[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: Flight Computers


> ... is it a given that the V53 will be used for the IHU?


> If so, it seems that 3 is the best choice, based on the 
> rational if you are chosing known reliable hardware, you 
> might as well have known reliable software too.

You could be right, but there are good reasons for investigating
alternatives, especially open source alternatives.  On what basis did
you skip 2 (RTEMS)?  It is also being used on spacecraft.

> ... I'm not certain that the V53 isn't overkill and could 
> not be replaced by a far simpler IHU or even dedicated 
> state logic. That would make available a lot more power 
> for a general purpose communications processor running 
> whatever OS the most talent is available for.  

The V53 is not overkill.  AO-E is a much more complex satellite than you
seem to think. Look for my article in the next AMSAT Journal for an
introduction. We are hoping to also fly a payload processor that will be
an ARM based CPU, similar to AO-40's IHU-2.  That decision doesn't
require that we eliminate the V53.

> ...the TI OMAP processors (ARM + DSP) look very interesting.

I expect that we will use either the StrongARM or the XScale, both from
Intel, because that builds on our experience base. XScale also has and
internal DSP engine.


Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org