Is there any document/information on how SpaceX manages its fleet of thousands of Starlink satellites ?
Since the TLEs are crucial to the service (allowing retail antennas to
point in right direction and for those newer satellites with the space lasers, know where to aim the laser to destroy ^H^H^H^H^H^H communicate
with other satellites,
how does SpaceX keep all the TLEs up to date? I assume radar tracking
from ground is not realistic, or does that work for such small guys in
the sky?
Or is each satellite equipped with enough instruments to calculate its
own TLE and transmit back to planet Earth? Can precise TLEs be done
with GPS alone? would it need some star tracker on each satellite?
How precise must the time of crossing ascending node be? aja, if ytou
get GPS samples each 2 seconds would being 1 second off detecing when
you crossed latitude 0 be a big no-no requiring calculation of
estaimated time of crossing it based on the 2 nearest readings?
Would it be correct to state that the only way for SpaceX to detect aI think this is a fair guesstimate. However, I'm also assuming there is
lost satellite is when it doesn't say "hello" when it passes over a
ground station? Typiocally, would lack of "hello" when passing over 1 ground station trigger the alert, or would they wait for no "hellos"
from a satelite over multiple stations?
I take it when SpaceX needs to send stuff to a satellite, it calculates
which ground station will next have view on it and get that ground
station to send the "execute order 666" command to the satellite as soon
as it says "hello" ?
Or would they send the command to all ground stations and the first oneIt could but why bother? It would depend upon how frequently such
that sees the satellite sends the command, and report back to HQ that
the command was sent succesfully and all other ground stations told to
remove the command from their queue?
It could but why bother? Why not just transmit it to all ground stations
for up relay. (see below)
So this brings about a question:
When you manage a fleet of say 10,000 low orbit satellites, how do you
manage loss of a few per orbital plane? So you just order the remaining
SVs in that orbital plane to space themselves a bit more to provide for
even gaps between each? Or leave the gap left by the de-orbited satellite?
And how would SpaceX end up replacing these satsllites? Since it usually launches over 50 satellites at a time, it isn't as if it could launch
just one satellite to be inserted in that plane at the right spot to
replace the fallen one. So what strategy will it use?
Are there statistics on how many per week de-orbit?
BTW, SpaceX annoucned it will now allow subscriptions in
Nunavut/Yukon/NWT, which likely means it has enough po;ar orbit
satellites with the space lasers function working so signals can reach a
base station in the south. Not long ago, it had announced it had done
so in Nunavik (northern Québec) with Government of QUébec agreeing to subsidize the initial hardware purchase.
Are the space lasers "fixed" in that only satellites in the same orbinal plane can talk to each other (which reduces need for mechanical movement
of laser and receiver since lasers can point forward and back and reach
the next/previous satellite in that orbital plane). or are they truly moving and tracking satellites in other orbital planes? (and how would
such a satellite know to move its optical sensor to pointr at some other satellite that is moving when there might be many that want to talk to
it at same time?
I'd guess the same one they are using now. Which is to continue
launching sat "trains" that place satellites is specific planes at
launch and the uses the on-board propulsion to do the spacing. Takes
less delta-V and thus reduces the amount of propellant needed, insuring
a longer on-orbit life.
Intermittent communication is a built-in feature of Starlink so having
it between satellites as well as between ground stations is probably no
big deal for the Starlink software.
On 2022-11-05 17:41, David Spain wrote:
Intermittent communication is a built-in feature of Starlink so having
it between satellites as well as between ground stations is probably no
big deal for the Starlink software.
Northern Canada was just opened to sales. There are no base stations
there so service requires that whatever satellite is above you is able
to talk to another satellite and so on until there is one over a base station. So intermittent inter-satellite links wouldn't allow such service.
On 2022-11-05 17:41, David Spain wrote:
Intermittent communication is a built-in feature of Starlink so having
it between satellites as well as between ground stations is probably no
big deal for the Starlink software.
Northern Canada was just opened to sales. There are no base stationsAs I said in my previous post, intermittency would only be between plane crossing satellites, not co-orbital nearest neighbors. So yes, co-planar satellites could forward to nearest neighbors until one is in range of a
there so service requires that whatever satellite is above you is able
to talk to another satellite and so on until there is one over a base station. So intermittent inter-satellite links would't allow such service.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 297 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 100:27:24 |
Calls: | 6,659 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,208 |
Messages: | 5,334,754 |