Choose your preferred language to continue.
Orbital Veritas brings together preferred parts intelligence, radiation evidence, test pipeline visibility, and mission-specific interpretation into one structured platform for New Space electronics teams.
Instead of treating component selection, radiation testing, lifecycle monitoring, and design-review evidence as separate workstreams, Orbital Veritas connects them into a single assurance workflow. The result is a clearer way to select, assess, challenge, and defend semiconductor choices for orbital missions.
New Space teams increasingly rely on COTS, industrial, and automotive-grade semiconductors to reduce cost, improve availability, and access higher-performance technology. But these components were not originally developed for orbital radiation environments.
A component may look suitable on paper, but radiation response, lot variation, date-code changes, process updates, PCNs, packaging differences, and limited test evidence can all affect mission risk. Internal teams often have to collect scattered evidence, interpret incomplete reports, coordinate testing, and justify component decisions under schedule pressure.
Orbital Veritas exists to make this process more structured, repeatable, and evidence-led.
Each module keeps a different part of the assurance workflow visible, from candidate discovery through evidence review and mission-specific interpretation.
The modules are connected so teams can move from a part record to test status, evidence packages, and decision support without rebuilding the context by hand.
The PPL Database is a curated preferred parts intelligence layer for COTS, industrial, and automotive-grade components relevant to New Space electronics. Components are organized by spacecraft function block, component category, package type, technology, evidence status, lifecycle signal, radiation assessment maturity, and mission-relevance context for review.
The PPL is not a blanket approval list. It is a structured starting point for evidence-based component selection.
The Radiation Test Pipeline tracks components as they move through nomination, planned testing, active test campaigns, completed characterization, assessment, and potential date-code surveillance. It makes campaign state, expected evidence packages, sponsorship options, and shared testing opportunities easier to understand. Teams can see where evidence is already developing and where additional participation may close important assurance gaps.
The pipeline supports customer-sponsored, pooled, and manufacturer-sponsored test campaigns.
Evidence Packages provide structured radiation test summaries, report-ready documentation, lot and date-code context where available, and interpretation notes for engineering review and mission assurance discussions. They connect raw test data to practical component decisions, caveats, and review-ready evidence trails.
The goal is to make available evidence usable, traceable, and defensible without overclaiming qualification.
Mission Assessment translates component evidence into mission-specific decision support across orbit, expected radiation environment, shielding assumptions, mission duration, subsystem criticality, redundancy, and programme risk posture. It helps teams understand where evidence is sufficient, where mitigation is needed, and where further testing is justified.
The output is a clear recommendation framework: candidate, use with mitigation, test further, substitute, restrict, or avoid.
Orbital Veritas supports a structured workflow for New Space component assurance.
Start with components used or considered for spacecraft functions such as power regulation, communication interfaces, payload electronics, memory, sensing, timing, protection, processing support, and control electronics.
Review whether the component is already listed, under assessment, in the test pipeline, supported by existing evidence, or flagged for lifecycle or radiation concern.
Access public data, internal reports, manufacturer information, radiation test summaries, date-code context, and known caveats.
Determine whether existing evidence is sufficient or whether the component should enter a new radiation test campaign, pooled campaign, or date-code surveillance process.
Assess the component against the mission's orbit, duration, shielding, subsystem function, redundancy, and acceptable risk level.
Generate a structured basis for design reviews, mission assurance discussions, customer reviews, and internal component selection decisions.
The same evidence structure supports component selection, supplier review, radiation planning, and manufacturer collaboration.
Reduce uncertainty when selecting COTS, industrial, or automotive-grade components for platform and payload electronics.
Create repeatable evidence packages for components used across multiple missions and customer programmes.
Improve traceability, review quality, and decision defensibility without starting from fragmented evidence.
Identify which product families may be credible New Space candidates and support customers with independent evidence.
Connect radiation test demand to structured campaigns and recurring component intelligence.