<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87wp1rbxo8.fsf@nemesis.taht.net">
<pre wrap="">I tend not to care as much about how long it takes for things that do
not need R/T deadlines as humans and as steering wheels do.
Propigation delay, while ultimately bound by the speed of light, is also
affected by the wires wrapping indirectly around the earth - much slower
than would be possible if we worked at it:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.03449.pdf" moz-do-not-send="true">https://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.03449.pdf</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Enchanting that somebody actually quantified this intricacy!<br>
</p>
<p><b>My</b> Addendum/Errata:</p>
<p> The alternative to a 'fast lane' backbone is not necessarily a
mast based microwave link as stated, which is probably
infeasible/inflexible etc.</p>
<p>They were mentioning 'weather-balloons' as well- which actually
boils down to - I'm presuming this - the probably ongoing airborne
platform internet extension attempts by Goggle/Lockheed Martin
etc., you call them ...</p>
<p>These attempts are not based on balloons, but airships
('dirigible'-balloons so to speak), being able to stay aloft for
potentially years. That's widely known and so let's get them away,
not out for that. <br>
</p>
<p>NB. Airships are quite impressive for its own and therefore worth
bein recherched for!!!</p>
<p>What I actually wanted to posit in relation to that is that one
could get sooner a c-cabable backbone sibling by marrying two
ideas: the airborne concept ongoing as outlined plus what NASA is
planning to bring about for the space backbone, e.g [1][2]. It's
laser based instead of directed radio-wave only. Sure, both is in
the speed range of c, apparantely, laser transmission has in
addition a significantly higher bandwidth to offer. "10 to 100
times as much data at a time as radio-frequency systems"[3].
Attenuations to photons in clean atmospheric air are neglible (few
mps - refractive index of about 1.0003), so actually a neglible
slowdown - easily competing with top notch fibres (99.7% the
vacuum speed of light). Sure, that's the ideal case, though, if
cleverly done from the procurement of platforms and overall system
steering perspective, might feasible.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/nasa-taking-first-steps-toward-high-speed-space-internet">https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/nasa-taking-first-steps-toward-high-speed-space-internet</a></p>
<p>[2]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-solar-system-internet-technology-debuts-on-the-international-space-station">https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-solar-system-internet-technology-debuts-on-the-international-space-station</a></p>
<p>[3]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/tdrs-an-era-of-continuous-space-communications">https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/tdrs-an-era-of-continuous-space-communications</a><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Besten Gruß
Matthias Tafelmeier
</pre>
</body>
</html>