Subscribe to rss feed

Adopting the Reddit CubeSat project | Project Proposals | Forum

 
You must be logged in to post user permissions login Login register Register


Register? | Lost Your Password?

Search Forums:


searchicon 






Minimum search word length is 3 characters – Maximum search word length is 84 characters
Wildcard Usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

topic

Adopting the Reddit CubeSat project

print
small tagNo Tags
UserPost

11:20 pm
April 2, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
1
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Post edited 11:33 pm – April 2, 2010 by Luke Maurits


Discussions on the proposal for CSTART to "adopt" the Reddit CubeSat project seem to have stalled somewhat.  Let's see if we can get the ball rolling again:

  1. First things first, is everybody okay with this?  I am talking mostly to the Acting Directors, but am happy to hear objections from anyway.  If anybody doesn'/em> want us to go ahead with this, can you say so in this thread, in the near future, giving your reasons?  Otherwise I'd like to see us push forward with this.
  2. There is the issue with the Design Philosophy, which there is a dedicated thread about. Not many people from CSTART have commented on this yet, it would be nice to see them do so.  Regardless, I do not think this is a show stopper.  As long as we all agree we are willing to make some kind of change to accomodate this project, we can push on with the project and make the changes later – nobody is going to yell at us for bending the rules slightly for a month or two in a way which is obviously consistent with our goals.
  3. The project will need a name.  I recall some people were throwing around something like OSCAR or OSCOR or the like.  With regard to this, I thought people should know that AMSAT have something called OSCAR, for "Orbiting Satellite Carrying Amateur Radio", so we may want to think of something a little more distinct.
  4. The project needs a clear purpose.  OHKLA and CLLARE are very well-defined projects: Get a hybrid rocket more than 100 km above the ground, get a person onto the lunar surface and then back to Earth.  It's quite clear how to proceed.  But "put a CubeSat in orbit" is a little vague – a 10 x 10 x 10 cm solid block of wood is technically a CubeSat, but obviously we want to put something more advanced than that into orbit!  We need to figure out why we want to do this.  "Because it's awesome" (while obviously true) isn't really a good enough justification for the CSTART organisation to do this, we need to think about what we can do with a CubeSat which will be most useful for us as an organisation and set up some minimum requirements so we can start design work on the project.  As a part of this, we should decide if the goal of the project is to produce a single once-off satellite, or if it is to be a program with multiple satellites of increasing complexity/capability.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

2:12 am
April 3, 2010


rpulkrabek

Member

posts 348

offline
link
print
2
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I agree that it would be good to adopt the CubeSat project. For one, it will make our combined team stronger and more people will become interested, sort of a synergy. As far as our design philosophy goes, I think we should somehow change it so that it fits with the CubeSat team. Whether that means we reword the "using off the shelf parts" or creating a disclaimer. Either way, I think both teams have something to gain after this.

2:43 am
April 3, 2010


Rizwan

Admin

posts 170

offline
link
print
3
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I am in favour of adopting the cubesat project. But recently the project has been quite silent, what if we adopt it and no one works on it after a few days? Like I said before, we should avoid bad PR.

6:29 am
April 3, 2010


Rocket-To-The-Moon

Altus, Oklahoma, USA

Member

posts 685

offline
link
print
4
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I suppose I don't really see any harm in doing so as long as they run it by themselves. Basically our only interaction would be maintaining the CSTART infrastructure for them (unless we choose to become involved obviously). We would want to maintain a working knowledge of what they are doing so that the teams don't waste energy by duplicating work; the open model should facilitate this.

Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering

small tagNo Tags

About the CSTART – Collaborative Space Travel and Research Team Forum

Forum Timezone: UTC -6

Most Users Ever Online: 59

Currently Online:
5 Guests

Currently Browsing this Topic:
1 Guest

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4
Forums: 36
Topics: 513
Posts: 3808

Membership:

There are 362 Members

There are 2 Admins

Top Posters:

Rocket-To-The-Moon – 685
brmj – 402
rpulkrabek – 348
DenisG – 69
antinode – 64
J. Simmons – 46

Recent New Members: kelley, Robinn, kasperholly, sharonn, alexander007, shekhar

Administrators: Luke Maurits (1483 Posts), Rizwan (170 Posts)



 
share save 120 16