WTC, your reply would be slighted if I didn't put some time into preparing an adequate response. Unfortunately, at the present time I'm in a state of high churn... I'll need some time to get back to you with anything equally respectable to that which you have afforded me in the upstream post.
You've certainly given me a lot to consider, both philosophically and technologically. And discerning the differences between the philo- and the techno- lately have become more challenging with each day. So I'll be getting back to you in the next day or two.
As an aside, I have to say that this thread is somewhat apparitional and becoming very rewarding to me, and in some very good ways even a little intimidating, when I witness some of the "non-comm guys" discussing the economics and the techs of satellite communications the way you do.
As the "plant guy" who coordinated the implementation of TAT-5 on the American side back in '70, and the one who actually "retired" Early Bird and one of the earlier Intelsat Flights in the process, I have to tell you All that your understanding of current day Sats has just about blown me away, providing me with just the right kind of motivation needed to get back into the discipline. I'm getting there. Thanks.
I suppose that the reason for my relative ignorance of late is because I continue to be a believer in tight wire-meshing of the globe with silica strands (which probably accounts for my avoidance of the orbitals for the time being, until I witness the ultimate contribution that they make, as you are providing now) with end links being served by LMDS-like appendages and other WLL techniques in those "far reach" circumstances.
But a true master, or even avid follower, of any discipline or field doesn't avoid staying abreast of those aspects of a discipline which are contrary to their philosophical leanings, just because of instilled preferences alone. To do so would defy the quality of being well rounded, and it prevents even the preparedness needed to put up a good argument. Have you been there before?
Perhaps one of the reasons I've recently shunned the satellite approach is due to the inherent latency it exhibits [and the sometimes seemingly insurmountable challenges endemic to the return path], which if taken into account from a "total delay budget" perspective for many time-sensitive apps like VoIP, and conferencing requirements, proves to be an inhibitor in the end.
But, granted, real-time apps do not the universe of comms or the Internet itself make, which is something I've got to start paying more attention to.
Best Regards, Frank Coluccio |
