Is there a web page where that was announced?
I have to wonder, why? Wouldn't it be simpler to just deploy the satellites off the lv on launch then bring them all the way to station then send them out the airlock.
By ejecting the picosats downward, (minus R-bar) the new orbits will have higer apogees, and cross the orbit of the ISS....
Awesome, I happened to google our project name and this thread came up! Thanks for finding (what I believe is) the first news article featuring TechEdSat!I'm the Spacecraft Manager for TechEdSat, if you guys have any questions I'm subscribing to this thread.
Quote from: NASA_Aaron on 02/01/2012 11:12 pmAwesome, I happened to google our project name and this thread came up! Thanks for finding (what I believe is) the first news article featuring TechEdSat!I'm the Spacecraft Manager for TechEdSat, if you guys have any questions I'm subscribing to this thread.Excellent, welcome to the site's forum. I have some questions, if you have time:1) What are the benefits of deploying cubesats from ISS, as opposed to hitching a ride on an LV?2) Does deploying cubesats from ISS present any orbital debris/conjunction concerns to ISS? If so, how will they be mitigated?Thanks!
1) What are the benefits of deploying cubesats from ISS, as opposed to hitching a ride on an LV?Thanks!
Quote from: Space Pete on 02/02/2012 08:12 amQuote from: NASA_Aaron on 02/01/2012 11:12 pmAwesome, I happened to google our project name and this thread came up! Thanks for finding (what I believe is) the first news article featuring TechEdSat!I'm the Spacecraft Manager for TechEdSat, if you guys have any questions I'm subscribing to this thread.Excellent, welcome to the site's forum. I have some questions, if you have time:1) What are the benefits of deploying cubesats from ISS, as opposed to hitching a ride on an LV?2) Does deploying cubesats from ISS present any orbital debris/conjunction concerns to ISS? If so, how will they be mitigated?Thanks!And to add on to this, why not deploy the cubesats from a departing VV ala the recent Progress M-13M(45)? Great work by the way
Quote from: NASA_Aaron on 02/01/2012 11:12 pmAwesome, I happened to google our project name and this thread came up! Thanks for finding (what I believe is) the first news article featuring TechEdSat!I'm the Spacecraft Manager for TechEdSat, if you guys have any questions I'm subscribing to this thread.Great! I have a question regarding the communication experiment with Irridium or OrbComm.I think this is the first time using inter-orbit communications such a small satellite.Could you explain more detail?
Hello everyone,I'm Thu, the Project Manager for F-1 CubeSat. This is our first space mission so we are a little bit nervous but very excited. If there's any questions about our little bird I'll be happy to answer
Good luck with your project Thu!
I simply do not understand, what the merits of this is.
Quote from: Skyrocket on 06/22/2012 10:41 amI simply do not understand, what the merits of this is.Number one, launching CubeSats inside cargo vehicles, where they can be padded with foam etc, has a much lower vibration environment than mounting straight to a second stage. This means the CubeSats can be designed to cope with less stresses (and thus be cheaper), and also have more chance of making it to orbit alive.
Second, when mounting to a second stage, you are at the mercy of the launch date of the primary payload (primaries will not wait for secondaries) - so if you have development delays with your CubeSat and get bumped from your flight, it could be years before another rocket is available to your selected altitude and inclination. With ISS however, if your CubeSat is bumped from one flight, another one to the same orbit will soon follow due to the constant stream of ISS resupply flights.
Cubesats are generally cheap and are also pretty robust.
Competely wrong - there are few flights available to ISS, as the material delivered in the pressurized cargo vehicles to ISS is a limited resource (both in mass and volume). Every cubesat flown is flown at the expence of material, which can be used and is needed on ISS.On the other side, there are now plenty of flight opportunities on upper stages, where real spare performance can be used without cutting the real payload.
Wouldn't this allow for cubesats that carry experiments that are hard to protect from vibrations when assembled, but trivial if separated? Thus, would have astronauts doing some "final assembly"?
So per the question I foolishly asked on the HTV-3 thread instead of here:The two J-SSOD deployers go up in CTBs on HTV-3. Then they are mounted on the MPEP plate. Is the MPEP also carried up on HTV-3? Or is it already on ISS?
Quote from: jcm on 07/20/2012 06:35 amSo per the question I foolishly asked on the HTV-3 thread instead of here:The two J-SSOD deployers go up in CTBs on HTV-3. Then they are mounted on the MPEP plate. Is the MPEP also carried up on HTV-3? Or is it already on ISS?The MPEP is also going up on HTV-3 - you can see it in the two attachments below. The two J-SSODs (the PPOD-like devices) are mounted to the MPEP, which includes a FRGF so that it can be grappled by the JEM RMS. The MPEP will mount directly to the JEM A/L slide table.
Yeah, I saw this image, but wasn't sure if this was the flight MPEP or a ground test article (since the MPEP isn't mentioned as a stowage itemin the HTV). The J-SSODs are attached to the MPEP by the crew after unloading of HTV.
Quote from: jcm on 07/20/2012 11:06 pmYeah, I saw this image, but wasn't sure if this was the flight MPEP or a ground test article (since the MPEP isn't mentioned as a stowage itemin the HTV). The J-SSODs are attached to the MPEP by the crew after unloading of HTV.I'm assuming it's a flight article, since the MPEP definitely isn't on ISS already, and the first CubeSat deployment is scheduled for November, so if the MPEP isn't aboard HTV-3, the only other way to get it up there in time would be via SpaceX CRS-1 - and I imagine the Japanese would prefer to fly their hardware on their vehicle.
Space Pete is right.MPEP is launched on HTV3 and that picture is flight article.
a couple of pics for you Fuji san
Video of the first deploy in today's ISS update (see from 1:40 to 3:26).
So am I correct that the deployments were about 1432 UTC Raiko/We Wish about 1544 UTC FITSAT/F-1/TechEdSatAnyone have more accurate times?
Quote from: jcm on 10/05/2012 12:29 amSo am I correct that the deployments were about 1432 UTC Raiko/We Wish about 1544 UTC FITSAT/F-1/TechEdSatAnyone have more accurate times?JAXA announced following time.1437 UTC Raiko/We Wish1544 UTC FITSAT/F-1/TechEdSat
Edit: by the way: still no TLEs on Space-Track.
Quote from: Fuji on 10/05/2012 03:55 amQuote from: jcm on 10/05/2012 12:29 amSo am I correct that the deployments were about 1432 UTC Raiko/We Wish about 1544 UTC FITSAT/F-1/TechEdSatAnyone have more accurate times?JAXA announced following time.1437 UTC Raiko/We Wish1544 UTC FITSAT/F-1/TechEdSatThanks! Hope the RAIKO comm issue is resolved soon.Edit: by the way: still no TLEs on Space-Track.
Only one major objective will be unmet. Initially the satellite was supposed to compare OrbComm and Iridium communications techniques in space, but there was not enough time to meet the licensing requirements before the launch date.
Space Station Opens Launch Pad for Tiny Satelliteshttp://www.space.com/18098-space-station-launches-tiny-satellites.htmlTechEdSat QuoteOnly one major objective will be unmet. Initially the satellite was supposed to compare OrbComm and Iridium communications techniques in space, but there was not enough time to meet the licensing requirements before the launch date.
"Of the other four satellites released Oct. 4, one of them, F-1, was a collaboration of Houston-based space hardware developer NanoRacks, Uppsala University in Sweden and FPT University in Vietnam."
Quote from: Danderman on 10/18/2012 03:07 pm"Of the other four satellites released Oct. 4, one of them, F-1, was a collaboration of Houston-based space hardware developer NanoRacks, Uppsala University in Sweden and FPT University in Vietnam."
Thank you, this is just our first small step in a long journey ahead.Wrt the launch with Interorbital, they told me that it'll be in 2013. While I hate these launch slips, on the bright side they give us time to learn from F-1 project and better prepare for the next CubeSat launch.
A case in point is Spinsat, which is set for “soft stowage” launch in the pressurized portion of the SpaceX Dragon headed to the International Space Station (ISS) next April. A station crewmember will carry the 22-in. sphere, essentially packed in a fabric bag, from the Dragon into the station and leave it there until its scheduled deployment through the Japanese module's airlock. NASA safety experts approved the mission because the satellite's 12 thruster-clusters burn an inert solid fuel called Hipep, and only when an electric charge is passed across it.In space, the Naval Research Laboratory satellite will demonstrate the DSSP thruster technology in a series of maneuvers, and also serve as a reflector for ground-based laser ranging to study atmospheric drag. It is one of two very different spacecraft that will be passed through the Japanese airlock and released from the end of one of the station's robotic arms to test a new NASA deployer known as Cyclops.Engineers at Johnson Space Center designed Cyclops to handle as many different spacecraft shapes as possible, grappling them with a special fixture, squeezing through the airlock tunnel and attaching to the end of the Canadian or Japanese-built arms to release them down and away from the back of the station to avoid recontact. In addition to the U.S. Navy's Spinsat, the Cyclops test in April will deploy a rectangular satellite—Lonestar-2—built by Texas college students.
Weir, isn't Hipep an ion engine running Xenon?