Reddit reviews Space Mission Analysis and Design, 3rd edition (Space Technology Library, Vol. 8)
We found 12 Reddit comments about Space Mission Analysis and Design, 3rd edition (Space Technology Library, Vol. 8). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
This is the best answer. And the reason why the spacecraft computers are 5-10 years behind commercial technology.
Source: SMAD
/u/another_user_name posted this list a while back. Actual aerospace textbooks are towards the bottom but you'll need a working knowledge of the prereqs first.
Non-core/Pre-reqs:
Mathematics:
Calculus.
1-4) Calculus, Stewart -- This is a very common book and I felt it was ok, but there's mixed opinions about it. Try to get a cheap, used copy.
1-4) Calculus, A New Horizon, Anton -- This is highly valued by many people, but I haven't read it.
1-4) Essential Calculus With Applications, Silverman -- Dover book.
More discussion in this reddit thread.
Linear Algebra
3) Linear Algebra and Its Applications,Lay -- I had this one in school. I think it was decent.
3) Linear Algebra, Shilov -- Dover book.
Differential Equations
4) An Introduction to Ordinary Differential Equations, Coddington -- Dover book, highly reviewed on Amazon.
G) Partial Differential Equations, Evans
G) Partial Differential Equations For Scientists and Engineers, Farlow
More discussion here.
Numerical Analysis
5) Numerical Analysis, Burden and Faires
Chemistry:
Physics:
2-4) Physics, Cutnel -- This was highly recommended, but I've not read it.
Programming:
Introductory Programming
Programming is becoming unavoidable as an engineering skill. I think Python is a strong introductory language that's got a lot of uses in industry.
Core Curriculum:
Introduction:
Aerodynamics:
Thermodynamics, Heat transfer and Propulsion:
Flight Mechanics, Stability and Control
5+) Flight Stability and Automatic Control, Nelson
5+)[Performance, Stability, Dynamics, and Control of Airplanes, Second Edition](http://www.amazon.com/Performance-Stability-Dynamics-Airplanes-Education/dp/1563475839/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1315534435&sr=8-1, Pamadi) -- I gather this is better than Nelson
Engineering Mechanics and Structures:
3-4) Engineering Mechanics: Statics and Dynamics, Hibbeler
6-8) Analysis and Design of Flight Vehicle Structures, Bruhn -- A good reference, never really used it as a text.
G) Introduction to the Mechanics of a Continuous Medium, Malvern
G) Fracture Mechanics, Anderson
G) Mechanics of Composite Materials, Jones
Electrical Engineering
Design and Optimization
Space Systems
BMW as recommended previously. The other Bible for spacecraft design is SMAD.
http://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108/ref=pd_sim_b_1
I also have that book. I think it's great if you already understand orbits. If you don't, it might be a little too technical. However, to anyone that already has a base in orbits, that is a great book.
Another good one!
SMAD.
https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1535934282&sr=8-3&keywords=smad
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porkchop_plot
​
Find one of these for the earth-moon system, if you haven't already.
​
Did your prof say how much they weigh delta-v vs time of flight? Knowing how they are going to grade is probably better for making a cost function than assuming how much consumables/fuel you need.
​
There is this, I have no idea how helpful it will be: https://www.nasa.gov/offices/ocfo/nasa-cost-estimating-handbook-ceh
​
A copy of SMAD may be available at your local uni library: https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108
​
Barring that, you could assume a rate for consumption of well, consumables (food, air, etc) and use that to find a mass budget for that. You can then assuming a launch cost per lb. Do something similar for your propulsion system, but assuming an engine with a certain ISP/propellant.
First, let's rephrase your statement 'SpaceX showed significant cost savings during Falcon 9 development, compared to traditionally procured launchers' The distinction is important, especially since you don't have insight into SpaceX's accounts to back up that claim, but rather tertiary sources through the GAO.
Secondly, developing launchers and developing spacecraft art nothing alike. I'm almost a full stack launch vehicle engineer. I'd be so far out of my depth on a spacecraft development campaign, it'd be funny. SpaceX was able to develop Falcon 9 for so cheap because:
Planetary science missions (especially to Europa):
​
You ignored the precedent of ISI's Beresheet lander, and my indictment of your ad revenue model. Please read SMAD before commenting again.
Je me suis débrouillé au final et j'ai à peu près acheté les mêmes livres plus d'autres en français :
J'en ai eu pour un peu moins de 100€ mais là au moins je suis blindé pour te faire toutes les trajectoires que tu veux :)
For the downlink, sounds like you need a copy of SMAD. I'm sure you can find a free copy somewhere, but here's a link. http://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108
Specifically, it discusses the link budget equation in great detail. A necessary estimate of the type of power/antenna/frequency/datarate configuration you'll need. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_budget#Equation
That said, the old team I was a part of used a UHF radio at ~700 MHz for our simple 9600 bps beaconing system. For one spacecraft, that was our only way of downlinking pictures, and yes, it tooks quite a few passes to get a full-res image. Compression sure helps.
For higher datarates, people typically move to an S-Band radio, which we did for subsequent cubesats. As a general rule, higher frequency means you can shove more data into the transmission. However, keep in mind your frequency's interaction with the atmosphere.
That said, I'm not an EE, I just worked with a bunch of 'em. :D
Not sure what to say as words of wisdom, except that you should get a copy of SMAD III if you're serious about making this project work.
The JC2Sat mission was supposed to be about a year, though the satellites should remain functional in orbit for years afterwards.
I don't have any ideas for a science project to include on the reddit satellite, just keep in mind that that space-certified equipment is outrageously expensive so you might just want to do something simple (like Sputnik) for a first shot at space.
There are literally hundreds of companies which specialize in all sorts of space-certified parts, with most of the big ones being American firms. If you expect participation of non-Americans with any of the hardware acquisition/assembly/etc, you'll probably run into ITAR restrictions at some point. For all the good that comes with international collaboration on space projects, ITAR pretty much negates it all. You wouldn't believe the hoops that non-American persons and companies have to jump through in order to buy something as simple as a space-certified hinge from an American firm...
There are several courses that ARO (usually) has, but ME exclusive program doesn't, such as Gas Dynamics, Low/High Speed Aerodynamics, Orbital Mechanics, Aircraft Stability, and Jet Propulsion. I based this statement from the school (CalPoly Pomona) that I went to. YMMV.
Book recommendations:
Aerospace is broad subject, you haven't specified whether you're interested in structures, aerodynamics, flight mechanics, or propulsion. I gave you a broad list of selection to reflect that, although I assume you are more inclined toward Astronautics (Space) part of Aerospace instead of Aeronautics (Air); hence you posted your question in /r/space.
https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108
This is the one. There’s a newer version, but my professsor profers this one.