Jump to content

Shetland Space Centre


George.
 Share

Recommended Posts

It would be fine to see some justification, to the requirements of so many satellites.

 What their real purpose is and how it will affect us.

As far as I can see no one is questioning what all those satellites will be doing, and the necessity for them.

Some explanation wold be good ,I'm not against it in anyway but suspicious why we need so many satellites and even more curious to know how it might affect us all.

Their not spending all this money, without gaining something ,point is where are they getting that something.  :ponders:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's about 2,500 satellites currently in various earth orbits. The majority are for communications, and there's  currently a push to launch thousands more to provide global high-speed wireless internet access (much cheaper than running fibre optic)

There are several international organisations who 'license' satellite launches and orbits, in particular to avoid collisions. Low earth orbits are quite strictly policed as there are so many operational and defunct satellites in orbit that collisions are becoming more common, and the collisions themselves produce more debris which in turn cause more collisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of us complain about the cost of the TV licence, but eventually terrestrial TV and radio will be a thing of the past, and we will then be at the mercy of goodness knows who for our TV  and radio entertainment . I would think that the total cost of various "providers" will total more than the TV licence annually, for a better service ????

As for communications I always thought that satellite coms was a problem due to the slight delay between send /receive. OK for receive only.

And if satellite is going to be preferred to fibre why is so much effort and money being spent on the provision of fibre over copper.

I'm still puzzled why we need so many of those objects in orbit, something fishy going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Urabug said:

As for communications I always thought that satellite coms was a problem due to the slight delay between send /receive. OK for receive only.

Th latency is indeed an inherent problem, but the new communications satellites tend to be small and in a low earth orbit so there's less physical distance for signals to travel. 

2 hours ago, Urabug said:

And if satellite is going to be preferred to fibre why is so much effort and money being spent on the provision of fibre over copper.

Fibre will likely still be the preferred option for cities and urban areas, but for many areas installing or improving physical connections are challenging (i.e. remote areas, areas with difficult terrain, or countries with unstable governments where infrastructure developments are problematic)

2 hours ago, Urabug said:

I'm still puzzled why we need so many of those objects in orbit, something fishy going on.

As mentioned, on the whole newer satellites are quite small (e.g. shoebox size), relatively cheap and are in a lower orbit than older, larger and more expensive satellites which only government agencies could afford. It's really just economics - communications service providers know that there's growing demand in lots of poorly serviced areas, and satellites are a relatively quick and affordable way to reach them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Urabug said:

It would be fine to see some justification, to the requirements of so many satellites.

 What their real purpose is and how it will affect us.

As far as I can see no one is questioning what all those satellites will be doing, and the necessity for them.

Some explanation wold be good ,I'm not against it in anyway but suspicious why we need so many satellites and even more curious to know how it might affect us all.

Their not spending all this money, without gaining something ,point is where are they getting that something.  :ponders:

 

4 hours ago, Davie P said:

There's about 2,500 satellites currently in various earth orbits. The majority are for communications, and there's  currently a push to launch thousands more to provide global high-speed wireless internet access (much cheaper than running fibre optic)

There are several international organisations who 'license' satellite launches and orbits, in particular to avoid collisions. Low earth orbits are quite strictly policed as there are so many operational and defunct satellites in orbit that collisions are becoming more common, and the collisions themselves produce more debris which in turn cause more collisions.

The types of satellite vary depending on the mission requirement. For example, GEO (Geostationary Orbiting Satellites) are most commonly used for telecommunications, satellite TV such as Sky and internet broadband. A lot of the satellites most people are hearing about are LEO (Low Earth Orbit) satellites, Starlink is a good example. Shetland Space Centre is looking to support launch vehicles into a polar & sun-synchronous orbit (SSO) for LEO satellites.

Most satellites launching into a Polar or SSO are earth observation, imagery and radar etc. A lot of these satellites are long term mission multi sensor sats or small cube sats which are single purpose but have a shorter life span. An area which has picked up a lot of interest is using satellite imagery to help farmers understand crop health and where on the land isn’t producing. 

There is a lot of satellites and more to go up, but all have specific missions and operating in a variety of orbits.

I hope this gives you a little bit more of an idea around satellite operations, any other questions, let me know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Urabug said:

Many of us complain about the cost of the TV licence, but eventually terrestrial TV and radio will be a thing of the past, and we will then be at the mercy of goodness knows who for our TV  and radio entertainment . I would think that the total cost of various "providers" will total more than the TV licence annually, for a better service ????

As for communications I always thought that satellite coms was a problem due to the slight delay between send /receive. OK for receive only.

And if satellite is going to be preferred to fibre why is so much effort and money being spent on the provision of fibre over copper.

I'm still puzzled why we need so many of those objects in orbit, something fishy going on.

I can only speak for satellite communications, the main problem some users experience with current GEO satellite communications is the latency, speeds and cost. However, this is a solution that many people use in remote locations and even oil and gas platforms. What will be interesting are the new LEO Starlink and OneWeb satellite constellation providing affordable pricing, comparable broadband latency with high bandwidth connections. I believe this week Starlink officially opened its network up to the UK for beta testing.

As David P said, satellite broadband won’t replace traditional communication links like Fibre optic broadband, but, it is definitely a good option for remote communities and even an option for home and business backup solutions.

Edited by Jacques
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With mobile radio masts just about everywhere providing 4G and 5G and just about everyone with a mobile phone and most homes with reasonable hi speed broadband nowadays ,the question is how much  data do we really need and will we all have jobs, providing of an income to afford it all.

Broadband and mobile phones do not come cheap ,can we all afford it.

Surveillance tracking each and everyone of us seems to be the way things are going ,my mobile phone does that, as does my computer, guess some of those satellites will be doing the same justified by the claim  of course to improve our lives by creating statistics which help us all.

What is those new satellites going to provide me with that I cannot already do. ???

The positive side is it is creating work ,how much of it really necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Urabug said:

With mobile radio masts just about everywhere providing 4G and 5G and just about everyone with a mobile phone and most homes with reasonable hi speed broadband nowadays

Maybe in Western Europe, but many areas of the world has patchy or no mobile / internet coverage. According to some statistics only about half the world's population has internet access.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Urabug said:

With mobile radio masts just about everywhere providing 4G and 5G and just about everyone with a mobile phone and most homes with reasonable hi speed broadband nowadays ,the question is how much  data do we really need and will we all have jobs, providing of an income to afford it all.

It would be interesting to know just where around us 5g is available for us to enjoy or use.

I certainly get a pretty good 2g signal, but only if I can see the Collafirth mast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, George. said:

It would be interesting to know just where around us 5g is available for us to enjoy or use.

I certainly get a pretty good 2g signal, but only if I can see the Collafirth mast.

Guess that you have to find the 'G spot'...   :ponders:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/02/2021 at 00:30, Muckle Oxters said:

Oot of interest, does onybody ken if dirs been an environmental impact study done and if it’s available fur a read (I assume dir his tae be such a thing)?

I’m no hivin a moan, I’m joost interested whit da craic is we hivin it so close tae Hermaness.

https://www.shetnews.co.uk/2021/03/22/rspb-adds-to-concern-over-spaceports-potential-impact-on-birds/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So, it seems the Shetland Space Centre is now hanging in the balance.

 

When I heard the news that the Scottish Government wanted to be officially notified of the SIC's Planning decision alarm bells started ringing and I wondered why they were starting to interfere.

 

Now that Historic Environmental Scotland(HES) have appeared out of nowhere and refused the project it's obvious that the Scottish Government are working behind the scenes to steal it and have it moved south.

 

I guess they were waiting to see if the project was a "goer" and now that it is they're moving in.

 

HES are simply doing the bidding of the Scottish Government.

 

As the man said, with a government like this who needs enemies.

 

What the Shetland Space Centre should do is state that if it doesn't happen in Shetland then they'll just move the project out of the UK.

 

Edited by Loki Viking
Better wording
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...