Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Nanosatellite Satellite Inspection 43

Posted by Hemos from the open-the-hood-up dept.
Richard Lancaster writes: "A couple of months ago Slashdot carried a story about the SSTL SNAP-1 spacecraft entitled "Nanosatellite Takes Out The Trash". However, SNAP-1 is a nanosatellite technology demonstrator with a primary mission objective of performing on orbit remote inspection of other spacecraft. We have now carried out our initial remote inspection mission, the results of which are here, and also made an official press release here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nanosatellite Satellite Inspection More

Nanosatellite Satellite Inspection

Comments Filter:
  • > Of course, part of me wishes they looked more like the repair bots from Babylon-5...

    I'll get onto our mechanics guys right away :)

    Richard Lancaster
    Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd

  • Assistant (Score:1)

    by jjr ( 6873 )
    These are going to become the new assistants of the astronauts. I thought I saw a story once about a sphere like assistant. That was suppose to help the astronauts.

  • They are certainly still in production. I just received them as part of the 2000 US Mint Proof and Uncirculated coin sets that can be purchased from the US Mint [usmint.gov].

    Personally, I think they should be taken out of production. It's just as easy to carry two quarters as one half dollar. The fifty cent piece has about as much redundancy as a two dollar bill.

  • Nano-anythings floating around in earth orbit are a bad idea. We've got enough bits of crap and junk and hunks of old satellites zooming around at incredible speeds up there already. The last thing we need is a bunch of little damn 'bugs' getting lost up there, winged off a satellite by a discarded fleck of paint off of one of the Apollo mission craft. It'd probably latch onto the hubble and start fixing stuff it didn't know was broken to begin with.

    Silly.
  • Hmm, doesn't seem like the nano did any on-orbit maneuvering, just detached itself from its booster and took a picture. It's not hard to make a satellite that'll last 10 minutes in space and performs 1 function. If it actually performed the rendezvous using its own propellant, i'd be more impressed.

    Anyway this looks like an anti-sat weapon in disguise -- oops, sorry, we just sprayed black paint on your recon satellite's solar panels! :)
  • What are they going to call real nano-satelites when the technology can get us down to the atomic scale?

    Nano-Nano

    No, seriously.. maybe they'll just call atomic-scale devices "atmospheric drag".

  • The US has had a 50 cent piece for quite some time. I don't know if they're made anymore, but they are out there. They're certainly not as common or popularly used as the other coins. And never will be, as long as the average soda machine does not accept them.

    I remember a long time ago the post offices here tended to like to dispense those for change when getting a book of stamps from the machine. I went to a convenience store afterwards, attempted to buy a drink, and the clerk had to check with her manager to make sure the damn things were "real".

  • well nano meaning 10^-9 for units, this would say thaht "normal satellites should weight around 1000 tons ... :-)

    So I also think that nano was a good choice to describe those satellites.
  • the cameras are ... each smaller than a 2 pence (50 cent) piece!

    Methinks their UK-US Babelfish is broken, unless a 50 cent piece has been introduced recently in the US?

    A 2 pence piece is about an inch in diameter, which I guess is just slightly larger than a quarter (I don't have one to hand).
  • However, SNAP-1 is a nanosatellite technology demonstrator with a primary mission objective of performing on orbit remote inspection of other spacecraft.

    Hmmm, maybe that's not just a fungus [slashdot.org] on Mir.

    All we've done up with is an intelligent slime mold. [slashdot.org] Maybe the Russian space program is more advanced than we ever realized.

    Are we prepared to shoot Mir out of the sky when it's "taken out of service" right into the Pentagon?

    ^_-


    --

  • In addition to 50 cent pieces, we also have dollar pieces, though in many cases they can be worth more than a dollar. They're nice and heavy, and feel like real money.
  • I remember reading somewhere that the cost in fuel per pound is about 10,000 USD. Gotta remember the escape velocity of earth is about 7 miles/s
  • I think they do freebies for humanitarian interests ... get cancer or loose a limb or something then maybe you'd have a shot.
  • I was wondering how I could get one of my many projects into space...

    Will NASA/ESA/Russian Space Thingy launch anything I give them? How much would this cost? Say something that weights 1 pound...

    That would be pretty sweet if they did. :-) I don't see why they wouldn't... just have it ride piggy-back.

    But then it would have to be assured that the private craft doesn't mess with the real one.

    Just wondering.
  • Hmmm... that is a bit steap. :-) But I wonder, would they accept my request? You hear about NASA lauching stuff with companies/schools... but never the private inventor.

    Anyone know of a company I could talk to to get my projects into space?
  • Damn... that might be tricky. There must be another way. :-) Peace out.
  • Besides, at true nano size, you're not talking about enough size or power to actually do anything. Not in the scale of space you're looking at, anyway...

    No, imagine. Large globs of nano-satellites. When they need to change orbit, they can lengthen themselves out into a cable (also usable for generating power), convert themselves to the tool of choice (adjustable wrench, pliers), split themselves into multiple parts when required in more than one place (one group to hold the parts together, the other to do up the nut), form into parabolic mirror shapes for welding, spread themselves out flat to shield from sunlight or as a solar sail, stand in for broken components on satellites. Very flexible indeed

    Rich

  • I wonder if anyone has had the idea to combine satellites with that new fangled wheelchair technology (the 1 with the 3 pentiums, the chair that WILL NOT let you fall off!) and make very effective anti-satellite mines/missiles. Given the relative power of the StrongArm (I think the 220 version was the second to be produced quite a number of years ago now although the one they used here was probably modified to survive in space). You could also use them to produce little sats that can find eachother automatically. This would be useful for sending components of some big structure one at a time and and on the cheap so that they can be assemble at some later date, by robots or by hand. Either way it should be fun (?? - possibly in an abstract problem solving way)

    dnnrly

  • Re:Destroying Big Brother in space (Score:3)

    by Dannon ( 142147 ) on Thursday October 05, 2000 @04:47AM (#730078) Journal
    I'd be worried about an application like this doing as much, if not more, harm than good.

    For one thing, I believe one of the major things that kept the Cold War cold as the space race picked up was that the US and the USSR could each see, to some extent, what the other was doing... If one could've made a move without the other knowing, things could've gotten ugly.

    Also, consider the ways in which the public has profited from programs of military application. GPS sattellites which were originally launched to aid the aiming of missiles are now used in cars, on fishing boats, on camping trips, and so on. Sattelite photographs used for geological surveys and mapmaking could easily be used for military logistics. Or, even worse, in the future, when scientists and civilians make their homes in orbit. How does a satellite aimed at 'taking out' other satellites make the distinciton? How do humans make the distinction for the satellites... and where does one draw the line?

    Finally, consider this: Even given the low price tag on these satellites, I can think of a few ways in which these 'poorest of countries' that you mention might rather be willing to spend their precious funds. Food and infrastructure for growth would be at the top of my list.

    Don't get me wrong... It's an interesting thought. I'm just not sure it's a can of worms that we really want opened up.


    ---
    Hold the mold, Klunk.
  • Sorry. Got a 1999 Susan B. in my house right now. Got it as change from a stamp vending machine from the post office. They are still in circulation. Only other place I have seen new ones tho is from the VR arcade at disneyland when I used to live in california.
  • 50 cent pieces have been around for quite some time and some are still in circulation. They are larger than a quarter by about 50%. Nice pieces of change, if a rare find these days.
  • Someone call Martin Short up about these sattelites. He could be a creative consultant for such *ahem* short things...

    ----

  • I agree with Kamel, this is a crock of shit.
    Any further PR attempts by these people with no real results is just going to make people know what kind of idiots they really are.
    And they're happy about these extra bits of orbital debris costing less than $1M?
    Wholly shit!
    What about when they lose one, and it kills some $20B Satalite?
  • You saw it here first: http://slashdot.org/articles/99/07/17/2312225.shtm l [slashdot.org]
    Actually a somewhat vague article, but it was clear that these are completely unrelated projects; the astronaut assistants will operate inside spacecraft.
  • I wonder if the NRO would be upset if someone launched such a nanosat and then wandered over to one of their spysats and started taking video. . .
    Of course, for big satellites you can already get some idea of what they look like from the ground [skyshow.com], but the nanosat obviously does much, much better.
  • Could this be the solution to the sateleite eating fungus? After all, if we can stick a high tech camera on it, how hard would it be to put a can of anti-fungul spray on it? I think these nanosattelites just put us one step closer to mantenience robots. Then true laziness can be achieved.
  • This could definately be implemented, however I don't believe that it would make your country any more 'secure' from imperialists.

    Destroying multi-million dollar spy satellites of countries that have the capability to pretty much decimate yours isn't going to put you in good favour none the less. It's a sad reality, but there really isn't much that anyone could do about it - the US forces crippling trade embargos on any country that doesn't even have the same political views as it (Cuba, for example). There is one post (a very good idea I might add!) however which suggests making a bunch of these nanosatellites that could just sit in front of the spy satellite's cameras, now that would be wicked!

    If there was ever another large scale global war, (I hope we're past that though) I wouldn't be surprised if this type of anti-spying tactic was employed.

  • The idea of having tiny little space going satellittes gave me an idea. Why not have lots of mini satellittes that are able to join up into larger structures in a sort of Lego type fashion. Stick some sort of short range radio communications gear on each one (along the lines of Bluetooth), and one piece of specialised equipment each, launch a big bunch of them into space, and have them communicate. If you need a machine to repair a space station a couple of solar cell satellittes and a few tool satellittes all come together, join up with a booster satellitte and get the job done. Then the solar cells could break off and manoveur to somewhere else they're needed. Much more effiecient than having big specialised bits of equipment, cheaper in the long run, and possibley adaptive too. Assuming its all possible..
  • If/when we ever make it offplanet on a permanent basis, and these satellites become cheap enough to mass produce, they would be ideal for survey teams. On the Moon, these would require a lot less fuel and shooting one up into geosynch. orbit could be done with a portable launch system.
  • The U.S. shares much of its recon data with its major allies like the UK, Australia, Germany, etc., so they're not about to do anything to jeopardize that relationship. In fact, systems like Echelon are joint efforts, so they'd be blowing up their own equipment. Besides, as I hear every so often by Statists regarding police searches, "if they're not doing anything wrong, why should they object if we surveille their every move?" (In case it isn't obvious, this is SARCASM (a registered tm of Microsoft)).
  • Probably the size of the transmitters able to send telemety to earth and the associated power supply systems are the big limiting factor - you could make a tiny satellite, but you couldn't talk to it...

    Perhaps launching sats with mobile phone style repeaters will be a future solution - the minisats could relay through these, and have much lower power radio gear....

    Dunno - what do you think?

  • Destroying Big Brother in space (Score:3)

    by flatpack ( 212454 ) on Thursday October 05, 2000 @03:59AM (#730091)

    What I would like to know is whether these satellites could be used to make sure that countries like America are unable to spy on other countries with impunity. Countries could launch dozens of these nanosatellites, and use them as kinetic missiles against spy platforms or other more dubious ventures such as Star Wars satellites.

    This way, even the poorest of countries could afford to ensure their security from the prying eyes of expansionist countries intent on prying every secret possible from their so-called allies. I think this would make a valuable contribution to both privacy and democracy, and would be a worthwhile use of $$$.

  • Nano? (Score:1)

    by gmm ( 218993 )
    Well I was under the impression that nano was supposed to mean small, like atomic small. If these satelites are between 1 and 10kg in weight that hardly qualifies them as nano IMHO.

    What are they going to call real nano-satelites when the technology can get us down to the atomic scale?

    --------------------------------------------
  • ahhhhhh.....do you remember the bots from that movie Silent Running [video-department.com] - Hewie, Dewie, and Louis if my memory serves me correctly. Weren't they lovely! Bless 'em.

    --------------------------------------------
  • Just think of it; we will finally see how much space fungus our satellites are gathering up there in orbit. An inspection of the Hubble and other elderly satellites up there might very well become an extraterrestrial biology safari.

    At the current rate of this technology, I won't have to worry about cholesterol anymore; we'll probably have nanoprobes run through our bloodstream in the future, burning up that plaque in the arteries.

  • If we even plan on having permanent orbital habitations, something like this is definately needed, both for removing debris from orbit, and to ensure the safety and integrity of such a habitat.

    Of course, part of me wishes they looked more like the repair bots from Babylon-5...

    NecroPuppy
    ---
    Godot called. He said he'd be late.
  • What are they going to call real nano-satelites when the technology can get us down to the atomic scale?

    I don't think they will ever get them down that small. You're talking about absolutely huge volumes of space... I mean, this would be beyond needle in a haystack, you're looking at single grain of sand on a beach.

    Besides, at true nano size, you're not talking about enough size or power to actually do anything. Not in the scale of space you're looking at, anyway...

    NecroPuppy
    ---
    Godot called. He said he'd be late.
  • I wonder if the NRO would be upset if someone launched such a nanosat and then wandered over to one of their spysats and started taking video. . .

    Not as upset as they would be if another bot came over and starting cutting into it with a radial saw blade. (Yes, I watched Battle Bots last night.)

    Even more amusing would be a sat-bot that kept repositioning itself in front of a spybot so that the only pics the spybot got were of the blocker... I bet then we'd find out if those spybots had any weaponry... :)

    NecroPuppy
    ---
    Godot called. He said he'd be late.
  • From the article: ... four micro-miniature single-chip video cameras, each smaller than a 2 pence (50 cent) piece!

    Amazing! It's even able to change the US/British exchange rates by an order of magnitude! Not bad for a sattelite that small.

    I want to see the software they used to make 2 pence worth 50 cents. It's probably some kind of IIS hack they're not willing to reveal.

  • Another alternative to providing security for your country though is the possibility of a nation disrupting (international) communications. If they can disable a spy satelite, then they can disable anything. Though could potentially attack, say, the space shuttle, the ISS, or anything else that they wanted to. This is not something that will only be used for good (or at least justified) purposes. If you recall from Desert Storm, one of the first things the US did was to attack the modes of communication in Iraq. Now, this could be done in space to cutoff military troops from their headquarters on the other side of the globe.
  • This just shows how old I am, but the name SNAP originally stands for Space Nuclear Auxilary Power. Check out this badly mangled url for more information: http://spacelink.nasa.gov/NASA.Projects/Human.Expl oration.and.Development.of.Space/Human.S pace.Flight/Shuttle/Shuttle.Missions/Flight.031.ST S-34/Galileos.Power.Supply/Space.Nuclear .Power.System.Accidents People should be a little more careful picking their names.
  • So much fuss about such a far-thing.

    Ok, a farthing was a quarter of a penny before British decimalisation.

  • There are two half-dollar coins in the US. The older had Benjamin Franklin on it, and the newer had John F Kennedy. Neither is commonly circulated (like with Susan B Anthony dollars).

Slashdot Top Deals

The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine

Close