DOCSLIB.ORG

MASTER's THESIS Nanosat / Cubesat Constellation Concepts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

2009:092 MASTER'S THESIS Nanosat / Cubesat constellation concepts Alexandru Catalin Munteanu Luleå University of Technology Master Thesis, Continuation Courses Space Science and Technology Department of Space Science, Kiruna 2009:092 - ISSN: 1653-0187 - ISRN: LTU-PB-EX--09/092--SE CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY ALEXANDRU CATALIN MUNTEANU NANOSAT / CUBESAT CONSTELLATION CONCEPTS SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING Astronautics and Space Engineering MSc. THESIS Academic year: 2008 – 2009 Supervisor: Dr. Stephen Hobbs June 2009 CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING Astronautics and Space Engineering MSc THESIS Academic Year 2008 – 2009 ALEXANDRU CATALIN MUNTEANU Nanosat / Cubesat Constellation Concepts Supervisor: Dr. Stephen Hobbs June 2009 This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science © Cranfield University 2009. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright owner. Alexandru Munteanu ABSTRACT This thesis was produced at Cranfield University, with support from EADS Astrium who introduced the base requirements for the study. The subject to be researched was the possibility of using Cubesats for producing viable Earth Observation missions when they would be used in some constellation configuration. The project involved surveying nanosat / Cubesat constellation markets and concepts (e.g. real-time data) for Earth Observation, using new / enabling technologies (i.e. deployable membranes, quad junction cells, miniature instruments). The project also contributes to the Cubesat projects by providing a roadmap of possible future missions enabled by advanced Cubesats. The study concluded by selecting a present day possible mission which could be developed by using COTS components and space-proved instruments and some missions which could be developed in the near future using other new technologies yet to be made available for space applications. Some simulations of the possible missions were performed in order to determine the best configurations and results are presented in the discussion and conclusion chapters. Alexandru Munteanu ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank to my supervisor Dr. Stephen Hobbs, for his constant support and the provided indications, and to my contact person at EADS Astrium, Steven Eckersly for his suggestions in approaching this subject. Last, but not least I would like to thank my family for all the direct and indirect support they have always given me. i Alexandru Munteanu LIST OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. i LIST OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... v LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... vi NOTATION .................................................................................................................... vi 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Project Overview ............................................................................................... 1 1.2. Rationale ............................................................................................................ 1 1.3. Objectives .......................................................................................................... 2 1.4. Literature review ................................................................................................ 2 1.5. Report outline .................................................................................................... 3 2. CUBESATS CURRENT STATUS .......................................................................... 4 2.1. Cubesats introductory discussion ....................................................................... 4 2.2. Past launches and missions ................................................................................ 5 2.3. Payloads Discussion .......................................................................................... 9 2.4. Hardware review – Mechanical System .......................................................... 10 2.4.1. Structure Introductory Discussion ................................................................ 10 2.4.2. ISIS Structures ............................................................................................. 12 2.4.3. Pumpkin Structure ........................................................................................ 13 2.4.4. Launching Systems ...................................................................................... 14 2.4.4.1. P-POD by Pumpkin Inc. .......................................................................... 14 2.4.4.2. ISIPOD by ISIS ....................................................................................... 15 2.4.4.3. T-POD by Tokyo University ................................................................... 15 2.4.4.4. CSS (CUTE Separation System) by Tokyo Institute of Technology ....... 15 2.4.4.5. X-POD (eXperimental Push Out Deployer) ............................................. 15 2.4.5. What the future holds for Cubesat structures ............................................... 16 2.5. Hardware review - Power System ................................................................... 17 2.5.1. General Discussion ....................................................................................... 17 2.5.2. Solar Cells by Clyde Space ........................................................................ 19 2.5.3. Other Cubesat Manufacturers: Pumpkin, Inc.ISIS, GOMSpace, and STRAS SPACE 20 2.5.4. What the future holds for solar cells ............................................................ 20 2.5.5. Batteries by Clyde Space ............................................................................. 21 2.5.6. Other Cubesat Manufacturers: Pumpkin Inc., ISIS, GOMSpace, and Stras- Space 23 2.5.7. What the future holds for batteries ............................................................... 23 2.5.8. Integrated Electrical Power Subsystems by Clyde-Space ............................ 24 2.5.9. Integrated Electrical Power Subsystems by Gom-Space ............................. 25 2.5.10. Integrated Electrical Power Subsystems by ISIS ..................................... 26 ii Alexandru Munteanu 2.6. Hardware review: Command and Data Handling System ............................... 26 2.6.1. General Discussion ....................................................................................... 26 2.6.2. Data Handling Hardware Introduction ......................................................... 27 2.6.3. GomSpace Data Handling Hardware ........................................................... 27 2.6.4. Pumpkin Inc. and Clyde-Space Data Handling Hardware ........................... 28 2.6.5. ISIS Data Handling Hardware ..................................................................... 29 2.6.6. SSDL (Stanford University) Data Handling Hardware................................ 29 2.6.7. What the future holds for Data Handling Hardware .................................... 30 2.6.8. Data Storage Hardware (secondary storage) ................................................ 31 2.6.9. Software Introduction ................................................................................... 32 2.6.10. Pumpkin Inc Software Solution ................................................................ 32 2.6.11. Data Compression .................................................................................... 33 2.7. Hardware Review – The Attitude Determination and Control System ........... 34 2.7.1. ADCS introductory discussion ..................................................................... 34 2.7.2. Attitude Sensors Introductory Discussion .................................................... 35 2.7.3. ISIS Attitude Sensors ................................................................................... 35 2.7.4. Clyde-Space and Pumpkin Inc. Attitude Systems ........................................ 36 2.7.4.1. ADCS for the Cubesat Kit ........................................................................ 36 2.7.4.2. ADACS Interface Module ........................................................................ 37 2.7.5. Tethers Unlimited ADCS sensors unit ......................................................... 37 2.7.6. GPS Receivers and other sensors ................................................................. 38 2.7.7. Stras- Space Actuators ................................................................................. 38 2.7.8. ISIS Passive Magnetic Attitude Stabilization System ................................. 39 2.8. Hardware Review - Propulsion Systems.......................................................... 40 2.8.1. Introductory discussion - NANOPS ............................................................. 40 2.8.2. Other propulsion systems ............................................................................. 41 2.9. Hardware Review - Communication System ................................................... 43 2.9.1. General Discussion ....................................................................................... 43 2.9.1.1.
Recommended publications
  • A Survey and Assessment of the Capabilities of Cubesats for Earth Observation

    A Survey and Assessment of the Capabilities of Cubesats for Earth Observation

    Acta Astronautica 74 (2012) 50–68 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Acta Astronautica journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/actaastro Review A survey and assessment of the capabilities of Cubesats for Earth observation Daniel Selva a,n, David Krejci b a Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA b Vienna University of Technology, Vienna 1040, Austria article info abstract Article history: In less than a decade, Cubesats have evolved from purely educational tools to a standard Received 2 December 2011 platform for technology demonstration and scientific instrumentation. The use of COTS Accepted 9 December 2011 (Commercial-Off-The-Shelf) components and the ongoing miniaturization of several technologies have already led to scattered instances of missions with promising Keywords: scientific value. Furthermore, advantages in terms of development cost and develop- Cubesats ment time with respect to larger satellites, as well as the possibility of launching several Earth observation satellites dozens of Cubesats with a single rocket launch, have brought forth the potential for University satellites radically new mission architectures consisting of very large constellations or clusters of Systems engineering Cubesats. These architectures promise to combine the temporal resolution of GEO Remote sensing missions with the spatial resolution of LEO missions, thus breaking a traditional trade- Nanosatellites Picosatellites off in Earth observation mission design. This paper assesses the current capabilities of Cubesats with respect to potential employment in Earth observation missions. A thorough review of Cubesat bus technology capabilities is performed, identifying potential limitations and their implications on 17 different Earth observation payload technologies. These results are matched to an exhaustive review of scientific require- ments in the field of Earth observation, assessing the possibilities of Cubesats to cope with the requirements set for each one of 21 measurement categories.
  • Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite

    Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite

    46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA 2008-1131 7 – 10 January 20006, Reno, Nevada Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite Stephen A. Whitmore* and Tyson K. Smith† Utah State University, Logan, UT, 84322-4130 A trade study investigating the economics, mass budget, and concept of operations for delivery of a small technology-demonstration satellite to a medium-altitude earth orbit is presented. The mission requires payload deployment at a 19,000 km orbit altitude and an inclination of 55o. Because the payload is a technology demonstrator and not part of an operational mission, launch and deployment costs are a paramount consideration. The payload includes classified technologies; consequently a USA licensed launch system is mandated. A preliminary trade analysis is performed where all available options for FAA-licensed US launch systems are considered. The preliminary trade study selects the Orbital Sciences Minotaur V launch vehicle, derived from the decommissioned Peacekeeper missile system, as the most favorable option for payload delivery. To meet mission objectives the Minotaur V configuration is modified, replacing the baseline 5th stage ATK-37FM motor with the significantly smaller ATK Star 27. The proposed design change enables payload delivery to the required orbit without using a 6th stage kick motor. End-to-end mass budgets are calculated, and a concept of operations is presented. Monte-Carlo simulations are used to characterize the expected accuracy of the final orbit.
  • Information Summaries

    Information Summaries

    TIROS 8 12/21/63 Delta-22 TIROS-H (A-53) 17B S National Aeronautics and TIROS 9 1/22/65 Delta-28 TIROS-I (A-54) 17A S Space Administration TIROS Operational 2TIROS 10 7/1/65 Delta-32 OT-1 17B S John F. Kennedy Space Center 2ESSA 1 2/3/66 Delta-36 OT-3 (TOS) 17A S Information Summaries 2 2 ESSA 2 2/28/66 Delta-37 OT-2 (TOS) 17B S 2ESSA 3 10/2/66 2Delta-41 TOS-A 1SLC-2E S PMS 031 (KSC) OSO (Orbiting Solar Observatories) Lunar and Planetary 2ESSA 4 1/26/67 2Delta-45 TOS-B 1SLC-2E S June 1999 OSO 1 3/7/62 Delta-8 OSO-A (S-16) 17A S 2ESSA 5 4/20/67 2Delta-48 TOS-C 1SLC-2E S OSO 2 2/3/65 Delta-29 OSO-B2 (S-17) 17B S Mission Launch Launch Payload Launch 2ESSA 6 11/10/67 2Delta-54 TOS-D 1SLC-2E S OSO 8/25/65 Delta-33 OSO-C 17B U Name Date Vehicle Code Pad Results 2ESSA 7 8/16/68 2Delta-58 TOS-E 1SLC-2E S OSO 3 3/8/67 Delta-46 OSO-E1 17A S 2ESSA 8 12/15/68 2Delta-62 TOS-F 1SLC-2E S OSO 4 10/18/67 Delta-53 OSO-D 17B S PIONEER (Lunar) 2ESSA 9 2/26/69 2Delta-67 TOS-G 17B S OSO 5 1/22/69 Delta-64 OSO-F 17B S Pioneer 1 10/11/58 Thor-Able-1 –– 17A U Major NASA 2 1 OSO 6/PAC 8/9/69 Delta-72 OSO-G/PAC 17A S Pioneer 2 11/8/58 Thor-Able-2 –– 17A U IMPROVED TIROS OPERATIONAL 2 1 OSO 7/TETR 3 9/29/71 Delta-85 OSO-H/TETR-D 17A S Pioneer 3 12/6/58 Juno II AM-11 –– 5 U 3ITOS 1/OSCAR 5 1/23/70 2Delta-76 1TIROS-M/OSCAR 1SLC-2W S 2 OSO 8 6/21/75 Delta-112 OSO-1 17B S Pioneer 4 3/3/59 Juno II AM-14 –– 5 S 3NOAA 1 12/11/70 2Delta-81 ITOS-A 1SLC-2W S Launches Pioneer 11/26/59 Atlas-Able-1 –– 14 U 3ITOS 10/21/71 2Delta-86 ITOS-B 1SLC-2E U OGO (Orbiting Geophysical
  • Istanbul Technical University Institute of Science And

    Istanbul Technical University Institute of Science And

    İSTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY « INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DESIGN STUDY OF A COMMUNICATION SUBSYSTEM AND GROUND STATION FOR ITU-pSAT II M.Sc. Thesis by Melih FİDANOĞLU Department : Institue of Science and Technology Programme : Defence Technologies JANUARY 2011 İSTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY « INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DESIGN STUDY OF A COMMUNICATION SUBSYSTEM AND GROUND STATION FOR ITU-pSAT II M.Sc. Thesis by Melih FİDANOĞLU (514071013) Date of submission : 20 December 2010 Date of defence examination: 24 January 2011 Supervisor (Chairman) : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gökhan İNALHAN (ITU) Members of the Examining Committee : Prof. Dr. İbrahim ÖZKOL (ITU) Prof. Dr. Metin Orhan KAYA (ITU) JANUARY 2011 İSTANBUL TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ « FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ ITU-pSAT II İÇİN İLETİŞİM ALTSİSTEMİ VE YER İSTASYONU TASARIM ÇALIŞMASI YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ Melih FİDANOĞLU (514071013) Tezin Enstitüye Verildiği Tarih : 20 Aralık 2010 Tezin Savunulduğu Tarih : 24 Ocak 2011 Tez Danışmanı : Doç. Dr. Gökhan İnalhan (İTÜ) Diğer Jüri Üyeleri : Prof. Dr. İbrahim Özkol (İTÜ) Prof. Dr. Metin Orhan Kaya (İTÜ) OCAK 2011 FOREWORD First of all, I would like to thank my advisor, Gökhan İnalhan for the opportunity to work in the fantastic setup of Control and Avionics Laboratory and to work with the research team here. I would like to thank ITU-pSAT II project team including Emre Koyuncu, Melahat Cihan, Elgiz Başkaya and Soner Işıksal for being my project teammates. Also, my sincere thanks goes to Control and Avionics Lab's fellow labmates, including, but not limited to, Serdar Ateş, Oktay Arslan and Nazım Kemal Üre. A special thanks goes to TÜBİTAK. Without their contributions, this project would not be possible.
  • Small Space Launch: Origins & Challenges Lt Col Thomas H

    Small Space Launch: Origins & Challenges Lt Col Thomas H

    Small Space Launch: Origins & Challenges Lt Col Thomas H. Freeman, USAF, [email protected], (505)853-4750 Maj Jose Delarosa, USAF, [email protected], (505)846-4097 Launch Test Squadron, SMC/SDTW Small Space Launch: Origins The United States Space Situational Awareness capability continues to be a key element in obtaining and maintaining the high ground in space. Space Situational Awareness satellites are critical enablers for integrated air, ground and sea operations, and play an essential role in fighting and winning conflicts. The United States leads the world space community in spacecraft payload systems from the component level into spacecraft, and in the development of constellations of spacecraft. The United States’ position is founded upon continued government investment in research and development in space technology [1], which is clearly reflected in the Space Situational Awareness capabilities and the longevity of these missions. In the area of launch systems that support Space Situational Awareness, despite the recent development of small launch vehicles, the United States launch capability is dominated by an old, unresponsive and relatively expensive set of launchers [1] in the Expandable, Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV) platforms; Delta IV and Atlas V. The EELV systems require an average of six to eight months from positioning on the launch table until liftoff [3]. Access to space requires maintaining a robust space transportation capability, founded on a rigorous industrial and technology base. The downturn of commercial space launch service use has undermined, for the time being, the ability of industry to recoup its significant investment in current launch systems.
  • Orbital Lifetime Predictions

    Orbital Lifetime Predictions

    Orbital LIFETIME PREDICTIONS An ASSESSMENT OF model-based BALLISTIC COEFfiCIENT ESTIMATIONS AND ADJUSTMENT FOR TEMPORAL DRAG co- EFfiCIENT VARIATIONS M.R. HaneVEER MSc Thesis Aerospace Engineering Orbital lifetime predictions An assessment of model-based ballistic coecient estimations and adjustment for temporal drag coecient variations by M.R. Haneveer to obtain the degree of Master of Science at the Delft University of Technology, to be defended publicly on Thursday June 1, 2017 at 14:00 PM. Student number: 4077334 Project duration: September 1, 2016 – June 1, 2017 Thesis committee: Dr. ir. E. N. Doornbos, TU Delft, supervisor Dr. ir. E. J. O. Schrama, TU Delft ir. K. J. Cowan MBA TU Delft An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/. Summary Objects in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) experience low levels of drag due to the interaction with the outer layers of Earth’s atmosphere. The atmospheric drag reduces the velocity of the object, resulting in a gradual decrease in altitude. With each decayed kilometer the object enters denser portions of the atmosphere accelerating the orbit decay until eventually the object cannot sustain a stable orbit anymore and either crashes onto Earth’s surface or burns up in its atmosphere. The capability of predicting the time an object stays in orbit, whether that object is space junk or a satellite, allows for an estimate of its orbital lifetime - an estimate satellite op- erators work with to schedule science missions and commercial services, as well as use to prove compliance with international agreements stating no passively controlled object is to orbit in LEO longer than 25 years.
  • Pocketqube Standard Issue 1 7Th of June, 2018

    Pocketqube Standard Issue 1 7Th of June, 2018

    The PocketQube Standard Issue 1 7th of June, 2018 The PocketQube Standard June 7, 2018 Contributors: Organization Name Authors Reviewers TU Delft S. Radu S. Radu TU Delft M.S. Uludag M.S. Uludag TU Delft S. Speretta S. Speretta TU Delft J. Bouwmeester J. Bouwmeester TU Delft - A. Menicucci TU Delft - A. Cervone Alba Orbital A. Dunn A. Dunn Alba Orbital T. Walkinshaw T. Walkinshaw Gauss Srl P.L. Kaled Da Cas P.L. Kaled Da Cas Gauss Srl C. Cappelletti C. Cappelletti Gauss Srl - F. Graziani Important Note(s): The latest version of the PocketQube Standard shall be the official version. 2 The PocketQube Standard June 7, 2018 Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 2. PocketQube Specification ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 General requirements ....................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Mechanical Requirements ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2.1 Exterior dimensions ..................................................................................................................................
  • Ground-Based Demonstration of Cubesat Robotic Assembly

    Ground-Based Demonstration of Cubesat Robotic Assembly

    Ground-based Demonstration of CubeSat Robotic Assembly CubeSat Development Workshop 2020 Ezinne Uzo-Okoro, Mary Dahl, Emily Kiley, Christian Haughwout, Kerri Cahoy 1 Motivation: In-Space Small Satellite Assembly Why not build in space? GEO MEO LEO The standardization of electromechanical CubeSat components for compatibility with CubeSat robotic assembly is a key gap 2 Goal: On-Demand On-Orbit Assembled CubeSats LEO Mission Key Phases ➢ Ground Phase: Functional electro/mechanical prototype ➢ ISS Phase: Development and launch of ISS flight unit locker, with CubeSat propulsion option ➢ Free-Flyer Phase: Development of agile free-flyer “locker” satellite with robotic arms to assemble and deploy rapid response CubeSats GEO ➢ Constellation Phase: Development of strategic constellation of agile free-flyer “locker” satellites with robotic Internal View of ‘Locker’ Showing Robotic Assembly arms to autonomously assemble and deploy CubeSats IR Sensors VIS Sensors RF Sensors Propulsion Mission Overview Mission Significance • Orbit-agnostic lockers deploy on-demand robot-assembled CubeSats Provides many CubeSat configurations responsive to • ‘Locker’ is mini-fridge-sized spacecraft with propulsion rapidly evolving space needs capability ✓ Flexible: Selectable sensors and propulsion • Holds robotic arms, sensor, and propulsion modules for ✓ Resilient: Dexterous robot arms for CubeSat assembly 1-3U CubeSats without humans-in-the-loop on Earth and on-orbit Build • Improve response: >30 days to ~hours custom-configured CubeSats on Earth or in space saving
  • PORTUGUESE SPACE CATALOGUE PORTUGUESE SPACE CATALOGUE Fundação Para a Ciência E a Tecnologia (FCT) Is the National Funding Agency for Science and Research in Portugal

    PORTUGUESE SPACE CATALOGUE PORTUGUESE SPACE CATALOGUE Fundação Para a Ciência E a Tecnologia (FCT) Is the National Funding Agency for Science and Research in Portugal

    PORTUGUESE SPACE CATALOGUE PORTUGUESE SPACE CATALOGUE Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) is the national funding agency for science and research in Portugal. FCT promotes internationally competitive and high impact science, technology and innovation across all areas of knowledge, including exact, natural and health sciences, engineering, social sciences and humanities. The FCT Space Office addresses all space related issues. It is strongly committed to strengthening the participation of Portuguese researchers and entrepreneurs in space-related activities and in bringing the benefits of developing space sciences, technologies and its applications to Portuguese citizens. Please reach us through [email protected] and on our website www.fct.pt. Towards the end of 2000, Portugal became a member state of the European Space Agency, thus paving the way to full participation in ESA technology and applications programmes. The success achieved by Portuguese companies and research institutes in the European Union programmes, namely in FP7, Copernicus (formerly known as GMES) and Galileo is proof that Portuguese companies and academia are both competitive and reliable partners. Indeed, Portugal contributes to most European Space programmes, covering key domains of space applications, ranging from satellite telecommunications, global navigation systems, Earth observation, space technology, space sciences and robotic exploration. The Portuguese Space Community is an active member of international networks, developing complex space technologies and participating in space science and exploration missions. This community is made up of innovative, knowledge- intensive companies, specialised research institutes and modern public institutions, all strongly engaged in advancing space science, technologies and their application in non-space sectors. Indeed, one of the success factors of the Portuguese Space Community is precisely the close links between companies and academia.
  • Highlights in Space 2010

    Highlights in Space 2010

    International Astronautical Federation Committee on Space Research International Institute of Space Law 94 bis, Avenue de Suffren c/o CNES 94 bis, Avenue de Suffren UNITED NATIONS 75015 Paris, France 2 place Maurice Quentin 75015 Paris, France Tel: +33 1 45 67 42 60 Fax: +33 1 42 73 21 20 Tel. + 33 1 44 76 75 10 E-mail: : [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Fax. + 33 1 44 76 74 37 URL: www.iislweb.com OFFICE FOR OUTER SPACE AFFAIRS URL: www.iafastro.com E-mail: [email protected] URL : http://cosparhq.cnes.fr Highlights in Space 2010 Prepared in cooperation with the International Astronautical Federation, the Committee on Space Research and the International Institute of Space Law The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs is responsible for promoting international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space and assisting developing countries in using space science and technology. United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs P. O. Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria Tel: (+43-1) 26060-4950 Fax: (+43-1) 26060-5830 E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.unoosa.org United Nations publication Printed in Austria USD 15 Sales No. E.11.I.3 ISBN 978-92-1-101236-1 ST/SPACE/57 *1180239* V.11-80239—January 2011—775 UNITED NATIONS OFFICE FOR OUTER SPACE AFFAIRS UNITED NATIONS OFFICE AT VIENNA Highlights in Space 2010 Prepared in cooperation with the International Astronautical Federation, the Committee on Space Research and the International Institute of Space Law Progress in space science, technology and applications, international cooperation and space law UNITED NATIONS New York, 2011 UniTEd NationS PUblication Sales no.
  • Artificial Intelligence for Small Satellites Mission Autonomy.Pdf

    Artificial Intelligence for Small Satellites Mission Autonomy.Pdf

    POLITECNICO DI TORINO Repository ISTITUZIONALE Artificial Intelligence for Small Satellites Mission Autonomy Original Artificial Intelligence for Small Satellites Mission Autonomy / Feruglio, Lorenzo. - (2017 Dec 11). Availability: This version is available at: 11583/2694565 since: 2017-12-12T12:02:11Z Publisher: Politecnico di Torino Published DOI:10.6092/polito/porto/2694565 Terms of use: Altro tipo di accesso This article is made available under terms and conditions as specified in the corresponding bibliographic description in the repository Publisher copyright (Article begins on next page) 11 October 2021 Doctoral Dissertation Doctoral Program in Aerospace Engineering (29 th Cycle) Artificial Intelligence for Small Satellites Mission Autonomy By Lorenzo Feruglio ****** Supervisor: Prof. S. Corpino Doctoral Examination Committee: Prof. Franco Bernelli Zazzera, Referee, Politecnico di Milano Prof. Michèle Roberta Jans Lavagna, Referee, Politecnico di Milano Prof. Giancarmine Fasano, Referee, Università di Napoli Federico II Prof. Paolo Maggiore, Referee, Politecnico di Torino Prof. Nicole Viola, Referee, Politecnico di Torino Politecnico di Torino 2017 Declaration I hereby declare that, the contents and organization of this dissertation constitute my own original work and does not compromise in any way the rights of third parties, including those relating to the security of personal data. Lorenzo Feruglio 2017 * This dissertation is presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in the Graduate School of Politecnico di Torino (ScuDo). A mia mamma, mio papà, mio fratello. Grazie per esserci sempre stati, per essere stati delle guide incredibili. Grazie Acknowledgment I would like to acknowledge and thank a great number of people: not everyone can be included here, but I’m sure the people I would like to thank already know I’m grateful to them.
  • Commercial Space Transportation Year in Review

    Commercial Space Transportation Year in Review

    2007 YEAR IN REVIEW INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION The Commercial Space Transportation: 2007 upon liftoff, destroying the vehicle and the Year in Review summarizes U.S. and interna- satellite. tional launch activities for calendar year 2007 and provides a historical look at the past five Overall, 23 commercial orbital launches years of commercial launch activity. occurred worldwide in 2007, representing 34 percent of the 68 total launches for the year. The Federal Aviation Administration’s This marked an increase over 2006, which Office of Commercial Space Transportation saw 21 commercial orbital launches (FAA/AST) licensed four commercial orbital worldwide. launches in 2007. Three of these licensed launches were successful, while one resulted Russia conducted 12 commercial launch in a launch failure. campaigns in 2007, bringing its international commercial launch market share to 52 per- Of the four orbital licensed launches, cent for the year, a record high for Russia. three used a U.S.-built vehicle: the United Europe attained a 26 percent market share, Launch Alliance Delta II operated by Boeing conducting six commercial Ariane 5 launches. Launch Services. Two of the Delta II vehi- FAA/AST-licensed orbital launch activity cles, in the 7420-10 configuration, deployed accounted for 17 percent of the worldwide the first two Cosmo-Skymed remote sensing commercial launch market in 2007. India satellites for the Italian government. The conducted its first ever commercial launch, third, a Delta II 7925-10, launched the for four percent market share. Of the 68 WorldView 1 commercial remote sensing worldwide orbital launches, there were three satellite for DigitalGlobe. launch failures, including one non-commer- cial launch and two commercial launches.