Live data from Hacker News

AWS Ground Station

aws.amazon.com

31–40 of 40 posts

Re: AWS Ground Station

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't. This is some VP's pet project .

Its probably a commercialization of a tech they already had to create to handle project kuiper. Which is Bezos's pet project.

The overlap in work required to build AWS Ground Station and to build a production ground station network for a constellation like Kuiper seems fairly minimal [1], but it does seem like an ok way to get their feet wet while they don’t have any real satellites of their own flying.

1. Kuiper uses a different RF band (Ka vs X or S), needs an order of magnitude more ground stations, doesn’t need all the *aaS infrastructure bits)

Re: AWS Ground Station

#32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't. This is some VP's pet project .

It's not that. Like most niche AWS services, this was likely the "pet project" of a major AWS customer that wanted something like this as part of a major business agreement [0]. And then after building it for that customer, AWS also expanded offering it to anyone else who wants to use it. 0: https://blog.maxar.com/earth-intelligence/2018/sending-data-... (posted the same day Ground Station was launched in 2018)

I had no idea this was the case. I've often wondered why these niche services have marketing pages which appear to appeal to the masses.

Re: AWS Ground Station

#33
If you are interested in an open-source satellite ground-station network feel free to check Libre Space Foundation's(https:libre.space) SatNOGS (https://satnogs.org) network. There are more than 370+ ground-stations participating in the network (https://network.satnogs.org) you can even build your own on your backyard or rooftop (check the docs(https://wiki.satnogs.org)) and there is an interactive dashboard (https://dashboard.satnogs.org) (powered by Grafana).

disclaimer: I'm involved in SatNOGS and Libre Space Foundation since the very beginning

Re: AWS Ground Station

#34
post #33

If you are interested in an open-source satellite ground-station network feel free to check Libre Space Foundation's(https:libre.space) SatNOGS ( https://satnogs.org ) network. There are more than 370+ ground-stations participating in the network ( https://network.satnogs.org ) you can even build your own on your backyard or rooftop (check the docs( https://wiki.satnogs.org )) and there is an interactive dashboard (…

I didn't know an open source project like this existed, it's awesome. Thanks for sharing.

How does it compare to the closed-source/proprietary alternatives?

Re: AWS Ground Station

#36
post #33

If you are interested in an open-source satellite ground-station network feel free to check Libre Space Foundation's(https:libre.space) SatNOGS ( https://satnogs.org ) network. There are more than 370+ ground-stations participating in the network ( https://network.satnogs.org ) you can even build your own on your backyard or rooftop (check the docs( https://wiki.satnogs.org )) and there is an interactive dashboard (…

[flagged]

Re: AWS Ground Station

#37

As an individual who certainly doesn't have any satellites in orbit and really doesn't have any space-specific skills beyond KSP, but who has enough money to blow on $10/minute fees, is there anything I could do with this? Not illegal or nefarious things either, but could I do something like listen in on data being transmitted down by an existing satellite (say something like Hubble or Landsat that will eventually re…

> Not illegal or nefarious things either

Well, now I’d love to know about exciting illegal things one could theoretically do with this.

Maybe pop a root shell on a satellite and have the coolest bouncer on efnet?

Maybe you could spy on satphones? But I guess AWS would be prohibitively expensive for that.

Re: AWS Ground Station

#38
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For instance in Australia, I’ll have to register with the ACMA (our FCC) and they require information about what kind of radio your using, where your ground stations are, and it actually creates a bit of a catch 22 here in Australia for non-experts. You need the ACMA documents to get the launch permits to get orbit information to get coordinated with Amazon Ground Station to get documents about your ground stations f…

Could SpaceX say, “if you put your satellite up with us, you can use this nifty, cheap module to link up with Starlink satellites in orbit, then we’ll forward your data directly to your terminal; no need for any radio permitting.” ?

Nope. You as satellite operator are responsible for requisite communications permits as a pre-requisite for your launch permits, including Earth to Space, Space to Earth, and Space to Space, all of which are separate item and while you can put any combination of multiple ones of them in a single application to the regulatory body, you end up with separate permits for each. In that scenario You would have to get a bunch of information from spaceX in order to prove to the regulator that your not going to interfere with the operation of the entire starlink constellation (spaceX providing the hardware is not sufficient proof). What SpaceX could do is provide a module that connected to the StarLink inter-satellite laser links they are planning to add in between the StarLink satellites.

Like I said, there’s really only two scenarios to change this. One is that we get regulatory change, which the ITU (the people globally in charge of radio regulation between countries, the FCC and ACMA coordinates their respective countries compliance with ITU regulations in order to meet extremely well established treaty obligations, the ITU is over a hundred years old) rejected the need for in their last meeting, based on evidence gathered in the years before that, essentially this entire scenario will break down when Starship slashes launch costs and they will either rule with an iron fist or bend to allow ISM band style approaches in space. The other is if laser communication systems come down significantly in price, the current cheapest I’ve seen is a one way (space to ground) link for “$10000 USD” list price and that wasn’t available ready to order and had no flight heritage so I’d be unsurprised if the price became $25k USD when it finally had some flight heritage. (One of the nasty secrets of aerospace engineering is how much Commercial “Off The Shelf” hardware is actually just built to order based on an approved design) and you need two way units to actually become cheap enough they aren’t more expensive than a radio permit is, which they aren’t at the moment since most people would have to both get the satellite hardware in the order of a hundred thousand or more, and also build a dedicated observatory with a sufficiently good telescope and powerful enough laser as their ground station which will probably set you back at least $50k unless you score as bargain or strike a deal with someone operating an experimental one.

Re: AWS Ground Station

#39
post #33

If you are interested in an open-source satellite ground-station network feel free to check Libre Space Foundation's(https:libre.space) SatNOGS ( https://satnogs.org ) network. There are more than 370+ ground-stations participating in the network ( https://network.satnogs.org ) you can even build your own on your backyard or rooftop (check the docs( https://wiki.satnogs.org )) and there is an interactive dashboard (…

I didn't know an open source project like this existed, it's awesome. Thanks for sharing. How does it compare to the closed-source/proprietary alternatives?

In a nutshell SatNOGS is focused on publicly available transmission data either from radio amateur, experimental or meteorological satellites.

Ground-stations are operated by individuals organizations, or corporations using existing antenna systems (from simple static quadrafilar antennas to large radiotelescopes) and SDRs.

All data are publicly available for all. That can be very useful for example for experimental university cubesats teams that have a hard time receiving their own satellites.

Proprietary solutions focus usually on building their own hardware infrastructure instead of crowdfunding it. The data are by default available only to the operators of the satellites, they incorporate several pricing schemes.

Needless to say that SatNOGS caters very different needs than such proprietary networks.

Re: AWS Ground Station

#40
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could SpaceX say, “if you put your satellite up with us, you can use this nifty, cheap module to link up with Starlink satellites in orbit, then we’ll forward your data directly to your terminal; no need for any radio permitting.” ?

Nope. You as satellite operator are responsible for requisite communications permits as a pre-requisite for your launch permits, including Earth to Space, Space to Earth, and Space to Space, all of which are separate item and while you can put any combination of multiple ones of them in a single application to the regulatory body, you end up with separate permits for each. In that scenario You would have to get a bun…

> What SpaceX could do is provide a module that connected to the StarLink inter-satellite laser links they are planning to add in between the StarLink satellites.

Yea, that was basically the idea I was asking about, but like you explained, it seems laser links are expensive and rare still, so I guess that isn't an answer for at least a while yet.

Thanks for the great answer!

Post reply on HN