4 ms·
I largely agree, even though you're being downvoted. What we really need is to standardize as much of the telescope as possible. Communications? Don't need to
by AdamJacobMuller 5y ago
I largely agree, even though you're being downvoted.
What we really need is to standardize as much of the telescope as possible.
Communications? Don't need to be bespoke per satellite.
Guidance/Navigation? Doesn't need to be bespoke.
Ultimately only the actual optical payload really needs to be bespoke. Commonality of components and design can drive down prices and reduce time-to-launch.
- Rebelgecko 5y agoThe problem is that if you can't really just standardize every subsystem unless you're willing to give compromise your mission in the name of a one-sizw-fits-all approach. Presumably the people who built JWST passed on of-the-shelf busses for a reason. Imagine if you to tried to force JWST's bus onto every satellite: people who don't care about pointing accuracy end up spending zillions of dollars so they can have fraction of an arc-second precision satellites that are in Earth orbit have different thermal needs than one in L2 satellites that are less weight sensitive waste money on carbon fiber an instrument that needs to be cooled down to 50K doesn't need a JWST-tier cryocooler, etc. You could try having a range of things, e.g. small, medium, and large bus with a handful of interchangeable subsystems. But you're still asking designers to sacrifice their precious size, weight & power requirements