From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x22d.google.com (mail-qk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 600C93CB35 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 14:25:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id g184so642619qkd.10 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:25:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AdRGPLwmJdpDBZ6eXIcCtUR3bSCzsy8wQ18D+EB6yvs=; b=KMjgfXV/wJvB+eso588/XMYbjB7ilHyMpOUj68hnAtB9TXJdj4eUC4aDUa1sJklSyH URgr9R6GJ28OQAGnEx31y9VtAbbiftbxDdK2x4JtcJ97oiBLcY4YTTi9Wp4BHOtyGqML xwkuRwGL9xQMqdNkqt7HtcPQdV9UtVdPGDZoA2piia3i4DrIRdMq1jpQkUsuJcADcGnO VBMY0zwBr00lJ2Sda58rAjm9lL9oVx83DoQ4Vu2IFtbhN/eWdnvQSq7g8FXWi3Zb5mJ2 1Mw6Ext8q99PjSV/mb0MhWQWcgL3Dwx6NjDB9EKI2okAeC/SVzlnugxK3REk6WRDg8dV 8doQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AdRGPLwmJdpDBZ6eXIcCtUR3bSCzsy8wQ18D+EB6yvs=; b=irz2ebc4MdJphAQfwJJ3bN4rgoNOuFnM1Eyxj+s1PIA6YlYs2oDi1G+oJX2ktwTQ1T zSVCCc6nktvDnwmKoTMbuavpZL/j8SjgpUF2fkvAWkbY5dooSOXMwnc6WRqyipDpUsYx jgzcko9GkLYElr/wqcMYJzk+1j71ESwM+TH2XuoWcyDZTP+1vGoxSyIW0tm1qtDd7SgM yQFgbWQ2d8ONS6YHVzOewkD9c9KmfQNwJajKK0+3nS7N+gFvbxbw74argQA5qe954TDT hwulQztVR8+YGqP/tN+QFUFIGT+dKdCdlr6d/1B5PEWczJ9mARm1pvzSV99vZH0xtkFR WIog== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7FVqX5DCGP3AA51YTFhKQJ0VCjvXHrE1st6iCmX40lMMoMpDdQ4 SUqW7c55bazP31Acn2JYaNU1WFVOgatuqnO1Y7A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsdRfe5jqQ9SHZb0Oqy8iAJhMdd+H4AOA3k7jIsE5ro76hrWki43Q4R90jy91YoipKP2hxJRE4d17HaD/PIzTc= X-Received: by 10.55.150.67 with SMTP id y64mr2327586qkd.318.1520965502594; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:25:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.191.15 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:25:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1520875105.31683592@apps.rackspace.com> <1520881804.31539998@apps.rackspace.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:25:02 -0700 Message-ID: To: Christopher Robin Cc: Jim Gettys , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] spacebee X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 18:25:04 -0000 On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Christopher Robin wrot= e: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:03 PM Jim Gettys wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >>> >>> 2) Although the FCC denied the application based on having inadaquate >>> radar reflectivity, according to their standards, the article states: >>> >>> "Websites dedicated to tracking operational satellites show the >>> SpaceBees in orbits virtually identical to those specified in Swarm=E2= =80=99s >>> application." Ground stations can only get better. > > > Note that the objections are based on a non-operating SpaceBee. I=E2=80= =99m not > seeing anything about one of the SpaceBees going dark for testing or not > responding due to malfunction. So the ground stations are prob getting bo= th > GPS data from the sat and a fix on the radio signal to determine position= . > If both of those methods of tracking disappear, there appears to be a > limited number of ground stations that could provide an accurate enough > location to allow for other orbitals to made an avoidance maneuver. > > With all the noise around this launch, I haven=E2=80=99t been able to fin= d info on > expected operational lifespan vs expected orbit decay. LEO=E2=80=99s can = still last > for decades. The only thing I=E2=80=99m finding is an expected use for 6m= o to 2yr, > but not sure how long after that the Spaceebee will stay in orbit and/or = be > responsive with positional data. The arkyd-3 was supposed to be in a 25 yr orbit with a 5 year operational lifetime... which may outlast the company at this point. So I'd assume this orbit (and corporate and projected lifetime) is similar. > While just 4 of these things in space isn=E2=80=99t a major concern, rogu= e launching > objects into space isn=E2=80=99t a scalable solution. This is especially = true as the > cost of launching comes down into the =E2=80=9Ccheap=E2=80=9D startup ran= ge. These types of > companies aren=E2=80=99t usually concerned 25yr impact plans, and most wo= nt last > long enough to be around to assist if any problems occur past that 2-3yr > window. > > We have rules for the road, the sea, and the sky. Space needs similar > protections. No, the FCC shouldn=E2=80=99t be that gatekeeper, but that= =E2=80=99s where we > are at until an agency is stood up with authority to handle these kinds o= f > issues. +1. --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619