4 ms·
So after blowing up Facebook's Internet-providing satellite, they're going after their own constellation. I do wonder how this will affect potential customers
by zymhan 10y ago
So after blowing up Facebook's Internet-providing satellite, they're going after their own constellation.
I do wonder how this will affect potential customers who would launch communications satellites on SpaceX, but are worried about handing over something proprietary to a competitor.
- foota 10y agoI imagine this would be a pretty low concern because that would probably violate all sorts of contracts.
- JshWright 10y agoFacebook didn't own the satellite, they were simply planning to lease a few of the transponders.
- zymhan 10y agoThis is true, but I wanted my comment to be short and pithy :P
- arijun 10y agoI don't know how concerned these companies are about industrial espionage. I would definitely buy that they were wary of funding a competitor.
- kylecordes 10y agoThey have conclusively demonstrated that relying on a small number of satellites in the small number of launches concentrates too much risk. Unfortunately the demonstrated this accidentally blowing up a satellite. In the long run though, success at scale with a system like this relies on the typically guaranteed losses. A certain percentage of rockets will fail, a certain percentage of satellites will fail, a robust system will be designed to accommodate this. (Of course, and this is probably the topic of a totally different thread, the tolerance for this must change dramatically when there are people in there.)
- nraynaud 10y agothere is still the issue of space junk, more satellites, more launches, more mishaps, more junk. And now you have more junk to create more mishaps. I'm not saying I want more concentration, I'm just saying that the path to de-centralisation is not that clear cut (at there is a threshold were we have to talk about CO2 emissions).
- fapjacks 10y agoYeah I'm really surprised no one else has mentioned the issue of space junk. SpaceX won't be the last company that wants to put thousands of these things into orbit.
- andygates 10y agoJunk prevention is addressed in the details of the proposal, deliberate deorbiting early, but if not they'll decay nicely. It's still as many satellites as are currently flying at all, but they have considered it.
- BWStearns 10y agoAs long as spacex is the cheapest taxi then they will have customers. No one sending something precious into orbit is lacking in the legal department. On top of that I think it's fair to say that spacex and Musk have a fairly "good guy" reputation as far as ip goes.
- AdamTReineke 10y agoNot a new competitive risk as this has been Musk's plan for at least two years now. http://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musks-next-mission-internet-satellites-1415390062 http://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musks-next-mission-internet...
- DGAP 10y agoViaSat already moved their launch of ViaSat 2 from SpaceX to a competing French company, primarily due to delays although I had heard it was due to the recent rash of SpaceX launch failures. Telecoms customers aren't worried about Musk stealing their technology, but they are worried that his satellites don't dependably launch on time, much less not explode. Lost in the Elon circlejerk is the fact that SpaceX is not even the best private launch company at the moment, and that low earth telecom satellites, a la SpaceX and FaceBook, trade reduced latency for a host of other challenges - there's a reason this hasn't been done before and it won't be the best solution for all markets even if it succeeds.