From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cmail.nextlayer.at (cmail.nextlayer.at [IPv6:2a01:190:1600:2164::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CB9A3B2A4 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 02:06:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 9125443398 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 07:05:58 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <007f1215-e15f-4aae-a7de-3958c0914e68@falco.ca> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 23:05:54 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-CA, de-AT To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net References: From: Daniel AJ Sokolov In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 Subject: Re: [Starlink] FCC Denies Starlink Low-Orbit Bid for Lower Latency (Mark Harris) X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 06:06:01 -0000 On 3/13/24 19:55, David Lang via Starlink wrote: > this doesn't make sense to me. The ISS can go as low as 360km before > they get a boost back to a higher orbit, but the starlink satellites > they are denying will all be lower than that (and worst case, they can > force SpaceX to pay for a few additional reboost missions over the next > 6 years before they deorbit it) These satellites would be in the way of supply missions to/from ISS. > but they would avoid the thousands of satellites going up and down > through the ISS orbit range to get to their ~550km orbit/ They don't linger there, so that's different. BR Daniel AJ