Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

oneweb.world

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 55 posts

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#21

Post by Veedrac »

benbristow wrote: post #14

When will this be available to the general public? I've heard of so many different "internet from space/the sky" schemes from Google Loon to SpaceX to this but I've never once been able to connect to a node to give it a whirl. I'm sure it's a difficult technical challenge but it does seem to be taking a long time!

Starlink has launched 360 satellites, and they originally wanted to start limited service after launching 420 sats, so we're possibly only months away from them starting service if things go well.

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#22

Post by ourlordcaffeine »

pietroq wrote: post #19
dmitrygr wrote: post #2

between this and Elon's stuff, how long till it is impossible to do astronomy or safely launch anything into space?

Let's put this to rest for once and all. The average radius of Earth is 6,371 km. Initial sats will be at 550 km height (many will be higher, many somewhat lower, but does not make much diff.) So the surface of the 6,931km radius globe is ~603,672,875 km2 (~604 million square kilometers). Don't have exact size for a Starlink sat, but a good upper bound is 3 x 2 m, i.e. 6 m2 = 0.000006 km2. Let's say there will be 40,…

Looks like you've never done astronomy. A single satellite passing through the shot can saturate the sensor and ruin a multi hour exposure.

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#23

Post by 34679 »

_Microft wrote: post #16
34679 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you spread 50,000 cars over the surface of the planet, how much of the Earth's surface do you think would be blocked from view by the ISS? Because we have millions of cars scattered all across the Earth and from space, you can't even tell they're there. >how long I'd say at least until there are more satellites than cars. In other words, not gonna happen.

This is a poor comparison. The contrast of a cars to the background of Earth is low, ofcourse we can not see any. Remove Earth and let these cars fly on orbits 500km below ISS and, oh boy, would you suddenly see car roofs and windows glinting in the dark everywhere. Amazing for satellite watchers and annoying for astronomers were e.g. Iridium flares. See [0][1]. Worst case for Iridium flares was them being about 50x…

What percentage of the sky do you envision will be occupied by man made objects?

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#24

Post by bolasanibk »

_Microft wrote: post #16
34679 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you spread 50,000 cars over the surface of the planet, how much of the Earth's surface do you think would be blocked from view by the ISS? Because we have millions of cars scattered all across the Earth and from space, you can't even tell they're there. >how long I'd say at least until there are more satellites than cars. In other words, not gonna happen.

This is a poor comparison. The contrast of a cars to the background of Earth is low, ofcourse we can not see any. Remove Earth and let these cars fly on orbits 500km below ISS and, oh boy, would you suddenly see car roofs and windows glinting in the dark everywhere. Amazing for satellite watchers and annoying for astronomers were e.g. Iridium flares. See [0][1]. Worst case for Iridium flares was them being about 50x…

> and let these cars fly on orbits 500km below ISS

I understand the point you are trying to make, but the ISS orbits at an average height of only 400 km.

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#25

Post by Veedrac »

34679 wrote: post #23
_Microft wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a poor comparison. The contrast of a cars to the background of Earth is low, ofcourse we can not see any. Remove Earth and let these cars fly on orbits 500km below ISS and, oh boy, would you suddenly see car roofs and windows glinting in the dark everywhere. Amazing for satellite watchers and annoying for astronomers were e.g. Iridium flares. See [0][1]. Worst case for Iridium flares was them being about 50x…

What percentage of the sky do you envision will be occupied by man made objects?

Very small, but that's not a useful measure. For astronomy, remember that bright, fast-moving objects will leave sizable streaks in images that halo a lot[1]. OTOH, intensity varies with time and satellite height. With regards to how much space we have, note that a satellite is taking up an orbit, not a point, and it's a lot harder to fit things in those safely, since they have a tendency to overlap.

[1]: https://nationalastro.org/news/starlink-satellites-imaged-fr...

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#27

Post by axaxs »

dforrestwilson wrote: post #17
benbristow wrote: post #14

When will this be available to the general public? I've heard of so many different "internet from space/the sky" schemes from Google Loon to SpaceX to this but I've never once been able to connect to a node to give it a whirl. I'm sure it's a difficult technical challenge but it does seem to be taking a long time!

Likely never. OneWeb is about to go bankrupt. Launching is a way for SoftBank to still claim spectrum rights.

As an additional data point, I live in the area and they just furloughed a lot of employees last week. Not sure the exact percentage, though.

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#28

Post by new_realist »

scandum wrote: post #26

OneWeb will be worse than fiberoptics while Starlink will be better than fiberoptics. This suggests OneWeb is pretty much doomed to fail.

There’s no way Starlink will be better than fiber. You have to pay a 25 ms penalty just to play, and then you have the cost of each hop, of which there are many.

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#29

Post by zaroth »

ourlordcaffeine wrote: post #22
pietroq wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's put this to rest for once and all. The average radius of Earth is 6,371 km. Initial sats will be at 550 km height (many will be higher, many somewhat lower, but does not make much diff.) So the surface of the 6,931km radius globe is ~603,672,875 km2 (~604 million square kilometers). Don't have exact size for a Starlink sat, but a good upper bound is 3 x 2 m, i.e. 6 m2 = 0.000006 km2. Let's say there will be 40,…

Looks like you've never done astronomy. A single satellite passing through the shot can saturate the sensor and ruin a multi hour exposure.

The satellite would not be passing through the shot for the entire exposure.

If you had software to detect and delete frames with a satellite moving through them, how many frames from a multi-hour exposure would have to be deleted?

I assume it can even be done digitally in post-production, but even if you had to actually close the aperture ahead of the satellite crossing through your frame, we know exactly where the satellites are going to be so we could calculate when they would enter and exit the frame.

Re: OneWeb successfully launches 34 more satellites into orbit

#30

Post by eutropia »

new_realist wrote: post #28
scandum wrote: post #26

OneWeb will be worse than fiberoptics while Starlink will be better than fiberoptics. This suggests OneWeb is pretty much doomed to fail.

There’s no way Starlink will be better than fiber. You have to pay a 25 ms penalty just to play, and then you have the cost of each hop, of which there are many.

Musk is selling precisely that to NYSE-London traders. Speed of light in a vacuum is considerably (I think 40%) faster than speed of light in glass fiber optics
Post reply on HN