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 (3940)	4/17/1999 7:51:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29987

Random orbits Thanks for the comments Mr A. I'm not convinced though. Yes, my point was save fuel by letting the orbits be higgledepiggledy, thereby increasing the lifetime [assuming the photovolatics and mechanical failure components are upgraded]. I understand that if the satellite starts off in the right orbit, it deteriorates due to the multitude of gravitational influences and needs to be regularly pushed back into place, which costs heaps in fuel. With enough satellites, a swarm, like a swarm of bees around a hive, seems likely to be the best solution to ensure complete coverage with least cost. Sure, if an orbit deteriorated so much that it was going to crash into the earth it would be worth rescuing by pushing back into a circular orbit, but wonky orbits shouldn't be a problem. CDMA by Q! can handle it. The gateways could track whichever satellites happen to be in the best place to give complete or optimum coverage. Heavy demand in a disaster area for example could be given more coverage than somewhere else by tracking satellites nearer there. Anyway, your objections were: "Collisions". Has there ever been a satellite collision? So what if there has? Certainly they would then fall to earth, but that happens anyway when satellites which run out of fuel and always adopt a wonky orbit. The cost of collision risk is trivial compared with fuel burned. "Efficient with your resources". I agree that for the first constellation or two, the very limited number of satellites means they have to be carefully controlled to maintain coverage and use them efficiently. My point was for the future when there are enough satellites [maybe 200] that coverage is highly redundant, with everywhere covered by several satellites. I can't think of any resource which would be conserved by controlling the satellites but can think of fuel wasted and satellite jockey waste. Also, when launching later satellites, less precision would be needed so launches would be cheaper. "Licensing agency wouldn't stand for it". Why not? Just give them the usual bribes and they'll agree. How come governments always get in the way of people trying to do good things? Next thing you know they'll make cloning illegal and jail Kevorkian for helping people who wanted help. Really, why should licensing be a problem? The spectrum is allocated, the satellites go over everywhere anyway. "On and On!" I'm not quite sure how to answer that objection because I'm not clear on the problem. I guess 'it's never been done before' is part of that objection. Well, that's true, but it isn't a reason not to do it. Thanks for confirming negligible fuel for attitude control, which makes the idea of random orbits even better. I know the Satellite Jockey Union will object. A bit like the Russian central planners don't like the idea of free markets. It doesn't mean they are right. Thanks if you can clear this up. The key to it is that 'dead time' on a satellite where there are temporarily excess satellites in one area, is not really dead time because the batteries can be recharging, ready for a busy period a bit later in the orbit. The interplay between battery charge, photovoltaic output, circuit availability and price per minute is tricky and great care is needed to get the profits maximized. If satellite life can be doubled, that is a great advantage. Goodbye Iridium! Maurice Build, build, build! Launch, launch, launch. PS: Valueman, Brianh, thanks for the data rate update.