Author Topic: Diamandis and Simonyi Planetary Resources Company Announcement and Notes  (Read 227298 times)

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39464
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25599
  • Likes Given: 12246
All right, you need a pretty good pointing accuracy on the sender side for sat to sat laser comms. Which is harder if both the sender and receiver are whizzing about ~8km/s on differing orbits.
I wasn't talking about sat-to-sat laser communication, I was talking about sat-to-ground.

But anyway, even what you suggest is possible, especially since the two orbits are very deterministic (i.e. there's very, very little short-term uncertainty about where each spacecraft is going to be).

And, other than doppler-shift (which can be dealt with), the relative velocities don't so much matter as much as the slew rate. Since they are likely to be hundreds of kilometers apart, you're still talking a slew rate in the degrees per second range. That's not actually that difficult, and is within the range of existing off-the-shelf systems (though pointing accuracy is pretty important here).
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 04:12 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline rklaehn

  • interplanetary telemetry plumber
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1259
  • germany
  • Liked: 191
  • Likes Given: 318
All right, you need a pretty good pointing accuracy on the sender side for sat to sat laser comms. Which is harder if both the sender and receiver are whizzing about ~8km/s on differing orbits.

This has been done before, but between a LEO earth observation spacecraft and a GEO relay. The pointing requirements should be roughly similar though. Definitely doable.

The TerraSAR spacecraft once took a SAR image of the ISS. Pointing one spacecraft precisely on another spacecraft is state of the art.

http://www.dlr.de/en/Portaldata/1/Resources/portal_news/newsarchiv2010_1/iss_radarbild_HiRes.jpg

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
No doubt its doable, question is how cheaply.

BTW, For some reason i suspect that PR is heavily banking on all sorts of new MEMS sensor technologies and heavy DSP processing power onboard their craft

EDIT: and a good, if a bit dated summary of the state of the art
http://satcom.jp/English/e-70/conferencereport3e.pdf

EDIT2: actually reading up, this doesnt seem far fetched at all. NICT Small optical transponder is quoted as Mass: 3.5kg, Power 5~10W. And they have portable ground stations .. hmm
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 05:32 pm by savuporo »
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10324
  • Liked: 720
  • Likes Given: 734
If you were to cover the whole US once every month, that's only an average bandwidth of 10Mbps. All of Europe would be another ~10Mbps. Two orders of magnitude less than a plausible first-generation data rate for free space laser communications.

10 Mps for a month is a non-trivial amount of data.

If PR truly can achieve the performance that you describe, their core business should be in satellite communications and not imagery or planetary resources.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39464
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25599
  • Likes Given: 12246
If you were to cover the whole US once every month, that's only an average bandwidth of 10Mbps. All of Europe would be another ~10Mbps. Two orders of magnitude less than a plausible first-generation data rate for free space laser communications.

10 Mps for a month is a non-trivial amount of data.

If PR truly can achieve the performance that you describe, their core business should be in satellite communications and not imagery or planetary resources.
Well, their first buck will be made in satellite communications research under their NASA SBIR:
http://sbir.gsfc.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/11/sttr/phase1/STTR-11-1-T4.01-9919.html

They are being invested in not because they're going to turn a buck but because they're going to mine asteroids. Do you make your career choices solely based on the amount of money you'd make?

And it's not like other entities aren't also pursuing laser communication.

EDIT:I've attached the SBIR brief. Shows more information about the Arkyd 100 series.
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 04:52 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6921
  • Erie, CO
  • Liked: 4223
  • Likes Given: 1959

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
So one piece of the puzzle is basically an attempt to obsolete Deep Space Network with optical comms network. Given that they are not the only ones trying, and the tech is all basically demonstrated and there, this could be interesting.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39464
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25599
  • Likes Given: 12246
So one piece of the puzzle is basically an attempt to obsolete Deep Space Network with optical comms network. Given that they are not the only ones trying, and the tech is all basically demonstrated and there, this could be interesting.
I don't think we'll be giving up on the DSN just yet. Radio communications is pretty nice, and we have all sorts of probes out there right now, so DSN will be needed for quite a bit longer.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Any estimates on how much power they might be able to get from those solar panels?
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
So one piece of the puzzle is basically an attempt to obsolete Deep Space Network with optical comms network. Given that they are not the only ones trying, and the tech is all basically demonstrated and there, this could be interesting.
I don't think we'll be giving up on the DSN just yet. Radio communications is pretty nice, and we have all sorts of probes out there right now, so DSN will be needed for quite a bit longer.
I didnt say give up. For real deep space, i.e. outer planets and ongoing missions obviously DSN is irreplaceable. I guess what they could be trying to do, in part, is sort of become comms backbone for future nearer to earth missions where optical links can work.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39464
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25599
  • Likes Given: 12246
Any estimates on how much power they might be able to get from those solar panels?
Around 30-45 watts, if those are the standard solar cells like are often used for cubesats (probably are).

BTW, here's a good website for cubesat (and nano/microsatellite) parts:
http://www.cubesatshop.com/
The Arkyd is supposed to be only in the 20kg range, which means that a lot of the parts on that website are usable. The reaction control parts, for instance.

(A really great site, by the way... with real prices listed, even!)
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 06:17 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Warren Platts

They are being invested in not because they're going to turn a buck but because they're going to mine asteroids. Do you make your career choices solely based on the amount of money you'd make?

Chris, this statement is so naive, I don't believe that you believe it. The scientific "consensus" of real geologists is that asteroids are, if not non-starters, they are down-the-road, shall we say, 2nd generation projects that will happen after the entire Moon starts getting depleted centuries from now. Do you not see the irony about your repeatedly expressed skepticism with regard to Lunar resources, combined with your repeatedly expressed optimism with regard to Google asteroid resources?!?

And please don't mention the so-called delta v advantage. Of 1500 NEA's listed by JPL here, even the best of them not even have a 40% savings on delta v. And of course, this 40% savings only happens for a 2-month window every 20 years....

You've heard of Dr. Alan Stern, right? He used to run the SMD at NASA? Here's what he says: ""I believe that the presence of water and ease of mining platinum group elements on the Moon's surface far, far trumps arguments that NEO's are energetically easier to get samples from than the Moon."

If these guys were really serious about mining, they would be talking about the Moon. But they're not talking about the Moon. So they talk about asteroids because that way any serious commitment to actual mining is always in the proverbial 30 years in the future.

Meanwhile, as the link Jon provided (which in turn links to Forbes.com) above says,

Quote from: forbes.com
In addition, the telescopes are capable of being pointed at Earth for observati0n, as well. All of this potential for gathering data is a potential opportunity to sell that data to universities, businesses, and government.

In addition, Lewicki confirmed to me that they’ll also be putting Arkyds on the market, as well as a tool for private scientific work. There’s not a price set yet, though it will be in the “low single-digit millions,” with the possibility of alterations for specific use...

For the Arkyds, the company wants to develop a small, low power, optical communications ability. This ability would be “tech enabling,” according to Lewicki, and would offer some better communications... “One of the robots might be relaying messages to Earth, while another takes pictures and yet another takes pictures from a different angle.”

When a business man says he's not in it for the money, you'd better believe he's in it for the money. These guys aren't stupid. Mining asteroids is stupid. The world's platinum market is only $5B/year. The Earth satellite business is $160B/year--and growing.

They'll start with Earth imaging (worth up to $10B+/year at the way things are growing), then they'll take over the satellite communications market (worth up to $100B+/year at the way things are growing. If these guys' plans come to fruition, they'll be bigger than Exxon.

Then, if they really want to get into the mining business, they will set their sights on the Moon, where there are actual, decent gold deposits that could generate close to a $100B/year and not crash the price....

All this is not to say that these greedy guys will not be doing a lot of great philanthropy as they go along. They will be leasing telescope time to universities at a great discount. They will be doing humanity a great service by keeping a sharp eye out for the city busters and dinosaur killers that are out there. They will be sending out (cheap) missions to asteroids that will vastly increase our understanding of these puzzling entities.

What is really intriguing to me is the fact that they brought Sara Seager, the exoplanetologist onboard. As the articles that activenano (a.k.a. "BW") wrote point out, these Arkyd telescope constellations will be able resolve exoplanets out to several light years with 1-km or better resolution. That's crazy and extremely cool. :)

21st-century astronomy is in for a major renaissance thanks to PRI! And that can only be applauded, right?

But let's not kid ourselves. The whole hypegasm about asteroid mining is a (fairly innocent) act of deception, à la a magician that uses smoke and mirrors to guide people's eyes away from what his or her hands are really doing....
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 07:30 pm by Warren Platts »
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39464
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25599
  • Likes Given: 12246
Warren: completely out of context.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline peter-b

  • Dr. Peter Brett
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 649
  • Oxford, UK
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 74
I suspect the paperwork demanded by the ITU for operating these telescopes (orbital slot allocation, frequency allocation, orbital debris cataloguing, ...) is going to significantly outmass the satellites themselves,  ;)
Research Scientist (Sensors), Sharp Laboratories of Europe, UK

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10324
  • Liked: 720
  • Likes Given: 734
I suspect the paperwork demanded by the ITU for operating these telescopes (orbital slot allocation, frequency allocation, orbital debris cataloguing, ...) is going to significantly outmass the satellites themselves,  ;)

Does ITU really have a role in determining LEO slots? Isn't the rest of this covered by an FAA launch license?
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 08:03 pm by Danderman »

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
The scientific "consensus" of real geologists is that asteroids are, if not non-starters, they are down-the-road, shall we say, 2nd generation projects that will happen after the entire Moon starts getting depleted centuries from now.
First off, consensus is irrelevant in science.  They might be doing a smoke and mirrors approach because it's a lot less controversial to mine asteroids than the moon.  But as a non-consensus geologist, I've made some good money.  Go read the book "mining the sky".  Even if I am wrong and the moon is mined first, asteroids would almost certainly not be centuries later. 

When a business man says he's not in it for the money, you'd better believe he's in it for the money. The world's platinum market is only $5B/year. The Earth satellite business is $160B/year--and growing.
No doubt they will be opportunistic.  If they can sell a large array of laser communication satellite telescopes (optical interferometer) to the US military for example, I doubt they would object.  But I really do think that their decision is largely driven by the exciting science that would also result.  This builds new future capacity rather than "turkey dinner for the homeless" or something.  There are a few new markets that this could potentially CREATE.  Having access to large volumes of platinum group metals would likely increase demand for them too. 

These guys aren't stupid. Mining asteroids is stupid.
You don't see the logical fallacy here?  Why not just assume what they are saying is truly a significant part of their aspirations? 
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 08:06 pm by go4mars »
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39464
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25599
  • Likes Given: 12246
I suspect the paperwork demanded by the ITU for operating these telescopes (orbital slot allocation, frequency allocation, orbital debris cataloguing, ...) is going to significantly outmass the satellites themselves,  ;)
Part of the beauty of optical communications is no need for frequency allocation.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
Quote
It is capable of high-precision optical stability down to the sub-arcsecond level, an increase in capability of almost 2 orders of magnitude over current small satellite stability performance, enabling optical communication at high data rates or over long (interplanetary) distances;
Does this imply that optical interferometer use is likely possible?
« Last Edit: 04/27/2012 08:15 pm by go4mars »
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39464
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25599
  • Likes Given: 12246
Quote
It is capable of high-precision optical stability down to the sub-arcsecond level, an increase in capability of almost 2 orders of magnitude over current small satellite stability performance, enabling optical communication at high data rates or over long (interplanetary) distances;

Why is the "or" not an "and"?
Because of diffraction, which lowers the power per area (and thus data rate) you can deliver over millions of km for a certain aperture size.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
I suspect the paperwork demanded by the ITU for operating these telescopes (orbital slot allocation, frequency allocation, orbital debris cataloguing, ...) is going to significantly outmass the satellites themselves,  ;)
Part of the beauty of optical communications is no need for frequency allocation.
I was thinking the same, but i would bet that they will have a regular AX.25 backup telemetry and command channel.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1