Readware went on to say:
------------------------------------------
"Satellite batteries have to be recharged, and are so by solar panels on the satellite. LEOs (as well as other satellites, obviously) are not always in the sunlight (which is what charges the batteries via the solar panels), and the question is will they have enough time to recharge so that battery capacity is sufficient to handle telephony demand.? Since there has to be a time when they need to be recharged, there may be a brief timespan when a particular LEO (whether a Globalstar LEO, Iridum LEO, or Ellipso LEO) footprinting an area may not be sufficiently operational. Another LEO comes into the plane the recharging LEO just left to replace it and provide access to the telephony system the recharging LEO may not. Will it happen that the approaching charged LEO (replacing the LEO that is recharging) will not meet the demand ? That would happen only if the LEO did not footprint the area in time. And I cannot imagine an Iridum or Globalstar software path program not accounting for this-- it is simply inconceivable.
Given the repeated simulation runs that Globalstar ground engineers have been running on this-- and I do know from last year that they have been doing this-- (I would not know about Iridium's Phoenix operation, but surely they have run simulations thousands of times), I do not think that the battery capacity issue presents a problem. It
is estimably manageable.
-------------------------------------------------------
So Readware doesn't think the battery capacity issue presents a problem. You are sure there is no capacity problem. Hopefully this week, somebody who knows will explain how much power capacity or circuitry will be going to waste in an effort to avoid "no service". At the moment I see a problem, which I've carefully explained, and there has been no comment other than assurance that "We know what we are doing!" If that is the case, there is no need for assurance, there is only need for explanation as to how the problem outlined will be avoided. So far, it seems to be that 65% battery capacity will be unused - every one of those stuck electron volts could be generating CDMA signals.
But no, they have to stay stuck in the battery to ensure there is no loss of service which will therefore be charged at excessive pricing to suppress demand much more than would be needed if power available and circuits were managed optimally - hardly a strategy to maximize revenue and profit.
Readware can imagine circumstances when the batteries won't be recharged sufficiently to remain in service. It is obvious that power supply, storage, service availability and pricing are being managed by way of very blunt instruments. It is time to bring the processing power of subscribers' minds into play and allow them to set the pricing and thereby control the power supply, circuit availability and therefore profitability, which they will maximize in conjunction with maximizing their own benefits.
No computer algorithm anyone can design can predict the value that subscribers will place on calls at any particular time. It might be 5 cents, it might be $20 or $1000 if they wish to make a "Mayday" call from a sinking boat. A "No Service" signal will not go down very well. Neither will excessive mass pricing which will suppress demand for the service and leave the system underused which is the only other way to ensure continuous service availability.
Maybe somebody who knows about the system and understands what I am suggesting could say just what it is they find unacceptable in "Price Auction", the proposed system. Bland assurances: "Trust us, we know what we are doing" are inappropriate when there are real questions to be answered.
Mqurice. |
