have “a winning system.” But an all-electric satellite that uses tiny ion particles for thrust would have trade-offs. The satellite’s mass, and corresponding launch costs, would be significantly less. But its lower thrust meant it would take much longer to get the satellite to the proper orbit, or to reposition the satellite later to another orbit if the customer wanted. “A satellite propelled with xenon is like having a vehicle that gets 300 miles per gallon—it’s way more efficient,” said Danny Howard, a team lead responsible for developing the avionics subsystems on the 702SP. “It might take longer to get there, but you burn a fraction of the fuel to reach the final destination.” Using a satellite’s on-board chemical propulsion system, it typically can take one to three weeks to maneuver a satellite from where the rocket drops it off in space until its final position. Depending on the launch vehicle used, this can take from three to eight months with an all-electric satellite. And a satellite doesn’t start producing revenue until it’s in the proper orbit and the signal has been acquired by the customer. Would customers want to wait that long? The solution, explained Holly Murphy, 702SP platform integrated product team lead and one of the original members of the development team, was to reduce manufacturing cost and time in the factory by optimizing the design—everything from developing new flight software and avionics hardware to changing the way PHOTO: (Far left) Matt Herrmann, left, vehicle engineer, and Carolyn Kim, manufacturing planner, look over a satellite communications payload. GRAPHIC: (Below) An artist’s concept of the Boeing 702SP satellite. ABS-2A is scheduled to launch in late 2015. BOEING Frontiers November 2014 19
Frontiers November 2014 Issue
To see the actual publication please follow the link above