Lesson 2 of 3 · BIRDS-RPM / Kumo
BIRDS-RPM: redesign a satellite without losing the evidence
8 minute lesson · 3 checks along the way
Your goal for this lessonAssess changed interfaces and distinguish development tests from demonstrated orbital performance.
In this lesson 3 sections · 3 checks
Using archive links & definitions
Words with a dotted underline open a short definition right here in the lesson.
Read & understand
Kumo builds on a family without copying it unchanged
BIRDS-RPM, also called Kumo, is a multinational 3U CubeSat project based at Kyushu Institute of Technology. It extends the BIRDS engineering heritage while changing parts of the platform. Its experimental onboard computer, Open Space Imaging Lab and Caburei packet-radio payload investigate different capabilities. A shared program history helps a team reuse knowledge, but each changed combination of hardware and software presents a new integration problem.
The project’s status page, reviewed on 20 October 2026, still identifies flight-model development as the current phase, with flight readiness, launch and operations upcoming. Its calendar includes earlier planned development ranges. Reaching the end of a printed range is not proof of launch. Keep the published development evidence separate from an orbital result until a dated operations report establishes what actually happened.
Check 1 of 3
10 pointsUse the reading above. You can try again without losing points.
Read & understand
A processor change reaches beyond the processor
The experimental onboard computer investigates STM32-based processing, card-edge connections and RS485 communication between subsystems. The team reports radiation and performance testing, including current, temperature and memory-use measurements against the earlier PIC-based approach. That comparison asks more than whether the new processor runs faster: a usable replacement must work with the surrounding power, data and mechanical interfaces.
In an invented power check, a payload allocation is 2.0 watts. Its processor consumes 0.7 watts, the sensor 0.6 watts and an interface board 0.3 watts, leaving 0.4 watts of margin. Replacing the interface with a 0.8-watt version raises the total to 2.1 watts and exceeds the allocation by 0.1 watts. A mechanically fitting board can therefore break the system budget. These values illustrate the reasoning, not Kumo’s measured consumption.
A new interface changes the budget
Original teaching diagram. INVENTED ORIGINAL. 0.7 + 0.6 + 0.3 = 1.6 W. 2.0 W limit; 0.4 W spare. REVISED INTERFACE. 0.7 + 0.6 + 0.8 = 2.1 W. Exceeds limit by 0.1 W. A shared heritage or matching connector does not preserve the old power margin.
Open full-size diagram in a new tab: A new interface changes the budgetCheck 2 of 3
10 pointsUse the reading above. You can try again without losing points.
Read & understand
Test the learning mission as well as the hardware
Open Space Imaging Lab links low-cost imaging hardware and onboard classification to satellite-learning opportunities for students in Rwanda. Its published tests include command-driven image capture, storage and telemetry, with a classifier trained for scene categories. Caburei explores amateur packet radio using digipeating and . Both require a complete path from a ground request through onboard action to understandable returned data.
For a hypothetical imaging test, suppose a classifier calls twenty images clear but independent review finds five obscured by cloud. Fifteen of the twenty selected images are actually clear: a 75 percent success fraction within that selected group. That does not reveal how many clear images the classifier missed. Preserve a separate evaluation set and inspect both kinds of error before claiming that onboard selection improves the delivered observations.
Check 3 of 3
10 pointsUse the reading above. You can try again without losing points.
Put it together
Your lesson progress
Each check connects to a part of the story. Complete all 3 to earn your 25-point lesson bonus.
Explore further · Optional
Go to the source
Explore the evidence behind this lesson. These optional readings and videos open in a new tab.
- Read: BIRDS-RPM: Kumo projectCompare the explanation and its assumptions with the worked example in this lesson.
- Read: BIRDS-RPM: development timelineReviewed 20 October 2026: the page still labels flight-model development current and flight readiness, launch and operations upcoming. Past calendar ranges do not establish completion.
- Read: BIRDS-RPM: experimental onboard computerCompare the explanation and its assumptions with the worked example in this lesson.
- Read: BIRDS-RPM: Open Space Imaging LabUse educational imaging and classifier testing; do not infer achieved orbital performance from development specifications.
- Read: BIRDS-RPM: Caburei packet-radio payloadCompare the explanation and its assumptions with the worked example in this lesson.