Parallax and Cubesat?

tetrode314tetrode314 Posts: 1
edited 2012-10-05 - 04:16:36 in General Discussion
Cubesats have been around for a while, but in the last year or so, the pace has picked up. e.g. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/575960623/ardusat-your-arduino-experiment-in-space

I
s there any interest or discussion of putting up a cube with a "Parallax flag" on it?

Comments

  • This is the main payload board for that satellite. freetronics.com.au- ardusat-payload-processor-module

    When iI saw a 16 ATmega328P's plus one ATmega2561 supervisor that classrooms can upload projects to while the Satellite is flying in space... I thought the exact same thing. Why not build a board with a large number or P1's or P2's to play with or even fly!... (hmm... can Px's be space-rated?)

    We just need the glue logic design to switch code load and sensor control/status to/from the Px's... (yeah, just... ;-) )

    Yes, I know I'm 8 years late on this but!!!?? it would be a fun board...

  • Buck RogersBuck Rogers Posts: 1,817
    edited 2020-07-30 - 10:25:26
    Odd. I had the same idea when the BASIC Stamp was still screaming around on the Stamp 1 profile. Anyway there's a four book series on the subject of building a Cubesat and oddly enough he discusses as a host, a decided kludge. It was one of Parallax's competitors in the BASIC running market.

    And this is one of them, "O'Reilly DIY Instruments for Amateur Space: Inventing Utility for Your Spacecraft Once It Achieves Orbit, 1st Edition"
    And the others are here, by Sandy Antunes

    I met him at a Maker Faire a number of years ago, he, ah, wasn't thrilled with that platform. I confess that we met at the NASA booth where he was talking with them there about the Cubesats that were there, oh and so was I.
    I attempted to convince him that the original BASIC Stamp 2 was much better. He wasn't convinced. I firmly believe that the P1 or even a definite P2 would be much better than the Ardunio based platforms.
Sign In or Register to comment.