Views: 0 Author: Site Editor Publish Time: 2026-06-08 Origin: Site
The selection of a satellite platform is one of the most fundamental hardware choices in a space mission. It dictates the overall Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) budget range available for the rest of the setup and has knock-on effects on all other aspects of the mission design.
Here are some of the key criteria to weight up when selecting a microsatellite or CubeSat platform:
Do-it-yourself (DIY) vs. pre-designed bus – firstly you need to determine whether a platform is actually right for your mission. The alternative is to build and/or purchase all of the elements present in a bus and then integrate and test these yourself.
There are many factors at play when making this choice. For example, if your goal is to build engineering capacity at your organization, a pre-built platform might not be for you. On the other hand, as is the case with many new space-based services; if your aims are to achieve a certain level of performance and reliability, and you’re agnostic to the technology that achieves it, a pre-qualified bus could be the best choice for you.
Form factor – the physical dimensions of the satellite is a very important consideration and will define the limitations on many of the subsystems you are able to use. The most important part of this decision is to again consider the service or performance levels that you wish to achieve and the mission plan that will be developed to do so.
Making decisions based on what your intended outcomes are, including the expected return on investment (RoI) for the mission, is going to determine what size of satellite should be used. There are many aspects of this decision, from primary payload dimensions to financial budget, but the important thing is to accurately assess the range of satellite platform form factors on the market to make the best choice for your mission goals.
Launch and deployment options – in the last 10 years microsat and CubeSat options have had a major impact on the market. The options for launching and deploying a nanosat or microsat are now well-developed, and shouldn’t be a major issue for professional missions.
Cost and availability will always be an issue, however, this is more of a mission planning consideration rather than a significant determining factor for the size or structure of the platform you may use.
Supplier restrictions and standards – as with any mission choice your platform decision also needs to take into account any limitations you (or your collaborators) may have on importing from certain countries and territories.
In addition, if your technology has military or other sensitive applications and/or requires particular enabling subsystems that need to adhere to certain standards or regulations, this might dictate which platforms on the market are available for you to use.
Supplier heritage and fit – finally, alongside the technical considerations and data analysis that needs to be carried out in order to pick the right platform, you also need to consider the expertise of the team you’ll be working with.
A satellite platform is a complex piece of equipment that will usually require a lot of collaboration with the manufacturer. You need to make sure that team you’ll be working with are experienced and flexible enough to meet your needs.
This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t consider platforms with little or no flight heritage, as it might be possible to negotiate more favourable contract terms in these cases. You may be able to develop closer working partnerships with newer teams as you will be taking on more risk. On the other hand, you might decide that well-established suppliers, with products that have significant operational heritage, are a safer bet.
Ensure that you try to assess how well you would work with the supplier in your project as part of the procurement process.
In the following sections we share details of a variety of commercially-available microsatellite and CubeSat platforms on the space market, organized by form factor.
