Best Practices in CubeSat Control Software Development: A Case Study of the SAGE Mission

CubeSats have revolutionised space access through their compact size and cost-effectiveness, enabling broader participation in space exploration [18]. However, managing multiple CubeSat missions introduces coordination and resource management challenges [9]. An efficient mission control software (MCS) with a well-designed user interface (UI) is essential for mission success.

Effective mission control software must provide robust technical functionality and ensure usability, trust, and efficiency in high-stakes environments. The SAGE mission, a student-led CubeSat mission, incorporates those design principles that enhance operator interaction, automate routine tasks, and mitigate cognitive load, ultimately improving mission efficiency and reliability.

This paper presents the design and implementation of a multi-mission CubeSat control software for the SAGE mission. The project addresses challenges in student-led missions, including high team turnover and limited experience compared to commercial operations.

SAGE is a 3-Unit (3U) CubeSat developed by ARIS. CubeSats are nanosatellites with basic units of $10\times 10\times 10\mathrm{cm}$, serving as low-cost alternatives to larger spacecraft [18]. One unit houses a biological payload, while the remaining two accommodate spacecraft systems. The mission objectives include providing an educational satellite platform in space, studying human cell ageing in microgravity, operating an amateur radio and custom GNSS equipment, and testing a custom RISC-V ASIC developed at the Integrated Systems Laboratory at ETH Zurich. The mission will be launched into a sun-synchronous Low Earth Orbit by a U.S.-based launch provider in 2026. The following teams are contributing to mission success and were involved in the design of the SAGE MCS:

• $\mathrm{■}$

  Thermal Control and Structures (TC-STR): Ensures the CubeSat can withstand launch and space conditions, provides mounting for other subsystems, and maintains satellite temperature within operating limits.

• $\mathrm{■}$

  Biological Payload (PAY): Investigates human cell ageing by hosting the first human cell culture in space.

• $\mathrm{■}$

  Electrical Power System (EPS): Generates, stores, and provides power using solar panels, a battery pack, and a power distribution module.

• $\mathrm{■}$

  Communication System (COM): Enables data reception, command transmission, and health status monitoring.

• $\mathrm{■}$

  Attitude Determination and Control System (ADCS): Assesses, monitors, and adjusts the satellite’s attitude using sensors, actuators, and state estimation software.

• $\mathrm{■}$

  On-Board Computer (OBC): Manages and processes tasks across subsystems, ensures satellite health, and provides local data storage.

• $\mathrm{■}$

  Mission Operations (MOPS): Operates the satellite from a Mission Operations Center in Zurich, including orbit determination, health monitoring, conducting experiments, and addressing anomalies.

CubeSat operations are divided into data retrieval and job scheduling, ensuring mission objectives are met. Data retrieval involves acquiring telemetry and payload data from the satellite. Raw data packets are received via ground station antennas, decoded, processed, and stored in a central database for analysis. Data integrity and redundancy are crucial for anomaly detection and mission performance assessment.

Job scheduling pertains to defining, verifying, and executing commands to control satellite operations. Users define jobs via a UI, which is then verified using a digital twin simulation. Verified jobs are uplinked to the CubeSat and executed at the scheduled time, with each step logged for traceability and troubleshooting.

The development and maintenance of operations centres for satellite missions have been the subject of past research. Traditional satellite operations centres are often designed for single missions and may not provide an efficient foundation for managing multiple concurrent (CubeSat) satellite missions. This has led to a shift towards the adoption of multi-mission software solutions in recent years.

To support the simultaneous management of multiple satellite missions, the concept of a Multi-Mission Operations Centre (MMOC) has been introduced. In collaboration with European national space agencies, the European Space Agency (ESA) developed the European Ground Systems Common Core (EGS-CC)¹¹1http://www.egscc.esa.int/, providing a shared infrastructure to facilitate the implementation of different missions [15, 2]. Similarly, NASA’s Multi-Mission Operations Center (MMOC)²²2https://www.nasa.gov/mmoc/ and the Advanced Multi-Mission Operations Service (AMMOS)³³3https://ammos.nasa.gov/ offer frameworks that enable the efficient operation of multiple missions using shared resources [9].

CubeSat missions present special operational requirements due to their inherent resource limitations and relatively short mission lifespans [10]. Traditionally, space missions have focused on the development of high-cost, large-scale satellites, but there has been a growing trend towards smaller satellite systems. CubeSats, particularly, have gained popularity among educational institutions, space agencies, and industry stakeholders due to their versatility and rapid development cycles [1].

At SpaceCHI, although not the core focus, related aspects of crew autonomy and space system development have been discussed in previous editions of the conference. Already in 2007, Huang et al. [5] explored the use of large interactive displays for workgroup collaboration, noting that while many systems have been tested in labs, they face challenges when deployed in real-world settings. Their study examines the adoption of NASA MERBoards during the Mars Exploration Rover missions, identifying deployment challenges external to the system design, and discusses how these issues apply to the broader use of shared ubiquitous computing technologies. More recently, Zheng et al. [21] emphasise the growing need for crew autonomy during long-duration missions, particularly in mission planning, due to the communication delays inherent in deep-space exploration. They propose a mixed-initiative approach where a computer assists in managing complex tasks like constraint handling while still allowing astronauts to retain control. The Playbook tool, designed for this purpose, addresses these challenges with its innovative scheduling capabilities, supporting autonomous crew planning.

Similarly, Nilsson et al. [13] critique traditional analogue environments for space system development, highlighting their high costs and limited participation. To counter these limitations, they are developing a mixed-reality testbed that combines physical mockups with digital extensions. This more accessible and cost-effective approach aims to facilitate participatory design and rapid prototyping, ensuring that the diverse future users of space systems can contribute to their development.

Building on these concepts of autonomy and more flexible and modular system design, Karasinski [6] stresses the necessity of enhanced crew autonomy in future space missions due to significant transmission delays and reduced bandwidth. They advocate for technologies that improve situational awareness (SA) for both astronauts and remote mission control. Their paper outlines a usability study on integrated timeline tools, which aim to predict and resolve potential mission constraints, ultimately supporting more successful and autonomous space missions.

Heinicke et al. [4] advocate for an even broader perspective that views inclusion not merely as a gesture of diversity but as a means to improve mission outcomes. They propose that space agencies should integrate individuals with various disabilities into the design and planning processes of space missions, thereby fostering innovation and resilience in space exploration.

While distinct in their approaches, these contributions underscore the importance of integrating autonomy, modular design, and innovative design methods to address the unique challenges of future space missions as we aim to reflect with our new UI for the CubeSat mission.

The design of UIs plays a crucial role in satellite mission operations, enhancing operator efficiency and minimising errors. Effective UI design requires the involvement of domain experts in the decision-making process [19]. NASA’s Open Mission Control Technologies (OpenMCT)⁴⁴4https://nasa.github.io/openmct/ is an open-source initiative aimed at providing customisable and extensible mission control UIs [3].

Dashboard design and data visualisation are critical for monitoring satellite operations effectively. Well-designed dashboards consolidate data from various sources, offering a comprehensive view of multiple mission statuses and improving decision-making and historical analysis [7]. The choice of visualisation techniques significantly influences the clarity and interpretability of complex data, ensuring that operators can extract meaningful insights [14]. Research highlights the importance of real-time data visualisation in operational contexts, aiding in the rapid analysis of evolving scenarios [17].

A crucial aspect of dashboard design is the integration of data from multiple sources to enhance situational awareness and historical analysis [7]. Selecting appropriate data visualisation methods ensures that complex information is presented in an accessible manner, allowing operators to identify critical insights swiftly [14]. User-centric design principles further enhance dashboard usability by prioritising intuitive layouts and ensuring the timely accessibility of relevant data [11]. Engaging stakeholders throughout the design process helps tailor dashboard features to specific operational requirements, leading to improved user adoption [20].

To maximise effectiveness, dashboards should incorporate key performance indicators (KPIs) relevant to mission operations, facilitating real-time monitoring and control [14]. The inclusion of feedback mechanisms allows continuous improvement based on user experiences and operational outcomes [8]. However, challenges such as data overload and the need for ongoing operator training must be considered to optimise dashboard utility and ensure long-term usability.

Despite advancements in multi-mission control software, CubeSat operations, and UI design, existing solutions often lack the simplicity and accessibility required for effective multi-mission CubeSat operations centres. Many systems do not provide integrated, user-friendly dashboards that balance flexibility, customisation, and intuitive design. Non-configurable mission control software that is tightly coupled to a specific mission or mission type leads to additional development overhead that does not align with the rapid development cycles of CubeSat missions. This research aims to address this gap by developing dashboards that are easy to implement and operate, guided by user-centred design principles and informed by operator feedback through user interviews.

Therefore, designing an effective UI for mission control software requires balancing usability, cognitive load reduction, and adaptability to diverse operational roles. As stated in the previous section, related research highlights the importance of usability in such interfaces [12] to facilitate intuitive interaction. Building on the related work, the UI of the SAGE MCS was developed to ensure efficient data visualisation, seamless navigation, and adaptability to mission needs. This section outlines the UI architecture, key design principles, and findings from our iterative evaluation process.

An iterative evaluation process was conducted to ensure that the design met operational requirements, involving key stakeholders throughout the development cycle. This approach ensured continuous feedback, enabling the refinement of system functionalities to better support mission operations.

Prior to developing the SAGE MCS, a collaborative process involving all relevant stakeholders was done to formulate the technical requirements, ensuring alignment with mission objectives. Three core principles guided the infrastructure design: prioritising essential features for mission success, ease of installation and learning through automation, and resilience to ensure continuous operation. These principles shaped a robust and efficient infrastructure, optimised for functionality and durability.

The SAGE MCS demonstrates a modular and flexible approach to multi-mission CubeSat control software. By prioritising simplicity, user-centric design, and comprehensive documentation, the system effectively addresses key challenges faced by student-led CubeSat missions, including high team turnover and constrained resources.

The iterative development process, guided by continuous stakeholder feedback, has resulted in a robust architecture and intuitive UI that aligns with the operational requirements of the SAGE CubeSat mission. This ensures reliable mission operations while enhancing operators’ situational awareness and decision-making.

Future work could explore extending to support a broader range of missions and vehicles, including robotic systems for terrestrial and space applications. The architecture was designed with scalability in mind, facilitating such expansion.