Space-grade electronics
Radiation-hardened subsystems
Overview
Radiation-tolerant electronics and subsystems qualified for the orbital environment. Reliability engineered for missions measured in years rather than months.
Orbital-grade reliability from an independent source, without the export strings that gate major-power parts.
Capabilities
- Radiation-tolerant electronics and subsystems
- Qualified for the orbital environment
- Engineered for multi-year missions
Specifications
| Type | Rad-hard electronics |
| Qualification | Orbital environment |
| Life | Multi-year |
| Origin | Independent / non-aligned |
In depth
Select for the orbital environment
Space-grade electronics are radiation-tolerant electronics and subsystems qualified for the orbital environment. The catalogue frames the requirement around reliability for missions measured in years rather than months. That is the relevant distinction between a component selected for ordinary conditions and a subsystem selected for the environment in which a spacecraft must operate. The product record does not name a particular board, processor or payload. It establishes a class of electronics and the qualification context that governs its use. A procurement review should start with the spacecraft function the subsystem must support and the mission duration it must sustain. Power, control and payload electronics are different requirements, even when they share an orbital environment. The available facts support qualified radiation-tolerant subsystems and multi-year mission engineering. They do not support a published radiation threshold, temperature range, failure rate, component list or mission-specific lifetime. Those unknowns must remain open until the supplier provides them under the relevant review.
Reliability is a programme choice
An electronics decision made during spacecraft design affects the mission that follows. Qualified subsystems are selected for the orbital environment before integration, rather than treated as an interchangeable catalogue part after the spacecraft architecture is fixed. The catalogue describes the source as the Satellite Programme Partner and the origin as independent and non-aligned. The stated edge is an independent source without the export strings that can gate major-power parts. That claim does not remove the need for programme evidence. Qualification for the orbital environment is a defined product fact. A buyer still needs the applicable qualification documentation, the part-level scope, supply continuity and the conditions under which the qualification applies. None of those additional details are published in the record. The responsible page can explain why radiation tolerance, orbital qualification and multi-year engineering matter, but it should not turn that explanation into an unverified certification or a promise of a particular mission outcome.
Keep the subsystem connected to the mission
The related catalogue links space-proven electronics to PCB X-ray inspection and automated test equipment. Those are separate capabilities, not features claimed inside the electronics product. Their relationship identifies two practical quality questions around a spacecraft electronics programme: how assemblies are inspected and how electronics are tested. The product itself remains the qualified radiation-tolerant subsystem. The orbital environment combines radiation, vacuum and thermal cycling, so qualification has to be read against the mission rather than treated as a general quality label. The existing exposition identifies power, control and payload subsystems as areas where qualified parts may be selected from the start. Once integrated and in orbit, a failed part cannot simply be replaced. That is the operational reason the catalogue separates radiation-tolerant, orbital qualification from ordinary electronics procurement. A power subsystem and a payload subsystem may face the same orbital environment while serving different spacecraft functions, so the requested qualification has to be tied to the part's place in the mission. The acquisition conversation should therefore define the orbital qualification required, the subsystem boundary, the mission duration, the documentation available for technical review and the export position. An independent supply source may reduce a major-power part dependency, but the available record does not establish manufacturing location, customer deployments or certification titles. It establishes a narrower proposition that can be defended: electronics and subsystems qualified for orbital conditions, with reliability engineering intended for multi-year missions. Component provenance and continuity should be reviewed with the programme because the source describes parts supply as part of the wider mission engagement, not as an unexplained promise of lifetime availability. PCB X-ray inspection and automated test equipment can be considered around the electronics programme, but they remain related inspection capabilities rather than evidence that this product includes a particular test process. The separation keeps the evidence clear: inspection and test may support acceptance of an assembly, while orbital qualification describes whether the subsystem is suitable for its mission environment. The source supports that distinction, but it does not supply a part number, radiation threshold or named qualification standard that can be added here. The published type is rad-hard electronics, the qualification context is the orbital environment and the stated life is multi-year. The independent, non-aligned origin describes the supply position, not a substitute for the missing qualification documents.
Why Unstrat: the difference
Unstrat is the authorised global representative and distributor for this capability. It is already in service with a track record behind it, so you are buying something that has done the job elsewhere, not funding a first attempt. You are not the test bed.
Independent, non-aligned origin, with no political exposure to any major-power ecosystem.
One accountable team from first briefing through delivery and in-region sustainment.
Radiation-tolerant subsystems qualified for multi-year missions.
How it reaches you
Related capability
View all →
Procurement & sustainment
Classification and the end-user-certificate chain are confirmed before this capability is represented to your market.
Sourced from an independent manufacturer: no major-power disclosure rules or political conditions.
A single team responsible from first briefing through delivery: not a chain of foreign primes to integrate yourself.
Lifecycle support and operator training delivered in-region, building capability that outlasts the initial deployment.
Applications it supports
Capability comparisons
Questions buyers ask
What are radiation-hardened electronics?
They are parts designed and qualified to keep working under the ionising radiation of the orbital environment, where ordinary commercial components suffer bit flips, latch-ups and gradual degradation. The usual measure is total ionising dose, quoted in kRAD, alongside single-event tolerance. Our subsystems are radiation-tolerant and qualified for the orbital environment, engineered for missions measured in years, and they are flight parts in service rather than engineering models awaiting a first mission.
See: Space-grade electronicsRadiation-hardened against commercial parts
Who supplies radiation-tolerant satellite avionics?
Several European vendors publish good parts with detailed datasheets. AAC Clyde Space states 20 kRAD total ionising dose, qualified above 30 kRAD, on a 130 g board at 1.3 W, and GomSpace publishes a 24 g NanoMind A3200 at 0.17 W typical. We supply radiation-tolerant subsystems qualified for the orbital environment from a non-aligned origin, and we do not yet publish an equivalent dose figure, so ask for one before you commit.
How much radiation tolerance does a satellite need?
It depends on orbit, shielding and mission length, which is why AAC Clyde Space pairs its 20 kRAD figure with a five-year LEO qualification rather than quoting dose alone. GomSpace does not publish a dose figure for the A3200 in its datasheet and refers enquiries to the company. State your orbit, duration and acceptable failure probability in the tender, then require every supplier to show the analysis rather than a single number.
Space-grade electronics without a foreign export licence
This is the constraint that decides the supplier for a lot of programmes, and it has nothing to do with the datasheet. AAC Clyde Space and GomSpace both sit inside member-state export processes that neither company can remove from your sustainment chain. Our parts come from a non-aligned origin, which takes one recurring approval out of a production line you intend to run for a decade.
Rad-tolerant subsystems for a five-year LEO mission
Five years is the point at which qualification evidence starts to matter more than headline specification. AAC Clyde Space states its Sirius OBC is designed and qualified for 5 years in LEO; GomSpace does not publish a design life for the A3200. Our subsystems are engineered for multi-year missions and qualified for the orbital environment, and we should be asked to state the dose rating, the latch-up behaviour and the qualification standard in writing.
Why do mass and power matter so much in satellite avionics?
Because on a small satellite they compete directly with payload. The gap between 130 g at 1.3 W and 24 g at 0.17 W typical is the gap between an assurance-focused command and data handling unit and a cubesat avionics board that also does attitude sensing. Neither is wrong; a spacecraft that must survive five years in a hostile orbit and one that must fit into 6U are answering different questions.
Radiation-hardened or commercial off-the-shelf parts for a first national satellite?
Commercial parts are cheaper and faster and they do fly, particularly on short demonstration missions in benign orbits. The trade is failure probability over time, and on a first national satellite the reputational cost of an early loss usually outweighs the saving. Where the mission has to be in service for years rather than months, our radiation-tolerant subsystems are the safer basis, and the qualification evidence should be part of the tender rather than an afterthought.
Can we assemble satellites domestically using imported flight electronics?
You can assemble them. Whether you can keep assembling them depends on whether the supplier's government renews the licence, which is where several national programmes have quietly stalled. Sourcing flight electronics from a non-aligned supplier removes one recurring veto from a line you intend to run for years, which is a production planning argument rather than a technical one.
Our satellite production line keeps stalling on export approvals for flight electronics. What are the options?
Three, realistically: design around the restricted parts, build a domestic capability, or change the origin of supply. The first is slow and usually degrades the design, the second is a multi-year investment, and the third is the fastest. We supply radiation-tolerant subsystems qualified for the orbital environment from a non-aligned source, as flight parts in service rather than development items, which is the point of the change: no member-state ministry sits between your line and the next shipment.
See: Space-grade electronicsCompared with AAC Clyde Space and GomSpace
How do we write a tender for space electronics so suppliers cannot hide behind description?
Require numbers where numbers exist: total ionising dose, single-event latch-up immunity, operating temperature range, mass, power, memory and error correction arrangement, plus the qualification standards met and the test evidence behind them. AAC Clyde Space and GomSpace publish most of that, and we currently do not publish all of it. Apply the same rule to every bidder including us, and refuse to score a published figure against a claim.
What qualification evidence should we demand before flying a subsystem?
The test campaign, not the summary: thermal vacuum and vibration levels, radiation test conditions, workmanship standard and the flight heritage record. A dose figure without the test conditions behind it tells you very little, which is why GomSpace directs A3200 enquiries to the company rather than printing a number it would have to qualify. Ask us for the same evidence in writing; our parts are in service, and the file should support that.
See: Space-grade electronics capabilityQualification gaps we still need to publish
Should a first-time national programme design its own avionics or buy them?
Buy them, and spend the saved engineering effort on the ground segment and the operators, which is where first programmes usually come apart. Designing a qualified on-board computer is a multi-year exercise that competes with the mission rather than serving it. A sensible progression is to fly proven subsystems first, build integration and test experience around them, and take on subsystem design once there is a second or third mission to justify it.
See: Nanosatellite programmes capabilitySovereign space infrastructure
What happens if our electronics supplier discontinues a board halfway through the programme?
Obsolescence is normal in flight avionics and should be handled in the contract rather than in an emergency. Ask for the lifetime buy policy, the last-time-buy notice period and the form-fit-function replacement commitment before signature. Our subsystems are engineered for multi-year missions, and continuity is easier to hold when the supply relationship is not also subject to a foreign export review each time you reorder.
Can we source radiation-tolerant parts without a US or EU licence chain at all?
For the subsystems we supply, yes: the origin is independent and non-aligned, so the shipment does not depend on a member-state approval. That does not automatically clear every part in a spacecraft, since a bill of materials assembled from many sources can reintroduce the problem through a single component. Treat licence exposure as something to audit across the whole build rather than solved by one supplier decision.
See: Origin and approval chain comparedSpace-grade electronics capability
How do we test that flight electronics arrived as specified?
By inspecting the assemblies rather than trusting the paperwork, which is a capability worth owning if you intend to build satellites repeatedly. Board-level X-ray inspection finds solder voids, cracks, bridging and plated-through-hole faults inside dense multilayer assemblies without cutting anything open, and it keeps the inspection record under your own roof rather than at an overseas laboratory. Pair incoming inspection with the supplier's qualification file and you can argue about defects with evidence.
Space-grade electronics: questions
What are Space-grade electronics?
Space-grade electronics are Unstrat's Space (Space Domain) capability: Radiation-tolerant electronics and subsystems qualified for the orbital environment. Reliability engineered for missions measured in years rather than months.
How do Space-grade electronics work?
Space-grade electronics deliver their effect through Radiation-tolerant electronics and subsystems, Qualified for the orbital environment and Engineered for multi-year missions, capabilities matched to the requirement and confirmed under briefing rather than published.
Who makes Space-grade electronics?
Space-grade electronics are built by The Satellite Programme Partner, whose focus is satellites & sovereign space programmes. Unstrat represents The Satellite Programme Partner to government and enterprise buyers worldwide as an independent, non-aligned prime vendor.
Who uses Space-grade electronics?
Government and enterprise buyers acquire Space-grade electronics to address ageing defence electronics across the space domain, matched to the mission and accountable to them, not to a foreign vendor's government.
Why choose Space-grade electronics over a major-power alternative?
Space-grade electronics are sourced from an independent, non-aligned manufacturer, so they carry no major-power disclosure rules, upgrade-locks or political ramifications. Concretely: Radiation-tolerant subsystems qualified for multi-year missions. The capability is accountable to you, not to a foreign vendor's government and its release schedule.
How are Space-grade electronics procured, and where can it be exported?
Orbital-grade reliability from an independent source, without the export strings that gate major-power parts. Every engagement begins with a briefing, and export eligibility is confirmed per market under briefing rather than published. Where controlled capabilities are involved, the classification and end-user-certificate chain is confirmed first. Space-grade electronics are then sustained in-region by one accountable team from briefing through long-term operation.