home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.space
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!torn!utzoo!henry
- From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
- Subject: satellite costs etc.
- Message-ID: <BzqBvs.J8H@zoo.toronto.edu>
- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:35:51 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>
- Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
- Lines: 26
-
- In article <1992Dec23.111923.22269@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
- >... A ten year life zero defects
- >GEO comsat like K2 is much cheaper than a 1 year life package
- >that costs 20 times less. That's because most of the investment is
- >not in the satellite, it's in the Earth based terminals that use it.
-
- I don't grasp this argument. It's the same Earth-based terminals either way.
- If you're providing a service, you plan to do so over more than one satellite
- lifetime, either way. Twenty years of service is cheaper with mass-produced
- short-life satellites, even with your (fairly unfavorable) assumptions.
-
- >... Since the satellite represents a single point failure node...
-
- This is your 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.
-
- >... 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.
- --
- "God willing... we shall return." | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
- -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
-