A commercial off the shelf (COTS) packet communications subsystem for the Montana EaRth-Orbiting Pico-Explorer (MEROPE) CubeSat

Hunyadi, G.; Klumpar, D. M.; Jepsen, Steven M.; Larsen, B.; Obland, M.

doi:10.1109/aero.2002.1036867

Cited by 14 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Common characteristics among the CubeSats was the use of the AX.25 protocol within the 432-438 MHz band. The only deviations from the standard within the launch were the MEROPE by Montana State University which utilized the AX.25 protocol at a significantly lower frequency (144-146 MHz range) [37] and the AeroCube-1 that operated in the amateur band between 902-928 MHz [30]. Most of the satellites utilized monopole or dipole antennas.…”

Section: Dnepr-1 Failure Baikonur Kazakhstanmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Communication Sub-systems for Intersatellite Linked Systems and CubeSat Missions

Muri¹,

McNair²

2012

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<pre>Intersatellite links or crosslinks provide direct connectivity between two or more satellites, thus eliminating the need for intermediate ground stations when sending data. Intersatellite links have been considered for satellite constellation missions involving earth observation and communications. Historically, a large satellite system has needed an extremely high financial budget. However, the advent of the successful CubeSat platform allows for small satellites of less than one kilogram. This low-mass pico-satellite class platform could provide financially feasible support for large platform satellite constellations. This article surveys past and planned large intersatellite linking systems. Then, the article chronicles CubeSat communication subsystems used historically and in the near future. Finally, we examine the history of inter-networking protocols in space and open research issues with the goal of moving towards the next generation intersatellite-linking constellation supported by CubeSat platform satellites.</pre>

show abstract

Section: Dnepr-1 Failure Baikonur Kazakhstanmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Communication Sub-systems for Intersatellite Linked Systems and CubeSat Missions

Muri¹,

McNair²

2012

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Once the satellite is in orbit, current passes through the Nichrome wire, the fibres melt and the linear antenna is released. Small satellites using this linear-antenna technique are studied in (Dabrowski, 2005;Galysh et al, 2000;Heidt et al, 2000;Hunyadi et al, 2002;LaBerteaux et al, 2007;Mizuno et al, 2005;Puig-Suari et al, 2001;Schaffner & Puig-Suari, 2002). But this is not the only available option in terms of wire antenna elements.…”

Section: Wire Antennas and Other Non-planar Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrically Small Microstrip Antennas Targeting Miniaturized Satellites: the CubeSat Paradigm

Kakoyiannis¹,

Constantinou²

2011

Microstrip Antennas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mini-satellite (100-500 kg) 2. Micro-satellite (10-100 kg) 3. Nano-satellite (1-10 kg) 4. Pico-satellite (0.1-1 kg) 5. Femto-satellite (0.01-0.1 kg) CubeSats belong to the genre of pico-satellites; their maximum weight lies on the borderline between pico-and nano-satellites. The main reason for miniaturizing satellites is to reduce the cost of deployment: heavier satellites require larger rockets of greater cost to finance; smaller and lighter satellites require smaller and cheaper launch vehicles, and are often suitable for launch in multiples. They can also be launched "piggyback", using the excess capacity of larger launch vehicles (Wikipedia, 2010b). But small satellites are not short of technical challenges; they usually require innovative propulsion, attitude control, communication and computation systems. For instance, micro-/nano-satellites have to use electric propulsion, compressed gas, vaporizable liquids, such as butane or carbon dioxide, or other innovative propulsion systems that are simple, cheap and scalable. Micro-satellites can use radio-communication systems in the VHF, UHF, L-, S-, C-and X-band. On-board communication systems must be much smaller, and thus more up-to-date than what is used 12 in conventional satellites, due to space constraints. Furthermore, miniature satellites usually lack the power supply and size required for conventional bulky radio transponders. Various compact innovative communication solutions have been proposed for small satellites, such as optical (laser) transceivers, antenna arrays and satellite-to-satellite data relay. Electronics need to be rigorously tested and modified to be "space hardened", that is, resistant to the outer space environment (vacuum, microgravity, thermal extremes and radiation exposure) (Wikipedia, 2010b). The CubeSat programme was developed through the joint efforts of research laboratories from California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) and Stanford University, beginning in 1999. The concept was introduced to the scientific community as an opportunity for all universities to enter the field of space science and exploration. A large group of universities, along with certain companies and organizations, participate actively in the CubeSat programme; it is estimated that 40 to 50 universities were developing CubeSats in 2004. Featuring both small size and weight, a CubeSat can be built and launched for an estimated total of $65,000-80,000 (per fiscal year 2004 values). The standard 10 × 10 × 10 cm 3 basic CubeSat is often called a "1U" CubeSat, meaning one unit. CubeSats are roughly scalable in 1U increments and larger. The four basic sizes are 0.5U, 1U, 2U and 3U. The number corresponds to the length of the CubeSat in decimetres; width and depth are always 10 cm, or 1 dm. Orbiters such as a "2U" CubeSat (20 × 10 × 10 cm 3) and a "3U" CubeSat (30 × 10 × 10 cm 3) have been both built and launched. Since CubeSats are all 10 × 10 cm 2 (regardless of length) they can all be launched and deployed using a common deployment system. CubeSats ar...

show abstract

“…As on board computer for the Telecommunication CubeSat-class satellite, the TMS320C5416 DSP efficient power consumption, from Texas Instrument was chosen for its ease of implementing the physical layer (AFSK and GMSK modems) and the data link layer (AX.25 protocol), and also for the availability of many reports applications, which reduce the design time of the satellite. The advantage of implementing AFSK and GMSK modems as software is to eliminate the need for external modem hardware needed by other satellites (Hunyadi et al, 2002), and to minimize the dimensions of the on board computer logic board which must be less than 10 cm x 10 cm. The DSP processor is connected to VHF transceiver through the AIC (Analogue Interface Circuit) interface.…”

Section: Processormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The transceiver, integrated inside the payload, operates in amateur VHF band and consists of the "guts" of a low cost Yaesu VX-1R (Hunyadi et al, 2002), arguably one of the smallest and lightest handhelds on the market. The radio is two stackable double sided PCBs measuring approximately 5 × 5 cm 2 .…”

Section: Transceivermentioning

confidence: 99%

Design of Low-cost Telecommunications CubeSat-class Spacecraft

Addaim¹,

Zantou²

2010

Aerospace Technologies Advancements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A commercial off the shelf (COTS) packet communications subsystem for the Montana EaRth-Orbiting Pico-Explorer (MEROPE) CubeSat

Cited by 14 publications

References 3 publications

A Survey of Communication Sub-systems for Intersatellite Linked Systems and CubeSat Missions

A Survey of Communication Sub-systems for Intersatellite Linked Systems and CubeSat Missions

Electrically Small Microstrip Antennas Targeting Miniaturized Satellites: the CubeSat Paradigm

Design of Low-cost Telecommunications CubeSat-class Spacecraft

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About