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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Globalstar Telecommunications Limited GSAT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Adrenaline who wrote (3927)	4/16/1999 2:36:00 PM
From: Jeff Vayda	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29987

Mr. A: Thanks for the input. Seems to be quite the difference, (20 yrs ) in a propellant lives for a Delta vs Soyuz launch. Kinda flies in the way of your optimization arguments from the earlier post (life span of propellant vs system, to get to a 7.5 yr 'average' life span for all systems and operations) Whatever. Thanks again for adding another tidbit to the brain pile. Jeff Vayda

To: Mr. Adrenaline who wrote (3927)	4/16/1999 7:38:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Fuel savings Mr A, if Globalstar puts up another couple of constellations over the next 5 years there would be heaps of satellites in view. The nature of CDMA is that it can be expanded very easily thanks to the soft handoff nature of the system. Maybe the orbits could be allowed to become random when there are enough satellites in orbit to maintain statistical coverage of any point on earth. Each satellite could wander around anywhere it likes. Attitude control would still be needed to keep beams pointing to the ground, but not orbit control. That should save a lot of fuel and increase satellite life. With Zenits blasting a dozen at a time around 900 km high, we could have a huge constellation in a few years time with very long lives due to fuel saving. Big photovoltaic panels would keep them in service. The system can get very, very cheap. We'll sell minutes at 1c per minute! Let's see ICO compete with that. Get your calculators out you silly ICO shareholders. The competition hasn't even begun. Maurice PS {Or have I got the fuel consumption wrong and it mostly goes in attitude control?}

To: Mr. Adrenaline who wrote (3927)	4/17/1999 12:16:00 PM
From: Dragonfly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

If a Delta-launched G* sat has 20 years worth of fuel, and Loral regularly manufactures GEOs with a lifespan in excess of 14 years, is it then safe to say that at least some of the G* constellation will last twice its estimated lifetime? Wouldn't the additional usage of these be worth the hassle/cost of launching all of them on Deltas? 7-13 extra years is a lot. Or do we figure the mechanical reliability rating is in the 7 year figure as well? Dragonfly PS- according to the Soyuz launch kit referenced in the previous message the Satellite life is a "minimum of 7 1/2 years" and each one weighs approx. 450kg