← Back to all articles

Competition Guides

Mission Space Lab: the code must work in orbit

Scientific questions, sensor choices and the reliability standard behind an Astro Pi flight-status submission.

30 Sept 20262 min read
Article cover image

Editorial overview

Mission Space Lab offers a rare constraint: the program is not merely judged—it may run on a computer aboard the International Space Station. Teams write Python to collect sensor readings or images, then use the resulting data for a space-science investigation. Every eligible program receives a limited orbital run, so reliability and scientific purpose have to coexist.

The official guides allow original investigations or supported project routes. Teams test against historical mission data in the Astro Pi Replay Tool before submission. That simulator is not just a technical hurdle; it asks whether the chosen signal will vary enough to answer the question. The organiser warns that some environmental sensors change little inside the controlled ISS, while camera and motion-related data may be more informative.

CompeteMap recommends Mission Space Lab to teams with basic Python experience and a mentor who can sustain a multi-stage project. The impressive outcome—code running in space—should not obscure the real work: choosing a measurable question, handling imperfect data and producing software safe enough for flight status.

Quick Facts

FieldDetails
ProgrammeESA Education Astro Pi Mission Space Lab
DeliveryESA Education with the Raspberry Pi Foundation
TeamTwo to six eligible young people with a mentor
TaskPython space-science program using ISS sensor or camera data
TestingAstro Pi Replay Tool with historical mission data
OutcomeEligible flight-status programs run on the ISS and return data

Review Evaluation

Rated Advanced. Teams combine Python, scientific method, constrained testing and a substantial mentor-supported preparation load.

For current dates, eligibility and registration details, see the Mission Space Lab competition page.

Checked on 26 September 2026.

Begin with a measurable signal

Write the research question before the program. Identify the sensor, expected variation, sampling method and analysis. A visually exciting idea is weak if the available data cannot distinguish one explanation from another.

Test failure, not only success

Use Replay data to check runtime, file output and boundary conditions. Assign one teammate to challenge assumptions. Flight status depends on meeting technical rules consistently, so the final week should be for verification rather than adding features.

Key Takeaways

  • The scientific question should determine the sensor and code.
  • Replay testing is part of the investigation, not a formality.
  • Choose Mission Space Lab only when a team and mentor can sustain a substantial project.

Sources checked

EXPLORE NEXT

Not sure where to start?

Find the right competition
View all articles →

Comments

Join the conversation

Share a question, note, or update.

No comments yet.