Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (88373)	4/1/2001 10:29:46 AM
From: RocketMan	Respond to of 436258

Interesting... Ellipso and Teledesic. Hope it is successful, at least they should be able to optimize coverage over more populated regions. Again, I agree with you on the LEO vs GEO issue, and was just pointing out that a large part of the LEO's life-cycle cost is in the TT&C, rather than direct launch costs. There are many other issues involved in the choice of orbital architecture: there are only so many GEO positions, due to interference problems, LEO gets better coverage in the far northern regions (as does elliptical), LEO or MEO orbits need more hardening against natural radiation, etc. It's going to take a long time for the LEO constellations to prove themselves. The government spent a lot of money early on (and still is) developing the technology and infrastructure that eventually became commercially feasible for GEO satellites. LEOs are going at it more directly, having to fund much of their own infrastructure, paying for their own mistakes and failures, duplicating efforts, etc. It's just going to take a long time.