Point is taken. Thank you for your correction. However, I don't think you really understand what I am refering to. I am sure it is not news to you that we are entering the peak of solar cycle 23. It may be of some value for you to pull down some Nasa or SEC (Space Enviorment Center) data and reports from 1989 and 1990. You might be very interested to learn the impact of the last peak on the few Leo's in orbit back then. Also the GPS satellites.
I don't want to claim expert status on the hardware of these currently orbiting LEO sats, but I am pretty familiar with how the systems work. Iridium has very high station keeping requirements because each sat must be in the right place in the array for the intersatellite links to perform properly. With the inteligence in the sats rather than the ground stations, any move out of the designated orbit will need to be corrected in order to keep the system running at peak performance. This is high station keeping maintenance. While the solar peak creates drag by heating the atmosphere, the drag is greater the closer the orbit is to earth.
In the event of a solar disturbance or CME (coronal mass ejection), highly charged walls of particles form in the polar regions (these are known as trapping zones). In 1989, some LEO sats were described by NASA as hitting a wall when they entered this region. The Van Allen Belts also extend lower during these solar events, thus causing a similar, but more dangerous problem (sat charging).
If you truely understand what happened in 1989 and understand that it will happen again over the next 12 months, then you can appreciate the differences between the Iridium array and Globalstar's. Iridium's satellite will constantly be moved out of their assigned orbit over a 12 months period starting sometime in the next few months. You may be right when you say they will have enough fuel to handle monthly burns to relocate them or move them back into position. My understanding was that they saved money on fuel storage by locating the array where they did. They felt this was the most stable orbit. Saved a few bucks on radiation shielding, but kept it high enough so that it would not experience greater drag.
Globalstar will weather this storm. Iridium will not. As for your point on fuel, you may very well be right. On the other hand, if I were to show you data on exactly how big an orbit shift these storms caused in 1989 and how often it occured (also a very high amount of space debris entered earth's atmosphere that year), you may find that these birds could experience greater problems then you assume.
If the bankers understood what I currently understand, Iridium would already be in a restructuring. Pretty soon, they will not be able to blame handset shortages or poor marketing. The technical problems will be the last nail in the coffin. I do not beleive Globalstar will share any of Iridium's fatal flaws in either marketing, distribution or technology. I don't expect a smooth ride either. Unlike most hear, I plan to build my postion during the Iridium mess. Adding more if another launch fails or they experience early testing glitches. You may diregard my opinion, but I have been right about Iridium for a long time. I think I will be right about Globalstar.
I don't have every technical fact correct, but have a pretty good understanding. Like others, I benefit greatly from reading this thread. Only a handful possess such good discussion and information. For the record, Iridium equity is a zero. Globalstar will at least head back into the low teens. At some point between Iridium blow up and Globalstar launch, G* will be a tremendous buy. |
