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

Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

spaceweather.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–55 of 55 posts

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#51

Post by simondotau »

xoa wrote: post #45
0_____0 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beamforming is an old technology though. It's not hard to do, just a pain to do cheaply when you've got a bajillion emitters unless you have custom silicon.

> Beamforming is an old technology though. It's not hard to do Well, so is satellite launch right? Cost, efficiency, and scaling are hard to do. That's SpaceX's entire raison d'etre. Doing a general public usable all weather maintenance free well designed phased array terminal they can sell for $250 and pump out by the millions is as worthy an achievement as near anything else in the Starlink project. And I'd love if…

> Well, so is satellite launch right? Cost, efficiency, and scaling are hard to do.

The famous phrase 'Quantity has a quality of its own' comes to mind.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#52

Post by simondotau »

Thlom wrote: post #41
wongarsu wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't easy at all. Nobody except SpaceX could have done it at the time. This is the result of SpaceX being able to launch much cheaper than anyone before them, and being able to use these high-cadence launches to both implement and test incremental improvements in their rockets and streamline their reuse of preflown boosters. SpaceX was the only conceivable launch provider for this, and if it had been an external…

I think OP was talking about the political side, not the technical side. How one company with the blessing of a regulatory body in one country could put thousands of satellites in LEO with minimal international coordination/deliberation.

Capability creates reality first, and legal consensus usually arrives later. It has always been thus. On land, states must back claims with an ability to project force. In low Earth orbit, words mean little unless you can literally, physically show up and enforce them.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#53

Post by perilunar »

gosub100 wrote: post #27
wongarsu wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't easy at all. Nobody except SpaceX could have done it at the time. This is the result of SpaceX being able to launch much cheaper than anyone before them, and being able to use these high-cadence launches to both implement and test incremental improvements in their rockets and streamline their reuse of preflown boosters. SpaceX was the only conceivable launch provider for this, and if it had been an external…

And phased-array antennae. The network would be next to useless if each receiver needed to track the satellite physically.

I disagree. Driving a small dish antenna only requires a couple of small electric motors. The receivers would be more expensive, and require more power, but they would still be affordable enough.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#54

Post by verzali »

perilunar wrote: post #53
gosub100 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And phased-array antennae. The network would be next to useless if each receiver needed to track the satellite physically.

I disagree. Driving a small dish antenna only requires a couple of small electric motors. The receivers would be more expensive, and require more power, but they would still be affordable enough.

They would break more often. This was a key limitation of LEO systems prior to Starlink.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#55

Post by gosub100 »

perilunar wrote: post #53
gosub100 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And phased-array antennae. The network would be next to useless if each receiver needed to track the satellite physically.

I disagree. Driving a small dish antenna only requires a couple of small electric motors. The receivers would be more expensive, and require more power, but they would still be affordable enough.

but what about the interruption when the satellite crosses over the horizon? you would then need a 2nd antenna that was ready to take over, or tolerate several seconds of lost signal.
Post reply on HN