SpaceX expects to launch 4,425 LEO satellites:
SpaceX plans to launch first internet-providing satellites in 2019
SpaceX plans to launch first internet-providing satellites in 2019
That is three times the number of sats in earth orbit right now. Talk about a mess.SpaceX expects to launch 4,425 LEO satellites:
SpaceX plans to launch first internet-providing satellites in 2019
SpaceX plans over 7,000.I still don't understand how feasible LEO satellites would be. Just how many would have to be launched to provide consistent coverage, since a vast majority of the time a single satellite won't even be over the US?
These are mini satellites that come off an assembly line. I don't know how many per launch, but SpaceX's plan is 4000 by 2020.So, if they launch one every other day (unlikely), it would take about 25 years to launch them all. By then, the first half of those satellites would already be starting to fail.
Then there's this:
"potentially cluttering up the space around Earth, making future launches potentially difficult and dangerous."
I don't see it.
SpaceX plans over 7,000.
Space is very, very big.Ok, 10 per launch sounds reasonable in the time frame specified, but it still doesn't negate, and in fact exasperates the clutter problem. Future outside LEO launches would become treacherous/prohibitively expensive.
Multiple satellite payloadsSo, if they launch one every other day (unlikely), it would take about 25 years to launch them all. By then, the first half of those satellites would already be starting to fail.
Then there's this:
"potentially cluttering up the space around Earth, making future launches potentially difficult and dangerous."
I don't see it.
I hear people complaining that they only have local cable covering their area (monopoly by fiat) or, maybe a telecom in competition. Everything I have read says that this service will be very robust. I can see them advertising "Why pay Comcast $100 per month when you can have faster speeds and lower latency at half the price?" If their market is the whole world, that would include metro areas. Musk sees this as a cash cow to finance his Mars plans. He HAS to win to beat Bezos.They must be expecting a HUGE number of rural subscribers, but that's after the fact. Who will fund the capital investment in the satellites and equipment? The very reason many people don't have broadband now is because companies don't see a ROI. Otherwise I'd have Comcast 150mbps in my small town.
Are you kidding me?OMG
LEO is not
Are you kidding me?Are you kidding me?
Place 4000 refrigerators on the surface of the Earth. (and just on the land) and there is a whole bunch of room left over. Heck, make it 10,000 houses, and you still have taken up a miniscule area. "Gravity" was a movie.
Engineers are worried about this problem.Are you kidding me?
Place 4000 refrigerators on the surface of the Earth. (and just on the land) and there is a whole bunch of room left over. Heck, make it 10,000 houses, and you still have taken up a miniscule area. "Gravity" was a movie.
At the end of 2016, it was estimated that 1,459 operating satellites were in orbit around Earth. But that number looks set to rise quickly, as companies continue to launch swarms of smaller spacecraft. Earlier this year, for instance, Planet Labs popped 88 of its tiny satellites into space to photograph the planet below.
That shouldn't be much of a problem, you might think. After all, each of the Planet Labs satellites is small—about the size of a backpack and around nine pounds in weight. But other organizations have grander visions. SpaceX plans to launch 4,425 satellites to blanket the planet in Internet connectivity. Samsung has described how 4,600 could enable it to do a similar job, and Boeing also wants in on the idea with a 3,000-strong fleet of its own.
The prospect of these huge swarms of satellites has been keeping Hugh Lewis, from the University of Southampton in the U.K., up at night. His concern: that an increasing number of satellites in orbit increases the risk of collisions, and current rules stipulating that old satellites be brought back down within 25 years of the end of their service life won’t be enough to stop the problem from escalating out of control.
I hear people complaining that they only have local cable covering their area (monopoly by fiat) or, maybe a telecom in competition. Everything I have read says that this service will be very robust. I can see them advertising "Why pay Comcast $100 per month when you can have faster speeds and lower latency at half the price?" If their market is the whole world, that would include metro areas. Musk sees this as a cash cow to finance his Mars plans. He HAS to win to beat Bezos.
Elon Musk (among others). I think Musk has the advantage because he owns the rockets. While others pay $10 million per (to him) or more to other lift services, his own are probably less than one million.Who's paying for it? Who is providing the capital for such an ambitious project?