Mission design software for small satellites
Mission design
that proves itself.
Define the mission, assemble the spacecraft from real parts, and fly it in simulation — every number traced to evidence.
- 01Define the mission
- 02Model & simulate
- 03Verify & package
The closure board
The verdict is the product.
Every budget is computed by a versioned physics engine and rolled into one go/no-go. When a margin fails, Paraxis says so — plainly, with the number.
From a real run of a 12U study mission. The red rows are the point: a design that doesn't close should never look like one that does.
| Budget | Current | Margin | Status | Engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mass | 11.7 kg of 22.0 kg | +47% | MET | MEL |
| Power (orbit-avg) | 10.6 W margin | +6% | MET | satpower |
| Link (RF downlink) | −15.6 dB margin | — | NOT MET | satlinkbudget |
| Pointing (APE) | 51.7 arcsec vs ≤ 288 | — | MET | satadcs |
| Thermal | 10 to 35 °C | — | MET | satthermal |
| Lifetime / deorbit | Exceeds FCC 5-yr disposal | −113% | NOT MET | satlifetime |
How it works
Three moves, one living model.
Define the mission
Orbit, payload, constraints, design life. The brief becomes a living model that every downstream number answers to — not a slide.
Model & simulate
Assemble the spacecraft from catalog parts and fly it: power, thermal, link, pointing, radiation, lifetime — one coupled simulation, recomputed when anything changes.
Verify & package
Trace every requirement to the evidence behind it, and export a review package a board can interrogate line by line.
The engines
Real physics, versioned and checked.
Domain engines run server-side behind one mission model — no spreadsheets drifting out of sync. Results are checked against analytical anchors and published flight budgets: SwissCube and HUMSAT-D link margins reproduce to within 0.2 dB.
Modeled results, not flight heritage — and labeled that way everywhere in the product.