SpaceX wants to launch 4,425 satellites into space to bring super-fast

>>57550636
>and it wouldn't matter if it breaks, just make one more for coppers.
And we'll have all that space trash orbiting Earth

>space debris in orbit at extreme speed from satellite crashes exponentially growing since the 70's
>"hey guys lets put 4000 more big metallic things on orbit"
yeah lets just speed up the kessler sydrome a few decades

File: 1435624490905.jpg (92KB, 430x342px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 430x342px

SPACEX WANTS TO BLOT OUT THE FUCKING SUN

How is satellite internet faster than fiber optic internet?

Fuck SpaceX they can't do anything right explosion after explosion

>satellite
>super-fast internet

Pick one. SpaceX/Musk confirmed for critically retarded.

>>57550718
It's not, but it's more readable available then fiber and you can just go to anywhere and use it.

>>57550730
I'd guess he probably wants to bring "Fast-Ethernet" all around the world.

>LEO roughly 300km up
>best possible rtt 200ms
>"super-fast internet"

Reminds me of AOL CDs.

>>57550730
Conventional satellites are designed for reliability in space radiation and not performance oriented.
They also do a lot of thing at the same time, nobody makes satellites purely for internet access.

Debris is not an issue if satellite is not sized like a car, what gov. been making recent 50 years is not what in mind of several companies that launch mini satellites in hundreds every year.

>>57550758
I'd take that if it's everywhere on the planet. You'd be able to watch youtube with that.

>>57550676
>>57550654
burns up in earths atmosphere anyway.

>>57550901
Way to miss the point, dumbshit.

They need to actually launch rockets without them blowing up

>>57550636
>falling for musk's shitty hype
>muh futurism
sage goes in all fields
>>57550730
I'm sure he knows very well how wrong it is, it's just a publicity stunt.

>>57550815
You mean a random company can just launch a satellite into orbit? How much does it cost to launch a satellite? How much bandwidth do they provide?

File: 1474602417717.jpg (204KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1000x667px

>"hey guys, I really cannot join this meeting right now. It will start raining and my internet will disconnect."

yeah, no, thanks.

>>57550721
That's how science works, dumbass

>>57550636
These retards cant even bring a single satellite into space.
Even the chinks are more successful than they are.

>>57550636
Yes, let's permanently lose even more resources to a ring of space junk that destroys all the shit up there. Great plan.

Futurists are so fucking stupid.

>>57550901
Only if it comes down, moron.

You're literally dumber than anime.

>>57552823
no idea, I just know that several companies in the world launch small 1-3 years life span satellites in hundreds every year for measurment or communication
it's not that hard or expensive to design and launch a satellite for short term use, the ones in orbit now are designed for at least 10 years

as far as I know they cost around 150-300k = basically nothing in space launch terms

space agencies are very very SLOW

>>57554193
>the ones in orbit now
I mean the ones size of a truck big boys launch that cost at least 50m

>>57554193
fuck off
http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/space-debris/impact-new-satellite-launch-trends-orbital-debris/
"hundreds" is an overstatement and commercial satellites are slightly more than non-commercial ones, not "very very SLOW" as you suggested

>>57554193
>300k

Fuck my dreams of a personal wireless satellite network are gone, how will I be able to overcome my drone's range limitations

>>57552857

>Explosion after explosion is how science works.

Right, kid.

>>57554272
they take at 2-3 years to make a satellite i'd say it's slow

>>57550954
audible kek

>even more third worlders have access
No thanks

hello my dear, i understand you are having wirus

>>57552823
"Seats" are limited so usually there is an application process where you argue your case against the competitors. Usually there is either public utility that wins or some kind of science research to be gain in your satellite.

"Seats" are offered by weight typically and are launched in a cube-sat configuration units.

So spacex is launching a resupply mission and are carrying a payload of X kg and have a max payload of Y kg. So they typically announce they have space for ( Y - X ) kg which will allow for Z cubesats. Then private companies, universities, or rich individuals will submit their proposals and designs for inspection, and eventually their satellites if they pass phase one until all Z cubesats seats are filled. This typically happens for every launch besides military specific launches because it drives down the cost for everyone involved. Obviously military is willing to spend extra for privacy.

So you and your buddies can start a gofundme campaign for launching a cubesat that will try to grow moss in space while spinning at high speeds, and then if you can get a solid design and pass through the process launch it into space on some future spacex rocket.

>>57554323
According to wiki most simple 1u cubesats cost $100k to launch and ~$50k to make with launch prices dropping recently and expected to continue to drop

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CubeSat

File: colonize.jpg (43KB, 572x419px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 572x419px

>subsidize my toys

fuck musk. most people have internet already. the real fight is stop it from being militarized and privatized. building this shit will solve nothing.

>>57550636
>satellites
>fast

Enjoy your 3000ms pings.

>>57555275
>most people have internet already
That's factually untrue. 3.2 billion people have Internet access but there are 7.4 billion people on Earth, more than half of them don't

>>57550636
>it will work

It will work as well as the Hyperloop...

>>57554173
Who is this anime?

>>57555446
nobody believed in electric car or private space rockets

why is /g/ so full of luddites?

>>57555385
unfortunately even most of those who do have much more difficult things to worry about

>>57556153
electric cars still use tires, leather, interior plastics, rare earth minerals for computers & lights, and have these huge batteries that don't last forever and must be disposed of properly

it's not the saviour it is marketed as

Your better off just running lines to those areas anyway.

The issue is that shortly after that previously non-networked region gets connected the users will grow in numbers exponentially. Businesses, governments, hospitals, and whatever else will become reliant on it. Making the satellite connection not enough.

usa should be investing in high speed long distance train like the rest of the world. automated travel already exists.

>>57555335
The theory is fewer hops for a more direct connection. It isn't to replace normal connections, just allow for connection in places not normally available. So anything is better than nothing

does literally nobody in this work or worked in a telco?
do you guys really have absolutely no idea how any of this works?
do you know how many _more_ people don't have anywhere near the speeds of what satellite comms would provide? or what other devices could use that network that don't need to fap to 4K porn from their basement?

oh I dunno, like really remote areas, farms that don't have fiber or don't need it/can't afford it

research stations, cabins, fuck it maybe even big tractors/vehicles

>>57554173
Planetes was a good anime.

>>57550636
What are the technical details of this plan?

amount of power generated and needed by each satellite?
transmission power needed from surface object?
maximum number of surface clients per satellite?
why 4,425 specifically?

File: IMG_20161116_190654.jpg (943KB, 2260x2260px) Image search: [Google]

943KB, 2260x2260px

>>57555335

We utilize Ka band all the time in the military, and user to user can ping across the shit no more than 225ms. Not bad for a bunch of Marines with fucked up gear and little understanding of what we're actually doing.

Great, more high powered waves you can't avoid in the atmosphere.

I'm going to have to invest in a faraday cag.. I mean house.

>>57550691
>BLOT OUT THE FUCKING SUN
It's merely 4,425 satellites, each less than the size of a car.
>>57555275
>building this shit will solve nothing
It's not about solving anything
>stop it from being militarized and privatized
It seems like a viable way to have continued net neutrality
Any data network can be militarized with sufficient system design
>>57555335
>Enjoy your 3000ms pings
I'd project a much faster network than that, sub 500 in most cases (also better than 1mbps)
>>57556153
>why is /g/ so full of luddites?
They're here as part of the /g/ promotions going on.
>>57555246
This isn't just some toy. It'd be awesome to see it working. The idea of having reasonable internet access from any point on earth without having to wire it up is very compelling for a large number of reasons.

>>57550636
Maybe start with being able to launch rockets. Something we did 60 years ago.

>>57556909
Is it because you can't live life without internet access?

>>57550636
Literal botnet

>>57550636
>fill up space with pollution, making future satellite launches basically impossible
>internet will still be slow as shit because lollatency
fantastic idea

>>57550815
>Debris is not an issue if satellite is not sized like a car
here's your reply

Why doesn't musk work on a fucking dyson swarm or something more useful than giving creamy memes to Papua new Guinea?

>>57554112
>These retards cant even bring a single satellite into space.
Are you blind or legitimately misinformed? SpaceX has dozens of successful missions

File: 1459152929962.jpg (543KB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 1440x900px

>>57556975
Manned aircraft
Internet in boats
Controlling autonomous bots
Floating cities
Internet in the wilderness

Loads of reasons.

>Is it because you can't live life without internet access?
Everybody can live without the internet but honestly... who would want to?
>>>Amish

>>57556989
It's literally 4,425 satellites, hardly space pollution
The satellites can be designed to gracefully reenter the atmosphere and burn completely at the end of their life.

>>57555044
OK so this application is all SpaceX's doing? No government or anything? If I somehow print a billion dollars and make my own super communications/sensors satellite and launch it, the US won't order an F-15 to shove an ASAT into its ass?

>>57554173
>>57555604
>>57556643
Supeisu deburi wa...

So that's why he blew up that Facebook satellite.

>>57557311
>The satellites can be designed to gracefully reenter the atmosphere and burn completely at the end of their life.
Or enter the graveyard orbit. Depends what orbit they are in.

The graveyard orbit is a little bit of a concern though. It is a good thing at least that we know where these EoL satellites are but we are still dumping them into an orbit like garbage. It will have to be cleaned up at some stage.

So, SpaceX themselves would act as the ISP in this scenario?
Will they respect users of the networks privacy?
Will they jew them with data caps?

>>57557311
>It's literally 4,425 satellites, hardly space pollution
There are currently about 1,000 operational satellites in orbit

>>57550636
What's the point of providing Internet to the whole world? What value is there to be gained from undertaking something like this.

>>57557509
I won't have to go without Internet while traveling.

>>57557509
Access to the internet makes economies grow faster. It makes people able to access alot more information alot more quickly than they were before, which means they can make better decisions in shorter times.
Providing Internet to places that dont have it isn't just a meme.

>>57557393
Why can't the US just missile them out of orbit

>>57558162
Because blowing up things in orbit creates more debris you moron.

File: space-debris-3-polar-orbit.jpg (1MB, 3508x2480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3508x2480px

>>57550901
>burns up in earths atmosphere anyway.

>>57556964

>we

File: IMG_20161010_171116.jpg (1MB, 2560x1797px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1797px

>>57558449

Is that an accurate pic? Source? Not calling you out, I want to spread the information.

I took this pic at my school. Unrelated.

>>57558668
The size of the satellites is obviously not to scale

>>57550636
can you say laaaaag, boys and girls?

>>57558668
It's not an accurate pic, but there's a decent source at least:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/news/orbital_debris.html

File: kessler.png (1020KB, 2048x3072px) Image search: [Google]

1020KB, 2048x3072px

>>57558692
>>57558668
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

These pictures are sourced

>>57554173
>Only if it comes down, moron.
Seeing as their going to be ~700-800 miles, they will.

>>57550758
It's actually around 4ms rtt

>>57557336
You will most likely be shot down before you even reach orbit. Unannounced satellite launches look alike to ICBM launches, and at that stage nations will usually shoot it down unless they know who's it is, what it carries and where it is going. If you manage to get past it, you may get ASATed

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/spacex-plans-worldwide-satellite-internet-with-low-latency-gigabit-speed/

>SpaceX expects its own latencies to be between 25 and 35ms
>the system will be able to provide high bandwidth (up to 1Gbps per user)

>>57558953
such bullshit and a bad idea.

>>57550730
Current satellite connections are slow because they're routed through a few satellites in geosynchronous orbit. That's quite high up, causing latency, and the reliance on a single satellite for most of a hemisphere strains available bandwidth.

The SpaceX plan (which is functionally identical to the earlier Google plan) is to put the satellites in low Earth orbit, cutting latency, and to make up for the loss in coverage area by launching a shitload of satellites. More satellites also conveniently distributes the bandwidth load, solving that problem as well.

So yeah, it's probably going to be low-tier LTE cell service at best, but that's still orders of magnitude better than current satellite providers.

>>57550654
planetes when

>>57559263
What the fuck are you on about? I said nations, does that imply I mean each and every one of them? Sure you might not get fucking ABM coverage in fucking Antarctica, way to take things too serious shitfucker. What has space centers with ABMs to do?

>>57559344
>all driving in the same direction on parallel highways
But satellites don't all fly in parallel. And to achieve a good orbit there's only so much margin you can have regarding flight/orbit height

>>57558846
So I just like email the US space guy (translate that into gov bureocracy terms) and tell him I'll be launching space craft so he doesn't blow it up to hell?

>>57559506
ABM being?

>>57559506
Now that your points are actually clear, sure I'll answer.

You want to kill an ICBM? It has to go to its destination, you don't need global coverage to be ICBM proof completely. If nukes can be deployed from ships, submarines etc, so can anti ICBM weapons be deployed. Second it has to go to its destination, and I'm pretty sure the warning systems will pick that up, it picked up a research rocket in fucking Norway, it surely will pick up your homemade satellite launch, or your ICBM.

Besides why are you fixated thst ICBMs are fired from space stations, they sre fired from silos, boats, submarines, trucks etc. Same purpose applies, if it fires a ICBM, it more or less can fire something thst reaches it.

>>57558449
Think of the size and distance between those objects. The likelihood of impact is extremely low.

>>57559589
Anti-ballistic missile

>>57559691
We've had long range air defense since the 50s, is he retarded?

>>57559687
I seem to have formulated myself in s wrong sense when to comes to homemade satellites or research satellites being shot down, tracked yes shot no. I can agree there. I took the time to read a little and your points stand firm, so I'm not going to pointlessly argue about something I'm not well versed in

You seem to know a bit about this, do you work with rocket systems?

File: 635635546340.jpg (61KB, 600x703px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x703px

>>57556783
Neeto!

>>57559782
>Long range air defence is not ABM
Ok, tell that to the manufacturer of the Patriot and whatever the Russian equivalent is.

>>57558953
>>57559153
Looks like they're planning to launch into ~1000km altitude, which means it will take them about 100-200 years to decay back into the atmosphere after a potential accident

Sounds like a fucking terrible idea. I hope it never gets funding. Better just lay fiber on the actual planet.

>>57557459
It's spaceX + Google, spacex will just launch those SATs and Google will fund and run it I believe because it is Google's plan

>>57558762
only if they fall below orbital velocity because of air resistance you dumbass

>>57558762
>>57561046
Yes, in 100-200 years

Enjoy 200 years of no low-earth satellite projects if shit hits the fan

>>57556909
look at this guy he got answers for everyone and everything

it is a fucking toy because it's musks plan to save the earth. it would be awesome to see a lot of things retard, but musk's bullshit is not something i feel like myself/family/friends paying for because we're not a bunch of braindead faggots looking for some post-jobs techno messiah.

File: 1476495289346.jpg (39KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 375x375px

>>57558668
>discussion group meant for queer niggers
>but the group is closed to queer niggers

>>57556594
this remote places like farms and rural floks like me could use this tech and it will be cheaper than getting rural boardband this shit is almost twice as expensive then town.

>>57550636
>wants

>>57554882
it's gonna happen either way

much easier to lay quality fiber through the banana plantations when we're stuck with monopolized shit tier connections

>>57550636
>Satellite
>Super fast internet
Getting real tired of this faggot ass nigger

>>57560712
you are now aware that it's actually easier to launch a fleet of satellites for internet infrastructure than it is to deal with the monopolies having control of the lines on the ground

>>57562056
You already have this technology, moron.

In fact there are solutions to do, terrestrially, what he's planning.

>>57558668
>LQBTQIA+
leftism was a mistake

>>57559687
you can cite NK's successful sat launch as historical evidence of your technical point

>>57555246
>ugly person can look good with washed hair and good lighting and angles

wow who knew

>>57562654
Anyone with a functioning brain.

>>57562695
>being so autistic you don't understand sarcasm

i bet you are one of the ones that think the programmers do all the work, huh

>>57550758
Traditional geostationary internet satellites are the ones with shitty latency. LEO satellites have latency low enough to beat some land-based broadband connections.