. Notice how the rest of the world had quad core phones back in April... Maybe Apple will "invent" quad core phones later this year. I wouldn't hold my breath on it though. They tend to deliver old hardware that's at least a year or two out of date on launch.