[Ground-station] NDA - Ettus, GOLF, Phase 4 Space

Sun Jun 17 05:36:16 PDT 2018

Another try.
Apologies if you get two copies

> On Jun 17, 2018, at 11:30 AM, Mike Parker <airarray at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Just a quick note from my vacation.
> 
> I wish to remind everyone that the price of an AstroSDR to AMSAT for P4B was free.  Rincon delivered an engineering test model to Va Tech before the work on P4B stood down and still plans to deliver a flight board should the project ever be resurrected.
> In addition, I spent a substantial amount of Rincon IRAD money to support P4B preliminary design and am protecting still more for AstroSDR support should it be resurrected.
> 
> Regarding the commercial price of an AstroSDR, I have some insight as to reasons and suggest that you may get what you pay for.  At the start of the P4B project we had planned to use an LPFE board that Rincon designed for terrestrial used. The AstroSDR board was derived from that board, but used components and design modifications in critical areas to make it more space tolerant.  Some of these components add substantial cost.
> 
> On a positive note, there is hope that some AstroSDR’s will be launched this year on non-ham satellites.
> 
> For those that want the latest cheapest thing from Rincon that purports to stream data to Gnu Radio or MATLAB, I suggest you check out the Raptor board found under www.rincon.com.  I haven’t personally used it, and it isn’t designed for space.
> 
> One more note.  An LPFE has been on the internet accessible as a satellite simulator to designated AMSAT p4b personal for perhaps two years.  To the best of my knowledge this hasn’t been used, so I will probably repurpose this for use by other projects sometime this summer.
> 73,
> Mike Parker, KT7D 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jun 15, 2018, at 10:12 PM, Howie DeFelice via Ground-Station <ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute> wrote:
>> 
>> The AstroSDR was supposed to be the primary communications payload on CQC. Both the AstroSDR and Ettus radios can do signal processing either in the FPGA or in an external processor or some combination of both. The issues we found with the AstroSDR at the time was the lack of low level interface firmware that allowed development using GnuRadio. The cost of an AstroSDR is also astronomical (hmmm, wonder if that had anything to do with the name). Ultimately the better approach may be to build a board from scratch using the Pluto board as a reference and upgrading the transceiver and FPGA to larger devices. That would be no more work than relaying out an Ettus radio and could still use the Ettus drivers (which I believe are open source). The advantage is that the hardware, including design files, could be open source. This is not a trivial task but it also does not require too much research other than verifying the differences between the transceiver and FPGA variants. It WILL require an experienced PCB designer with multilayer board experience. 
>> 
>> Howie AB2S
>>  
>> From: Ground-Station <ground-station-bounces at lists.openresearch.institute> on behalf of Zach Leffke via Ground-Station <ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute>
>> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 1:29 PM
>> To: ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute
>> Subject: Re: [Ground-station] NDA - Ettus, GOLF, Phase 4 Space
>>  
>> I'll offer an opinion, with no hard numbers to back it.....so maybe just thoughts to consider.
>> 
>> The baseline for the GEO mission payload at VT up through PDR (maybe two or so years stale at this point?) was based on the AstroSDR from Rincon.  The folks at Rincon were super supportive and easy to work with.  I'm pretty sure there were some efforts around IP cores for DVB-S2X with AHA (...more NDAs...) tailored for the AstroSDR as well (not sure how far that went).  We're actively pursing other missions at VT/Hume that involve the AstroSDR in some way shape or form (two engineering units are 'in the mail' as soon as NDAs and such get worked out).  To my limited understanding/eye it is about on par with the capabilities associated with the E310 in terms of signal processing, but obviously with lots of focus on flightworthiness for spaceflight (radiation, thermal, etc.).  So I would offer that VT *may* be able to offer some insights into the AstroSDR (within the limits of our NDAs with Rincon/Primes) as things progress on those contracts over the next year and beyond (haven't learned much in the last couple years of being on hold since the GEO PDR, but that should start to change here in the next couple weeks).
>> The LimeSDR and Pluto as I understand it are just the SDRs, with no real signal processing capability native to them, implying there would be a need to develop the signal processing 'host computer' or FPGA or whatever.  The AstroSDR and the E310/320 have the compute power native to them, so are more of a complete package.
>> 
>> In cases of a 'complete space SDR' (Ettus/Rincon/others), NDAs around the devices seem to add a layer of complexity that makes open source work more difficult (not impossible, but 'trickier').  Maybe that's a deterrent for others, but clearly not for ORI.  Tether's Unlimited has a pretty sophisticated line of 'SWIFT SDRs' that might be an option (with lots of options and capabilities for multiple bands from UHF through at least Ka-Band).  The L3 (Comm Systems West division) CADET is an SDR 'under the hood.'  I think the Innoflight radios are SDRs as well.  In all three cases though, without engaging in pricey contracts and talking a lot about fees for custom modifications, the baseline product you get is just their 'custom firmware load' for whatever protocol you want the radios to support, usually targeted at high rate data downlink, with minimal uplink capability.  There are probably many other 'complete packages' at any number of defense contractors that would likely be impossible for anyone other than US Gov to work with .  
>> I'd offer that Ettus and Rincon seem to be the easiest to work with and more receptive when it comes to developing with devices under NDA for an overall open source project.  The other companies I mentioned won't show you whats behind the curtain, they'll ask for requirements, and charge you an arm and a leg to have their own developers implement it to your specs (if they do any more than just sell you the baseline model at all).........not great for experimentation/prototyping/etc.........  
>> I don't think I'm left field when saying the ideal case would be an open source equivalent (or maybe even something less capable, but good enough for proposed mission conops).  Still pretty green in this whole arena, but is there maybe some value to investigating the AMSAT work on the ARISSsat SDX and maybe updating it based on more current technology?  The capabilities are a far cry from AstroSDR/E310 type devices though, so that might be wasted effort if its a huge jump to the type of capability we want.  If not the SDX work itself, maybe a longer term strategy/road map for ORI should include development of their own open source 'space sdr.'
>> 
>> 
>> -Zach, KJ4QLP
>> Research Associate
>> Aerospace Systems Lab
>> Ted & Karyn Hume Center for National Security & Technology
>> Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
>> Work Phone: 540-231-4174
>> Cell Phone: 540-808-6305
>>> On 6/15/2018 12:29 PM, Michelle Thompson via Ground-Station wrote:
>>> The Careful COTS effort for a re-layout of the USRP for GOLF and Phase 4 Space has changed.
>>> 
>>> Ettus declined to sign an NDA with AMSAT GOLF for the E310. It is assumed that GOLF will adopt the original plan presented at Symposium 2017. We have received no communications from GOLF since the minutes from the second Careful COTS conference call were published. 
>>> 
>>> Phase 4 Space will continue to work with Ettus and other open source teams to target the E320 as a potential communications package. 
>>> 
>>> The E320 layout will have to be redesigned, if that is what we choose to adapt. As previously discussed, radiation requirements are not the only concern. We need to know what we're doing with thermal as well. 
>>> 
>>> A variety of research efforts are active to adapt a USRP for higher orbits, with good published results from a number of universities. While not a bad choice at all considering the USRP is widely used, there are other alternatives for a baseline SDR.
>>> 
>>> LimeSDR and the Pluto have been frequently brought up, and then there is also the Rincon AstroSDR. 
>>> 
>>> With IHUs developing, the challenge of producing a solid, open source communications hardware package needs some serious discussion. Comment and critique welcomed and encouraged. 
>>> 
>>> Continue with the E320? 
>>> 
>>> -Michelle W5NYV
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ground-Station mailing list
>>> Ground-Station at lists.openresearch.institute
>>> http://lists.openresearch.institute/mailman/listinfo/ground-station
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ground-Station mailing list
>> Ground-Station at lists.openresearch.institute
>> http://lists.openresearch.institute/mailman/listinfo/ground-station
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openresearch.institute/pipermail/ground-station-openresearch.institute/attachments/20180617/a757a606/attachment.html>