4 ms·
An airplane a few kilometers in the air is _not_ in orbit. Pity - if they had the bucks and the chops to actually orbit a server ... now that would be somethin
by bdunbar 15y ago
An airplane a few kilometers in the air is _not_ in orbit.
Pity - if they had the bucks and the chops to actually orbit a server ... now that would be something.
- shasta 15y agoDepends how fast it's going.
- Arelius 15y agoI don't know. Getting something in orbit isn't too expensive, but there is only a few people who do it, and there is a big legislative bottleneck. Easy to compute trajectories and everything makes orbits easy to track, and hard to put up. Whereas trying to float many serves in the atmosphere, that sounds much more interesting and exciting to me. Dealing with wind currents is much more complicated than having to control an orbit trajectory anyways.
- jacquesm 15y agoyou can orbit a server without too much trouble. Then you still need to power it up and get it to a spot where you can route packets to it, which if you only orbit one server and have one groundstation means geo-synchronous orbit. That isn't cheap, and those that fly satellites into orbits like that typically are very much in bed with the very nation states that tpb is trying to get around. And then, when you have finally cleared all those hurdles you'll realize that you can be just as easily blocked as though you had plugged that server into the nearest outlet at the groundstation.
- Nick_C 15y agoAustralia is about to do this for bases in Antarctica (which all suffer from sporadic satellite coverage). The cheapest solution is two non-geosynchronous satellites in opposition to each other on highly elliptical orbits, providing pretty much constant coverage. Total cost is about $40,000,000. http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/3453168.htm http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/3453168.htm