3 ms·

I believe they are required as part of FAA regulations to ensure that no manned craft are within 15 miles of the landing zone? Something like that, at least, wh

I believe they are required as part of FAA regulations to ensure that no manned craft are within 15 miles of the landing zone? Something like that, at least, which would complicate a tether-based approach.

larkeith 9y ago
I think the suggestion was a separate but tethered unmanned platform, which would presumably have less vibrations. I would imagine it's just not cost-efficient for SpaceX, as they'll be able to recover the footage later regardless.
- apaprocki 9y ago
  Who needs a tether? Ubiquiti makes gear capable of slinging 400+ Mbps over 25km in a straight line. For about $1500 they should be able to shove the "last mile" to a ship outside of the exclusion zone and put the sat uplink on the ship. https://www.ubnt.com/airmax/powerbeam-ac-iso/ https://www.ubnt.com/airmax/powerbeam-ac-iso/
  - niftich 9y ago
    If you're losing connection due to a shaking radio dish, as in the original case, a different shaking radio dish is hardly a compelling solution.
    - apaprocki 9y ago
      They have grid antennas with a slightly wider beam, or maybe a sector style with 20-30 degrees could be used. I just think it's easier to engineer a workable ship-to-ship stabilized radio solution rather than deal with the ship-to-sat dish which probably has much tighter tolerances.