<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">The issue is that they can't track satellites that small using current radar technology. They literally move satellites out of the way</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">if there is some possibility of collision. If there is a collision, then you get lots of debris, that just makes the debris</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">problem worse. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">See: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision</a></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Certain orbits are much more of an issue than others; for example, low earth orbits decay quickly enough that there is little issue, as the satellites will </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">reenter quickly enough that there is unlikely to be a problem. Other orbits are seldom used, so there isn't much to run into.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">The satellite's vendor proposed using on-board GPS to send its location.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">The problem is that if the satellite fails, they would get no information. The FCC was unhappy with that. Launching without solving that</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">objection is a real "no-no".a</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Jim</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Christopher Robin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pheoni@gmail.com" target="_blank">pheoni@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Now I'm not defending the FCC thinking it has global launch control, but I've actually done some academic reading on space debris and usable orbits. The experts in the field have shown concern for how to handle the growth of space traffic for decades, and not just in GEO space. Someone "going rogue" could have large scale impacts. This is different than flying planes or setting up a new radio tower without following the "rules of the road". Space also has the additional factors that:<br><br>1) there is currently no way (realistic) to clean up after an event in space <br>2) any collision events in space tend to cascade into a much larger problem<br><br>There are some awesome technologies on the horizon, and I want to see them come about. But unlike terrestrial radio, fixing a mistake isn't currently feasible for small scale companies. Until that changes, we really need an independent, international organization that will verify that these small startups didn't miss something in their planning. Personally I'd rather be stuck with sub-par terrestrial signals than increasing risk to GPS & weather imaging. </div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:10 PM, <a href="mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com" target="_blank">dpreed@deepplum.com</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com" target="_blank">dpreed@deepplum.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><font face="arial" size="2"><p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">To me that is analogous to the idea that since ancient TV sets would show weird ghosts when various kinds of radio transmitters were placed nearby (or even be disturbed by power-line noise) that the entire effort and rulemaking of the FCC should be forever aimed at protecting those TV sets, because someone's grandmother somewhere might still own one.</p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt"> </p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">It's a technologically backwards idea. It's the kind of idea that made it next to impossible to legalize WiFi [I know, I was there]. Only a very key person (named M. Marcus, now retired from FCC OET, and a friend) was able to enable the use of WiFi technologies in the ISM bands. Otherwise, the idea that all current poorly scalable systems ought to be allowed to "block" new technologies takes over.</p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt"> </p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">All I can say is that if you really think about sharing orbital space in a scalable way, there is a lot more "space" available. Which is why I suggested "rules of the road" that operate in everyone's interest and privilege no one use over another are almost certainly feasible. As satellites get more capable (smaller, lighter, more maneuverable, as they follow the equivalent of Moore's Law for space) avoidance becomes feasible, *especially if all satellites can coordinate via low energy networking protocols*.</p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt"> </p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">I know all the scare stories. Planes will fall out of the sky if someone accidentally uses a WiFi device or cellphone on airplanes. The Internet will be inhabited only by criminals. Encryption is something no one with "nothing to hide" needs to use.</p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt"> </p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">Please. Think harder. Become an expert on space technology, etc. Not just someone who "knowledgably repeats lines from news media articles" as so many do.</p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt"> </p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">My point is that while it may be that *geosynchronous equatorial orbit* is very tightly occupied, most MEO and LEO space is not densely occupied at all.</p><div><div class="m_5806845258338955771h5">
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">-----Original Message-----<br>From: "Christopher Robin" <<a href="mailto:pheoni@gmail.com" target="_blank">pheoni@gmail.com</a>><br>Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 1:34pm<br>To: "<a href="mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com" target="_blank">dpreed@deepplum.com</a>" <<a href="mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com" target="_blank">dpreed@deepplum.com</a>><br>Cc: <a href="mailto:cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloa<wbr>t.net</a><br>Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] spacebee<br><br></p>
<div id="m_5806845258338955771m_-5081523524459804136SafeStyles1520880947">
<div dir="ltr">The portion of space with usable orbital paths is much, much smaller. One rogue rocket with a poor/flawed understanding of that could endanger several other satellites. Many systems already in orbit lack the redundancy to handle a major collision. And any collision in orbit could ruin the usability of a much larger section of space. </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 1:18 PM, <a href="mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com" target="_blank">dpreed@deepplum.com</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dpreed@deepplum.com" target="_blank">dpreed@deepplum.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">Well, that may be the case, but it's a non-scalable and highly corruptible system. IMO it's probably unnecesary, too. Space is actually quite big.</p>
<div>
<div class="m_5806845258338955771m_-5081523524459804136h5">
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt"> </p>
<p style="margin:0;padding:0;margin:0;padding:0;font-family:arial;font-size:10pt">-----Original Message-----<br>From: "Jim Gettys" <<a href="mailto:jg@freedesktop.org" target="_blank">jg@freedesktop.org</a>><br>Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 12:26pm<br>To: "Dave Taht" <<a href="mailto:dave.taht@gmail.com" target="_blank">dave.taht@gmail.com</a>><br>Cc: <a href="mailto:cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloa<wbr>t.net</a><br>Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] spacebee<br><br></p>
<div id="m_5806845258338955771m_-5081523524459804136m_-8020749043834695581SafeStyles1520875041">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">I do believe that the international space treaties require our government to control all launches.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Launching satellites without permission is a big no-no.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Note that according to the article, it is collision risk, rather than radio radiation, that is the issue here.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Jim</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 12:13 AM, Dave Taht <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dave.taht@gmail.com" target="_blank">dave.taht@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">This is awesome. The FCC (whic still doesn't "get" spread spectrum<br> radio) just discovered it doesn't have authority over the airwaves of<br> the whole planet.<br><br><a rel="noreferrer" href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/satellites/fcc-accuses-stealthy-startup-of-launching-rogue-satellites" target="_blank">https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech<wbr>-talk/aerospace/satellites/<wbr>fcc-accuses-stealthy-startup-<wbr>of-launching-rogue-satellites</a><br><span class="m_5806845258338955771m_-5081523524459804136m_-8020749043834695581HOEnZb"><span style="color:#888888"><br> --<br><br> Dave Täht<br> CEO, TekLibre, LLC<br><a rel="noreferrer" href="http://www.teklibre.com" target="_blank">http://www.teklibre.com</a><br> Tel: <a href="tel:1-669-226-2619" target="_blank">1-669-226-2619</a><br> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br> Cerowrt-devel mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloa<wbr>t.net</a><br><a rel="noreferrer" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/<wbr>listinfo/cerowrt-devel</a><br></span></span></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br> Cerowrt-devel mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloa<wbr>t.net</a><br><a rel="noreferrer" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/<wbr>listinfo/cerowrt-devel</a><br><br></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div></font></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Cerowrt-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net">Cerowrt-devel@lists.<wbr>bufferbloat.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/<wbr>listinfo/cerowrt-devel</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>