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

IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

reneweuropegroup.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 500 posts

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#391

Post by panick21_ »

lispm wrote: post #123
inglor_cz wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Mittelstand is pretty much the only reason why Germany's prosperity is still a thing. Countries like Italy and Spain, which lack this backbone of mid-sized companies, are in deep trouble and unlikely to get out of it. But there were times when German companies actually were world leaders in the big things as well, not just reliable suppliers to foreign big players. Don't you count this as a regression?

> But there were times when German companies actually were world leaders in the big things as well We have the world leader in civil aerospace in France/Germany, Many high-speed trains in the world are coming from France or Germany. There are many large high-tech sectors. It's nice that Estonia is successful, but it's not where the next big chip manufacturing sites will be build. Intel and TSMC are in talks to move t…

> Many high-speed trains in the world are coming from France or Germany.

Sadly that isn't that many. And China and Japan are doing their own. The US plans to use Japan technology (Texas). So does Indonesia.

Its just a smaller industry.

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#392

Post by kazen44 »

eethawkey wrote: post #347
PicassoCTs wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A crowd that is ideological resistant to reality in quite a entertaining fashion. Just remember the Boing 737 Max, which was never explored under this focus. Why does European airbus thrive, while us aircraft industry declined? Both are heavily state subsidized, so it is not that. There is something dysfunctional in us business culture, that extracts value first, and then runs without creating something for the value…

Way to cherrypick - A380 wasn't exactly a masterpiece in economics. Should we discuss Airbus/Araine?

not being a masterpiece in economics is not on the same scale as building an aircraft which is technically simply unfit to fly.

Sure, you can make bad bussiness decisions but this doesn't mean you cannot build proper airplanes.

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#393

Post by PeterisP »

scotty79 wrote: post #379
panick21_ wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is vastly overestimated problem. Changing orbits takes a lot of energy and most of these crashes don't have enough to put significant materials in a significant different orbit. If something is already on an orbit that decades within a decade or so, it still will.

If two things collide heads on there's decent probability of some chunks going twice as fast and twice as fast is 4 times the energy which means way higher orbit.

A fragment of a low orbit collision can't end up in a higher circular orbit, because the old orbit and new orbit inevitably intersect at the point/height of the collision, so in the best/worst case the new (more energetic) orbit's perigee/low point (which is the one that matters for the drag and deorbiting - and small fragments deorbit faster than large satellites) happens to be exactly is at the height of the collision and only it's apogee is raised; and in every other case the new orbit has a much higher apogee but the perigee is even lower, which means that the fragment deorbits on its own even faster.

So no, if satellite swarms are in orbits low enough to deorbit on their own within some years (e.g. 550km for Starlink), then a mass collision doesn't result in a Kessler syndrome as the resulting debris is effectively self-clearing. Doing the same at twice the height (e.g. 1100km original Starlink plan) would have that risk though.

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#394

Post by panick21_ »

peterfirefly wrote: post #147
lispm wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But there were times when German companies actually were world leaders in the big things as well We have the world leader in civil aerospace in France/Germany, Many high-speed trains in the world are coming from France or Germany. There are many large high-tech sectors. It's nice that Estonia is successful, but it's not where the next big chip manufacturing sites will be build. Intel and TSMC are in talks to move t…

I love trains -- but planes are usually a better solution than high-speed trains. They will be an even better solution when we have small electric jets, especially for inter-European flights. Do you think the first practical electric jet will come from a subsidized EU development plan -- or from a VP funded US company?

> I love trains -- but planes are usually a better solution than high-speed trains.

Sure if you think its a good idea to blow lots of carbon in the air and a punch of emissions with led all over the continent.

Trains absolutely make sense in the waste majority cases in Europe.

And having high speed dedicated lanes also has the additional benefit of removing capacity from older lines and allowing more regional and more cargo.

Building trains, both conventional and high speed is a huge win.

P.S:

The current lead in terms of electric viable plains I would say is Heart Aerospace from Sweden.

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#395

Post by kazen44 »

Symbiote wrote: post #320
nbevans wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK was trying to negotiate a special agreement/treaty regarding Galileo. But the EU did not want to even consider it. Indeed even today the UK has not really given up on trying to be friends with the EU and continues to remain open to rejoining Galileo and Horizon programmes. Bizarrely, the latter of which, the EU seemingly had a moment of weakness during the negotiations by agreeing that the UK could remain memb…

The EU is waiting for Britain to abide by the current treaty they signed (Northern Ireland etc) before proceeding to new areas.

which it has every right to do, considering this treaty is especially important to one of its member states (ireland).

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#396

Post by PeterisP »

karmakaze wrote: post #207

So it seems that each group of nations needs/wants physical networks because it's not enough to use encrypted communication on others'. How many is enough, 3, 4, more? Is this solvable with a single network? e.g. Is there a way of anonymizing users of a network preventing discrimination, analogous to cryptocurrency?

You might anonymize users, but for this tech you can't anonymize location, so blocking communications for certain locations is possible and governments really, really want to ensure that they have a system where nobody else can deny them ability to talk to a certain place.

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#397

Post by elif »

scotty79 wrote: post #355

Why this infatuation with low Earth orbit? Why not put just few satelites further out, like every other satellite internet provide does except starlink? EDIT: To people bringing up latency. Far away satellite has them far enough that they cover large area so the signal goes to satellite and back and that's it. Distance introduces latency. But in case of constallation packet must bounce through multiple satellites and…

The constellation has direct line of sight while fiber follows crazy paths. Constellation /decreases/ not /increases/ latencu

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#398

Post by renewiltord »

concordDance wrote: post #44

Does it annoy anyone else that the title says "Musk's Starlink"? Yes, it was his idea and he is the main driving force and owns half of the company, but any project like this is a collaborative effort between tens of thousands of people.

Yeah but I thought Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri was a great game.

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#399

Post by yesod »

amm wrote: post #121

Too little, too expensive, too late? Once again the EU is playing catch up with last gen tech. Starlink is almost 10 years old - conceptually even older. Iridium has been around for over 25 years. If the EU was serious, it should have invested proactively in next gen satellite direct to device tech that is around the corner in the US. AST SpaceMobile is close to starting commercial activity for satellite based 5G tha…

6 years ago the ESA and Arianespace were ridiculing reusable rockets, even as SpaceX was getting closer and closer to the non-RUD landing. Ariane 6 yet to launch, now trying to retrofit some level of reusability. Too slow, too stuck with their views... From my perspective, the 40ms I get from Starlink is worlds better then the 900ms I got from my 128kb/s Iridium Pilot (now in the skip).

Re: IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink

#400

Post by ClumsyPilot »

0xDEF wrote: post #17
sys42590 wrote: post #5

Sounds fantastic, but if we look at the history of the EU's Galileo GNSS [0], massive delays can be expected. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)

There was little demand for non-GPS satnav. There is plenty of demand for non-Musk satcom.

> There was little demand for non-GPS satnav.

Gallileo can detect a distress beacon in the middle of the pacific ocean and send gelm. No other system can do that.

Civilian gallileo has better accuracy than GPS or any competitors.

Every mibile phone has multi-system reciever and accuracy of navigation has tripled in the past 10 years precisely because Gallileo and Glonass and the chinese system went online.

Post reply on HN