thermal dissipation and power distribution problems associated with handling power transmitted to the station by a Powersat are considered small. In this sense. Freedom's overall configuration is transparent to where the power comes from. By comparison, the Columbus Free-Flyer is currently optimised for one maximum power level. Hence, for it to be augmented to receive higher levels of power from a Powersat. significant modifications to the Free-Flyer's power and thermal subsystems would be necessary. In addition, special interfaces for the attachment of the rectenna would need to be provided, unlike with Freedom where the rectenna can be attached to the same interfaces that otherwise would be used by a solar array wing. Importantly, such modifications would need to be made to the Free-Flyer long before its planned launch in 2003 because the maximum Hermes flight rate of 1-2 per year, coupled with a payload capability of 1-3 tonnes, precludes any possibility for modifying the Free-Flyer when on orbit. The Columbus Free- Flyer is not a good niche market candidate as it is presently configured and supported. 4.2 Two Powersat Options for Space Stations 4.2.1 Option 1: The Co-Orbiting Microwave Solution Reference Concept Configuration By far the simplest approach for the first Powersat would seem to be in the role of augmenting the power of a single, major user such as Space Station Freedom. This would be achieved by having a Powersat positioned within 5-20 kilometres behind (-V bar) the station. The Powersat would then beam power by microwave radiation to a rectenna located on one end of the boom, as shown in Figure 4.2-1.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==