Page 19 - test

Ref : CM-DFH4-2014-1
BEAZLEY Issue : 1

DFH 4 Series Spacecraft Date : 28 Sept 2014
Page 17 of 38

6.1 LAOSAT TECHNICAL ASSEMENT SUMMARY

Based on the above analysis, one can conclude:
 The Loasat spacecraft is not too complex and the payload is relatively simple.
 But the TWTA are at their max output power. It is assumed that there are evidence of qualification for thes key
equipment
 The technologies proposed can be qualified as “modern” and up to date. Further demonstration on the antenna
qualification as well as on the LiIon battery for this application shall be provided
 Few critical units are subcontracted.
 Most of the units are designed, manufactured and tested by CAST.
 The categorization of the units and their qualification status is questionable and several of them do not have any
flight experience. Most of the unit should be submitted to PFM test
 As a general comment it will be necessary to get the evidence that the “minor modifications” implemented in
many equipment which are said to be qualified are really minor and don’t required a new “requalification “ of
the unit.
 The usage of Li Ion batteries could be considered as a challenge.
 The schedule and the launch date are questionable due in particular to the short duration of the single line flow.
 The in orbit performances of Venesat are considered positively for the Laosat spacecraft.. But som issues
encountered on other satellite shall be developed with their corrective actions implemented for this mission
As indicted above, some other questions are surfacing but it is not sure that they are relevant for an insurance assessment,
as examples:

1) The program manager of Laosat (Zhou-Zhi..) is also the Chief Engineer of Chinasat. Same organization as
Chinasat. The lines of reporting and responsibilities are questionable.
2) Who is developing the star tracker, STS on LAOSAT and not on Chinasat? Who is in charge of TWTs. un
3) C band, provide evidence that the 75 W TWT are really qualified.
4) What is the uncertainty margin for antenna gain? Is this type of antenna and associated process are really
qualified? Thermal distortion …
5) The total dimension of the spacecraft is 6 meters longer that Chinasat (+20 %) this is surely due to the size of
the Solar Array bus the solar array power EOL decreases only by 80 W. Is it coherent?
6) Mass Budget Coherence with Chinasat difficult to comprehend.
7) All of the equipments are tested at FM levels, why not tested at PFM level? No indication of life tests, LiIon
battery qualified for LEO and not for GEO.
8) Payload not described in details.- -
9) Since the CDR is completed, it will be interesting to get some feedback on radiations, ESD, EMC, thermal
prediction, mechanical constraints (launcher interface)…

In summary the construction of this spacecraft is not too challenging and should be feasible (if China as full access to
equipment manufacture with a reliable in orbit record mainly for antenna, TWT A, Rx , Imux, battery without significant
identified risk for in orbit operation.

This document is proprietary of BEAZLEY© and must be treated on a confidential basis. It may be used solely by BEAZLEY, use or reproduction, of the document and the
Contained therein, for any other purposes without BEAZLEY written consent is prohibited.