3 ms·

Maybe Starlink satellites should also feature a camera? They've already got the connectivity. You'd need a large constellation and this one seems like it will b

by tpmx 5y ago

Maybe Starlink satellites should also feature a camera? They've already got the connectivity. You'd need a large constellation and this one seems like it will become huge.

Denvercoder9 5y ago
At 1 px/m², the Earth's surface is 5×10^14 pixels, so with the full constellation of 10,000 satellites and 1 fps that'd be 5×10^10 pixels/satellite/second (about a terabit/satellite/second uncompressed). If you can shoot 30 images per second, you'd need a 1.6 gigapixel camera. It's technically possible but not feasible.
- giantg2 5y ago
  "It's technically possible but not feasible." Not to mention that earth imaging satellites require approval by the government and, I believe, compliance with international regulations.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Why downvote? It's really frustrating to see people downvote a factual statement (as opposed to opinion) without giving any sort of correction to that information. If I'm wrong - show me! I don't need this sort of crap after working all day at a job I hate where my voice is basically worthless and a legitimate debate can't take place.
- tpmx 5y ago
  It would be quite useful at lower resolutions too, I think. Edit: The uncompressed bitrate comment is a bit like saying 1080p network video streaming will take decades to become feasible, because the incompressed bitrate is 1.485 gigabit/s...
  - bzbarsky 5y ago
    The obvious first bandwidth issue here is through the optical sensor, which is definitely pre-compression, no?
wongarsu 5y ago
They could do something like Sentinel's 10m/px, but looking at those images [1] I don't see the advantage of updating that more often than the once every few days we already have from Sentinel. To make near-realtime interesting you need something closer to 1m/px where you can clearly make out cars. But at that point the optics and camera take more mass than a normal star link satellite. They would become earth observation satellites with an internet uplink, not the other way around. 1: https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/sentinel-playground/ https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/sentinel-playground/
- tpmx 5y ago
  Yeah, I guess it would require a breakthrough in optics/lenses to become feasible. Sentinel-2 is ~1000 kg, and each Starlink satellite is approx 250 kg.

by tpmx 5y ago

Maybe Starlink satellites should also feature a camera? They've already got the connectivity. You'd need a large constellation and this one seems like it will become huge.

Denvercoder9 5y ago

At 1 px/m², the Earth's surface is 5×10^14 pixels, so with the full constellation of 10,000 satellites and 1 fps that'd be 5×10^10 pixels/satellite/second (about a terabit/satellite/second uncompressed). If you can shoot 30 images per second, you'd need a 1.6 gigapixel camera. It's technically possible but not feasible.

giantg2 5y ago
"It's technically possible but not feasible." Not to mention that earth imaging satellites require approval by the government and, I believe, compliance with international regulations.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Why downvote? It's really frustrating to see people downvote a factual statement (as opposed to opinion) without giving any sort of correction to that information. If I'm wrong - show me! I don't need this sort of crap after working all day at a job I hate where my voice is basically worthless and a legitimate debate can't take place.
tpmx 5y ago
It would be quite useful at lower resolutions too, I think. Edit: The uncompressed bitrate comment is a bit like saying 1080p network video streaming will take decades to become feasible, because the incompressed bitrate is 1.485 gigabit/s...
- bzbarsky 5y ago
  The obvious first bandwidth issue here is through the optical sensor, which is definitely pre-compression, no?

wongarsu 5y ago

They could do something like Sentinel's 10m/px, but looking at those images [1] I don't see the advantage of updating that more often than the once every few days we already have from Sentinel. To make near-realtime interesting you need something closer to 1m/px where you can clearly make out cars. But at that point the optics and camera take more mass than a normal star link satellite. They would become earth observation satellites with an internet uplink, not the other way around. 1: https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/sentinel-playground/ https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/sentinel-playground/

tpmx 5y ago
Yeah, I guess it would require a breakthrough in optics/lenses to become feasible. Sentinel-2 is ~1000 kg, and each Starlink satellite is approx 250 kg.