Blog

How to Reduce Satellite Development Time And Get to Orbit Faster

In today’s small satellite and CubeSat market, time has become the dominant constraint. Whether driven by commercial pressure, technological challenges, or launch opportunity windows, mission teams are increasingly judged not only on whether they can deliver a spacecraft but on how quickly they can get it to orbit and start generating value.

 

WHY FLIGHT SOFTWARE IS KEY TO FAST SATELLITE DEVELOPMENT

Flight software directly determines how early a spacecraft can be integrated, tested, and operated. More than any other subsystem, it defines the success of mission development and operations:

 

  • Flight software sits at the heart of the space system, acting as the glue that coordinates and integrates all hardware subsystems. As a single point of operational control, it is the key element that sits on the critical path of almost every system-level activity.
  • Modern satellites increasingly rely on COTS subsystems and software-defined behaviour. This shifts complexity from hardware into flight software as more functionality is implemented in code. As a result, flight software complexity scales faster than hardware complexity, making its architecture and maturity a key determinant of development speed.
  • For most small satellite missions, the project schedule is tight from day one. Hardware and software development often happen in parallel, and in many cases, flight hardware is unavailable for meaningful testing until late in the program. Despite this, flight software must be available early to support system-level verification, simulation, and operations development.
  • Satellite missions evolve, payload capabilities change, constraints shift, and operational concepts mature. Flight software must accommodate these changes without forcing system redesign. If the flight software architecture is rigid or tightly coupled, every requirement change becomes a schedule risk.

 

WHAT FLIGHT SOFTWARE OPTIONS ARE THERE?

 

The False Choice: Bespoke vs. One-Size-Fits-All

Traditionally, teams have faced a few unsatisfactory options:

  1. Fully Custom Flight Software

Developing flight software from scratch allows maximum mission tailoring but at a cost:

  • Long development cycles
  • High verification and validation effort
  • Significant schedule risk
  • Increased maintenance burden

For many CubeSat and small satellite missions, this approach is simply incompatible with commercial timelines.

  1. Rigid, Mission-Specific Frameworks

At the other extreme, tightly coupled or monolithic flight software frameworks may accelerate early development (assuming the team has the necessary engineering skills) but struggle to adapt:

  • Steep learning curve with minimal support
  • Difficult to modify when requirements change (and they inevitably do, even before the development is finished)
  • Poor reuse across missions
  • High integration friction with non-standard payloads

In a market where every satellite is unique, this approach does not scale.

  1. APIs Do Not Equal Architecture

Some technology providers attempt to bridge the gap by offering highly flexible systems with multiple APIs. The idea is straightforward: if enough interfaces are exposed, mission teams can adapt the software to almost any use case.

In practice, however, this approach rarely delivers the intended scalability or schedule benefits, especially as systems grow in complexity. APIs define how software components communicate, but they do not define how the system is structured.

  • API flexibility increases complexity as correct behaviour needs to be orchestrated across multiple interfaces
  • Poor scaling as mission grows – changes in one interface ripple across the system increasing risk and complexity
  • Integration becomes the bottleneck

 

WHAT’S THE SOLUTION?

 

The Reality: Most Spacecraft Do the Same Things

Despite mission diversity, the majority of spacecraft perform a common set of standard functions, regardless of size or application:

  • Telemetry acquisition and downlink
  • Command handling
  • Health monitoring and logging
  • Time management
  • File management
  • Mode control and fault detection

The uniqueness of a mission typically lies in:

  • Payload processes and behaviour
  • Mission logic
  • Specialised autonomy or algorithms

Recognising this separation is key. There is no reason for engineering teams to repeatedly re-implement and re-verify the same foundational functionality.

 

Modular Flight Software: Fast and Flexible

A modular approach to flight software resolves this tension by combining reuse with flexibility.

Component-Based Architecture

In a modular architecture, flight software is built from standardised, pre-verified, reusable components that each implement a well-defined function. These components:

  • Expose clean interfaces
  • Can be configured rather than rewritten
  • Are independently testable and reusable

This enables teams to rapidly assemble a mission-specific flight software package without starting from a blank page.

 

HOW DOES IT REDUCE DEVELOPEMENT TIME?

Beyond the ability to rapidly assemble an initial flight software baseline from reusable building blocks, this approach provides further advantages that reduce the development cycle.

 

Parallel Development Without Blocking

Because modular flight software can run in simulation and on engineering models long before final hardware is available, teams can:

  • Develop payload software independently
  • Validate mission logic early
  • Begin operations and ground software development sooner

This decoupling significantly compresses the critical path.

 

Designed for Constant Change and Evolution

Requirements will change before the mission is launched: payload capabilities evolve, constraints shift, and mission objectives expand. Modular flight software is inherently resilient to this reality:

  • Components can be replaced or extended without system-wide redesign
  • New functionality can be integrated incrementally
  • Risk is localised rather than systemic

Instead of treating change as a failure mode, the architecture absorbs it.

 

From Time to Orbit to Time to Market

The impact of smart flight software development extends beyond launch readiness.

  • Faster integration and verification reduce program risk
  • Earlier operational readiness shortens commissioning phases
  • Reduced development cost improves business case viability
  • Reusable software assets add value across missions as existing software can be reused on new spacecraft

In commercial space, where revenue is generated only after a spacecraft is operational, reducing time to orbit directly translates into reduced time to market.

 

Re-cap: Flight Software as a Strategic Advantage

Launch vehicles get satellites to space but flight software gets missions off the ground.

A modular and reusable flight software approach allows engineering teams to:

  • Focus effort where it truly adds value
  • Reduce schedule and technical risk
  • Adapt rapidly to evolving mission needs
  • Deliver spacecraft faster without sacrificing reliability
  • Save significant cost across the mission lifecycle

In an industry defined by tight timelines and unique missions, smart flight software design is no longer just a technical choice, it is a strategic advantage.

 

Example: HELIX Flightkit, A Modular Platform Built for Speed

 

One real-world implementation of the modular flight software is Bright Ascension’s HELIX® Flightkit, a flight software development environment designed specifically to accelerate satellite software delivery while maintaining scalability and long-term reliability.

Rather than forcing engineers into bespoke or API-only solutions, Flightkit provides a flight-proven, component-based framework with:

  • A library of reusable, configurable onboard software modules covering core functionality such as task scheduling, telemetry/telecommand handling, fault detection and recovery (FDIR), and subsystem management;
  • Hardware-agnostic interfaces that simplify integration with a wide range of COTS subsystems and platforms;
  • A development workflow and tooling optimised for fast assembly, testing, and iteration of mission software;
  • Full access to source code, enabling teams to tailor and extend the platform as mission demands evolve.

By adopting a modular, reusable core and aligning tooling with the realities of tight schedules and changing requirements, Flightkit reduces engineering effort on common functionality, localises mission-unique work, and helps teams drive down both time to orbit and time to market.

HELIX Flightkit is built on flight-proven technology with nearly 60 spacecraft in orbit.

Talk to our experts today to learn more about Flightkit and how it supports rapid, scalable satellite software development.