>Mario Lombardo wrote:
>>Ronan, seriously I think it costs more than $30k/lb. for lofting?
>>They have to position it as well, true? When you said Zaurus, I
>>thought of a hardened case and RF equipment. It would weigh hmmm
>>five pounds or so?
>>
>
>I think that NASA charges commercial companies $30K/lb for LEO.
>Geosynchronous should be much more expensive.
>
>>Now how many people would contribute money to have that thing
>>lofted to have a FREE network? I, for one, would chip in $100 and
>>I'M BROKE! Sooo worst case $200000/100 = 2,000 people
>>
>
>If the satellites are in LEO, you have better latency times, but you
>need some very exotic motor-driven antenna mounts to do
>communications.
Yes, well they have to be synchronized, so it doesn't sound any more
difficult than getting a land radio feed from a Cesium clock and
quality stepper motors. Ahhh, what the heck do I know anyways :^)
>>Better yet, why don't we unwind some old transformers and build us
>>a rail gun? No fuel!
>>
>
>Florida is close enough to the equator to make a rail gun launch,
>but it is much too close to sea level.
>
>--ronan
How about Puerto Rico? Mexico? Panama? .....CUBA!!! That's our
icebreaker with the Cubans. Spend the money to put them on the Astro
Charts of the Universe and we'll be friends again. I heard it's very
beautiful there.
/mario
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:55:30 EDT