China may prefer to build their own Internet constellation, anyway.
https://www.spaceintelreport.com/spacex-satellite-mega-constellation-attracts-competitors-fire/
Quote from: jpo234 on 07/17/2017 07:05 pmhttps://www.spaceintelreport.com/spacex-satellite-mega-constellation-attracts-competitors-fire/Did anybody read this? There is good stuff in here:* They "only" expect to launch 1600 satellites within the first 6 years after getting the license ("We can’t launch 4,425 satellites – 1.7 million kilograms’ worth – in 72 months")* public interference-mitigation plan filed on 07/12* concerns regarding collision risk
That 6 years is from getting the license, not from start of launches. They still have to finish the design, test the prototype satellites, then ramp up manufacturing, and build/rebuild a pair of launch sites. That only gives them 4 or so years to launch everything.
But now we have a semi-official mass number.. ~400 kg.I believe 25/launch (10 tons), with a dedicated reusable s2/dispenser - as long as F9 based, and that's 60 launches for the first 1600.25 satellites is ~half an orbital plane, so they can start by quarter-populating the constellation (50% per plane, 50% of planes, very roughly) and work up from there.Afterwards, I agree with those that think that a future craft will take over.
Quote from: meekGee on 07/18/2017 02:14 pmBut now we have a semi-official mass number.. ~400 kg.I believe 25/launch (10 tons), with a dedicated reusable s2/dispenser - as long as F9 based, and that's 60 launches for the first 1600.25 satellites is ~half an orbital plane, so they can start by quarter-populating the constellation (50% per plane, 50% of planes, very roughly) and work up from there.Afterwards, I agree with those that think that a future craft will take over.What if they don't spend time and money into redesigning a reusable second stage of F9 but instead invest that time, talent and money into the next vehicle that should have a reusable second stage / spacecraft by design? Especially when that rocket obsoletes F9 altogether? What is more economical?
If the dispenser has a rotation mechanism (think of a lazy susan inside a cabinet) then a payload bay door approach would work. Just rotate the birds to a position where they can be dispensed...
Envy. You forgot the fact that it delays the development of the next generation vehicle. You also forgot that a reusable second stage might just not work. I would think it's bad investment. But we are again on the wrong thread for this discussion and should defer to not continuing.
I just saw a commercial for Airborne Wireless Network, which is doing an airliner based constellation. There are planes constantly in the sky all over the globe. And they claim they can use these already flying planes as the platform for their service. I didn't see a thread for this, but a model like that could seriously dent the business model for a large satellite constellation.
Operator @INTELSAT wants @FCC to delay approval of @SpaceX sat constellation pending review of interference risk.