
For collecting weather data, tiny satellites measure up to expensive cousins - kevitivity
https://phys.org/news/2018-09-weather-tiny-satellites-billion-dollar-cousins.html
======
interknot
As a software developer, the thing I love about the cubesat concept is the
presumably reduced iteration time. The idea of waiting for years only to find
out something went wrong once the satellite is in orbit seems absurd (sorry,
GOES-17).

That said, isn't the whole concept of cubesats tied to the idea that they're
not in a geostationary orbit? There's something to be said for the simplicity
of "point at this spot in your section of sky and receive data".

I suppose now is a good time for me to look into how to get data from a
cubesat fleet.

~~~
geuis
If you're curious about this, check out Planet Lab's.
[http://planet.com/](http://planet.com/)

They have a fleet of almost 200 cubesats now, in addition to higher resolution
satellites from TerraBella. There's an api that you should be able to
experiment with.

~~~
redavni
Sadly, their time resolution (at least at the free tier) is awful.

Would be quite an interesting challenge to interpolate a large fleet of
cubesat's imagery into decent time resolution (the goes satellites regularly
do 30 sec time resolution ) over a large geographic area.

edit: The cube sats in the study are only microwave as well, which are
compared to the noaa-20 series which arent the correct comparison really.These
cubesats would fit in better with the GPM constellation for which global
coverage is pretty good, but more coverage would be good. The biggest problem
as mentioned is calibration. Accuracy of the dataset over long periods of time
is Paramount.

------
btilly
My big concern is that we still don't have a solution for
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome).
Lots and lots of small satellites brings us closer to that potential
catastrophe.

My big hope is that SpaceX's BFR can potentially launch and maneuver cheaply
enough to take dead satellites out of orbit in a cost effective manner.
Hopefully they manage to launch, and someone is willing to pay to make it
happen...

~~~
mirashii
Cubesats at their typical altitudes have deorbit times ranging from 6 months
to 20 years, with regulation (in the USA at least) mandating a deorbit within
25 years to receive a license. The fear of Kessler syndrome is much more
relevant to launching large geostationary satellites that may break apart than
for cubesats.

~~~
btilly
That is good to know. Thanks.

------
woliveirajr
> You can build them faster, which means you can put new technology on quicker
> instead of waiting 10 years for new technology infusion on a government
> program

I imagine that having one cube launch every year with top equipament (or the
best that the budget allows and tha fits the cube) can have better results
than one big giant with older technology.

Of course, probably some tech cannot fit a small satellite, but I bet that the
vast majority can. And if it can't now, it can in the following 3-5 years,
before the big one is released.

~~~
Retric
A single cube sat is vastly worse. They are comparing an array of cube sat's
which means they also end up very expensive due to short lifespans.

