DailyDirt: Space-Based Telecommunications

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The idea of space-based telecommunications seemed so promising in the 1980s, but the delivered services didn’t quite live up to the dream of ubiquitous global communications. Al Franken’s one-man satellite reporting didn’t really address the latency issues associated with geosynchronous satellite orbits, but the future of satellite communications was still a bad joke. Perhaps after a few decades, we’re ready for another try?

After you’ve finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: , , , , , , ,
Companies: iridium, oneweb, spacex

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DailyDirt: Space-Based Telecommunications”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
5 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Wonder how many satellites it takes just to cover the continental US? If 900-4000 cover the whole world, it should only take… several dozen? That’s like a few million bucks to cover the whole country now that launch systems are getting less expensive? Chump change to a giant telecom, so what’s really preventing satellite internet again?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

The problem with satellites in lower orbits is that you cannot really separate coverage of the US from coverage of the whole world. The satellites spend more of their time below the horizon from any viewpoint on earth.
While one or two Geostationary satellites could cover most of the US, northern Alaska would be a problem, but low orbit satellites can solve this problem. The latency introduced by geostationary satellites is noticeable, and would be a problem for gamers etc.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: big difference in altitude

Great point about the latency. I knew there was a difference in altitude between the two orbits but had never looked it up before. Holy cow!
LEO orbit is around 99 miles high
Geosynchronous orbit is at 22,236 mi

I can see how that might make for a little bit of latency difference.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...