21–30 of 55 posts
That is a pretty cool engineering feet. Never knew a shoe box sized telescope can give such detailed pictures. They have sent about 200 satellites, cost "six figures" each, so an estimate of 200,000 a piece, they have spent about 40 million dollars, excluding the price of launches. The data collected is definitely worth the price IMO. Imagine the ability to monitor storms and hurricanes, analyze their data and update…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the case of a Kessler syndrom event it remains a concern. Collisions will push some debris higher while causing other pieces to enter early. The result would be a debris cloud that persists for decades even in LEO.
From first principles, I'm not seeing how a LEO collision pushes a significant amount of debris notably higher, but I'm certainly missing something: Post collision, all debris orbits will still be passing through the point of collision. Any deflection with a vertical component (up or down towards the earth) will have a part of their orbit go through thicker atmosphere, which will make them deorbit faster. That leaves…
This is not too dissimilar to the process of evaporative cooling in a liquid, or gas escape from an atmosphere.
That sounds very scary to me. If they don't care whether a single satellite is working or not, they are basically asking Kessler syndrom to start within years. Multiple start-ups (etc.) and the article covers not even have a tiny bit about what happens at the end of life of the satellites, what could go wrong ...
This is simply ignorant of the plans. Firstly, there are levels of functionality, being able to provide service being the highest one. Out of service satellites are still most likely to be able to execute a controlled re-entry. Secondly, these satellites will be in low Earth orbit. If they become completely inoperable they have an orbital lifetime of only a few years before they re-enter. Only with routine station ke…
How? By a burn? That's a lot of fuel reserve to use up.
That is a pretty cool engineering feet. Never knew a shoe box sized telescope can give such detailed pictures. They have sent about 200 satellites, cost "six figures" each, so an estimate of 200,000 a piece, they have spent about 40 million dollars, excluding the price of launches. The data collected is definitely worth the price IMO. Imagine the ability to monitor storms and hurricanes, analyze their data and update…
Skylabs had seven high-res SkySat satellites that Planet got via acquiring Skylabs/TerraBella complementing its existing fleet of medium res satellites.
Planet’s existing network could only get three to five meter resolution, while Skybox’s satellites could manage “sub-meter" accuracy.
80 million in funding seems low. The price of the Skybox/TerraBella acquisition from Google alone had to be in the hundreds of millions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From first principles, I'm not seeing how a LEO collision pushes a significant amount of debris notably higher, but I'm certainly missing something: Post collision, all debris orbits will still be passing through the point of collision. Any deflection with a vertical component (up or down towards the earth) will have a part of their orbit go through thicker atmosphere, which will make them deorbit faster. That leaves…
When collisions are more frequent than once per orbit you get effects where more than one collision cause a bit of debris to have itself lifted. MOST debris is deorbited, but a small fraction is lifted into a higher orbit overall. As these collide with other objects the total mass of the system might go down (from reentry), but the number of objects and the frequency of collision goes up, continuing the process of so…
That sounds very scary to me. If they don't care whether a single satellite is working or not, they are basically asking Kessler syndrom to start within years. Multiple start-ups (etc.) and the article covers not even have a tiny bit about what happens at the end of life of the satellites, what could go wrong ...
The other comments that are replying to you have it fairly accurate. It's not widely known but it isn't a secret either: the point of the doves is to be deployed en masse and with more capability with every subsequent build. A quick refresh in the constellation means there is fresh hardware in space every so often. This means the intention is indeed for re-entry into the atmosphere after the operational lifespan of t…
Are there any steps taken to ensure the satellites de-orbit in a timely manner? Are there any estimates on how many of the satellites will de-orbit and when, absent such an intervention?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other comments that are replying to you have it fairly accurate. It's not widely known but it isn't a secret either: the point of the doves is to be deployed en masse and with more capability with every subsequent build. A quick refresh in the constellation means there is fresh hardware in space every so often. This means the intention is indeed for re-entry into the atmosphere after the operational lifespan of t…
It sounds like you're relying on the satellites de-orbiting and burning up in the atmosphere. Are there any steps taken to ensure the satellites de-orbit in a timely manner? Are there any estimates on how many of the satellites will de-orbit and when, absent such an intervention?
Kindly can someone tell me how these snall satellites are able to remain in orbit. Don't we need jet propulsion to have them stay in orbit and not fall into earth? I don't much about satellites.
There is some amount of atmospheric drag in low earth orbit which will eventually cause satellites at that altitude to lose speed and fall back to earth, but that drag is small enough that the satellites should be able to remain in orbit for years without needing any additional thrust.