Space infrastructure review
A 30-page review of policy, technology, and capabilities completed at Columbia.
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCHNOMOS ORBITAL / MISSION PLANNING
Plan satellite, ground, and compute access in one workflow.
I founded Nomos to compare space-data mission options using satellite catalogs, ground-station locations, and calculated orbital contact windows.
See the planning workflow ↓What exists now
Space infrastructure software: a network atlas, API, and Python SDK.
$25kGrant funding secured
Funding supports the solo-founder research and product work.
30 pagesResearch and technology review
A Columbia review of space policy, technology, and infrastructure capabilities.
1 MVPInfrastructure software MVP
FastAPI, Next.js, Python SDK, PostGIS and SGP4/Skyfield contact windows. Service booking and mission execution require provider integrations.
THE PLANNING PROBLEM
A satellite pass is only one part of a mission.
An observation also needs a ground contact to receive its data and compute resources to process it. Nomos brings these choices into one plan so users can compare feasibility and inspect the information behind a recommendation.
SEPARATE INPUTS
Satellite catalogs, ground-station records, and compute services are separate sources.
COMBINED PLAN
Compare those resources in one plan, with calculated contact windows and linked sources.
PRODUCT WORKFLOW
From a mission objective to ranked infrastructure options.
The planner combines orbital calculations with sourced infrastructure records. It separates calculated contact windows from provider capabilities that still need to be confirmed.
01
Define the mission
Specify the observation or space-data objective and its constraints.
02
Calculate access
Use SGP4 and Skyfield to calculate orbital passes and contact windows.
03
Compare plans
Review satellite, ground, and compute options with their sources and unresolved constraints.
PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Show what is feasible, what is calculated, and what still needs confirmation.
A plan needs more than a list of providers.
A useful plan identifies a satellite opportunity, a ground contact, and a way to process the data. Users need to see the calculations, source records, and missing integrations before committing to a mission.
REQ.01
Traceable sources
Keep catalog entries, station locations, and capability sources attached to the plan.
REQ.02
Calculated contact windows
Use orbital propagation to estimate when a spacecraft can communicate with a ground station.
REQ.03
Explicit integration status
Distinguish a planning recommendation from a booked service or an executed mission.
04 / RESEARCH INDEX
Orbital calculations, infrastructure records, and longer-term research.
Orbital access
SGP4 and Skyfield calculations for satellite passes and ground contact windows.
IMPLEMENTED IN MVPProvider capabilities
Sourced infrastructure records and explicit gaps where provider integrations are incomplete.
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENTAutonomy during communication delays
Longer-term research into what a spacecraft can decide locally when Earth contact is unavailable.
RESEARCH DIRECTIONPreserving mission context
Longer-term research into retaining data provenance and decision history across tools and operators.
RESEARCH DIRECTIONPRODUCT COMPONENTS
What the current product includes.
I built the interface, backend, and SDK as a solo founder. The current product supports planning and comparison; booking and execution depend on provider integrations.
01
Mission-planning MVP
Next.js interface, FastAPI backend, and Python SDK.
02
Network atlas
PostGIS-backed infrastructure records with ground-station locations and orbital geometry.
03
Contact-window calculations
SGP4 and Skyfield support the orbital access calculations.
04
Provider integrations
Booking and execution require provider connections beyond the current planning workflow.