Article View: sci.space
Article #6540Re: satellite costs etc.
From: Henry Spencer
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 03:27
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 03:27
38 lines
2706 bytes
2706 bytes
In article <1992Dec27.163935.20473@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>...assumption, not a self-evident fact. Communications networks
>>normally have redundancy to cover predictable single-point failures.
>>Even today's gold-plated satellite networks do, despite the expense.
>
>It's the network reconfiguration costs that get you. When NBC had to
>reconfigure from K2 to SBS 3 due to a control failure on K2, it cost
>NBC $150,000 a *minute* for 4.5 hours until the major ground systems
>were re-aimed... Doing it *unscheduled* because of
>a failure of the cheapsat, can be really expensive if it only happens
>once.
Why do you assume that the redundancy will involve repointing? If you
*plan* for such handovers, you can put the spare satellite in the same
orbital slot as the operational one. (Those slots are over a thousand
kilometers wide, there's plenty of room.) Result, no repointing. Only
the control room needs to even *know* which bird is live.
>>>... and since for most orbits
>>>the satellites aren't retrievable or repairable, and DC won't change
>>>that...
>>Again, your assumption, not a self-evident fact. Cheap launches change
>>almost everything, including the feasibility of retrieval and repair.
>
>I wasn't aware that DC was planned to have a GEO capability, or a large
>enough cargo bay to retrieve a major comsat.
Why do you assume that DC alone has to do everything? The big expense
of doing most anything in space is getting into LEO; cutting that cost
massively makes *everything* more feasible. It becomes much more
attractive to develop a tug capable of bringing things back down from
GEO, or a reentry capsule capable of landing a payload too big for a
DC cargo bay. Neither of these devices is technologically difficult;
they don't exist at the moment because operations costs -- mostly
the cost of launching to LEO -- are too high.
--
"God willing... we shall return." | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
-Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<C0049H.7tB@zoo.toronto.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!utzoo!henryReferences:
<1992Dec14.221347.3359@iti.org> <1992Dec16.092029.27518@ke4zv.uucp> <1992Dec16.202219.2063@eng.umd.edu> <1gvlmnINN9c@mirror.digex.com> <72109@cup.portal.com> <BzMwDx.KGw@zoo.toronto.edu> <1992Dec23.111923.22269@ke4zv.uucp> <BzqBvs.J8H@zoo.toronto.edu> <1992Dec27.163935.20473@ke4zv.uucp>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.space Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!utzoo!henry From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: satellite costs etc. Message-ID: <C0049H.7tB@zoo.toronto.edu> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 03:27:15 GMT References: <1992Dec14.221347.3359@iti.org> <1992Dec16.092029.27518@ke4zv.uucp> <1992Dec16.202219.2063@eng.umd.edu> <1gvlmnINN9c@mirror.digex.com> <72109@cup.portal.com> <BzMwDx.KGw@zoo.toronto.edu> <1992Dec23.111923.22269@ke4zv.uucp> <BzqBvs.J8H@zoo.toronto.edu> <1992Dec27.163935.20473@ke4zv.uucp> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 38