Cowboy Space (I hate their name so much) published their consolidated response a week ago but we just noticed it.
-
After modelling this in detail, I can say that that these companies can't even do basic geometry, apparently. They want tens of thousands of satellites to have 24 hour sunlight, so sun-synchronous terminator orbits, baybeeee!
But as Hugh Lewis pointed out (I know, ew, linkedin sorry) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sun-always-shines-tv-hugh-lewis-tlkbe/ IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK unless you're above 1400km altitude. And then you're not in the *magical* low-latency low-altitude zone that these companies actually want for fast comms.
Assuring one's satellites are always in constant sunshine surely exacerbates the LEO light pollution problem (for everyone who appreciates a dark night sky, not just astronomers).
At least with other orbital configurations, satellites fairly rapidly dim in brightness as their orbits pass into Earth's shadow, and they lose the source of the light they reflect back to Earth...
What is the delta-V needed to boost Leon Musk to infinity (no need to bother about beyond)?
-
After modelling this in detail, I can say that that these companies can't even do basic geometry, apparently. They want tens of thousands of satellites to have 24 hour sunlight, so sun-synchronous terminator orbits, baybeeee!
But as Hugh Lewis pointed out (I know, ew, linkedin sorry) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sun-always-shines-tv-hugh-lewis-tlkbe/ IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK unless you're above 1400km altitude. And then you're not in the *magical* low-latency low-altitude zone that these companies actually want for fast comms.
Eh, this only scratches the surface of geometry challenges. A ring of satellites over the terminator only services a strip of Earth on both sides of the orbital ground path. The lower the ring, the narrower the strip.
I suppose the eclipse problem could be solved by simply eclipse-hardening the satellites. There are always nearby satellites in the ring that are still/again in sunlight. Only, perhaps it isn't 'simple': like incandescent lamps, many electronic circuits not specially designed will be age limited by on/off shocks.
-
The rest of the astronomy section is pure bullshit, unadulterated by any facts or actual information.
"We will definitely work with astronomers, and we definitely won't have any reflections because our satellites are magical, we also won't have any infrared emissions, even though physics says that very hot things emit blackbody radiation. We are cowboys, not bound by mere LAWS OF PHYSICS."
WOW it gets even more whimsical and hand-wavy in the orbital debris section. Actual quote: "Certain commenters raise concerns regarding the extent of the orbital debris mitigation information provided in the application but ignore Cowboy Space’s steadfast commitment to operating
safely."In other words: "Why won't scientists believe the words that we wrote down without any actual data, information, citations, or sketches?"
-
WOW it gets even more whimsical and hand-wavy in the orbital debris section. Actual quote: "Certain commenters raise concerns regarding the extent of the orbital debris mitigation information provided in the application but ignore Cowboy Space’s steadfast commitment to operating
safely."In other words: "Why won't scientists believe the words that we wrote down without any actual data, information, citations, or sketches?"
@sundogplanets Their demo video is not reassuring: https://youtu.be/xt_Kn4DggPg?t=122
-
After modelling this in detail, I can say that that these companies can't even do basic geometry, apparently. They want tens of thousands of satellites to have 24 hour sunlight, so sun-synchronous terminator orbits, baybeeee!
But as Hugh Lewis pointed out (I know, ew, linkedin sorry) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sun-always-shines-tv-hugh-lewis-tlkbe/ IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK unless you're above 1400km altitude. And then you're not in the *magical* low-latency low-altitude zone that these companies actually want for fast comms.
So many physicists and other domain experts had commented on the absurdity of these proposals. If you just count up the amount of emissions required to bring the mass of gear into those orbits is an absurdity. The amount of materials themselves is an absurdity.
Terrestrial data center build is ban absurdity. So, instead of dealing with reality, they are now arguing space make all the problems disappear.
-
So many physicists and other domain experts had commented on the absurdity of these proposals. If you just count up the amount of emissions required to bring the mass of gear into those orbits is an absurdity. The amount of materials themselves is an absurdity.
Terrestrial data center build is ban absurdity. So, instead of dealing with reality, they are now arguing space make all the problems disappear.
Maybe it’s time to not negotiate in facts and details, but to openly ridicule them as idiots. Dispute their reputation because they are vulnerable to it. It’s just another fucking Ponzi scheme.
-
WOW it gets even more whimsical and hand-wavy in the orbital debris section. Actual quote: "Certain commenters raise concerns regarding the extent of the orbital debris mitigation information provided in the application but ignore Cowboy Space’s steadfast commitment to operating
safely."In other words: "Why won't scientists believe the words that we wrote down without any actual data, information, citations, or sketches?"
@sundogplanets they’ve never made any orbital debris (because they’ve never launched anything) so therefore you must believe they’ll never create any, right?
-
WOW it gets even more whimsical and hand-wavy in the orbital debris section. Actual quote: "Certain commenters raise concerns regarding the extent of the orbital debris mitigation information provided in the application but ignore Cowboy Space’s steadfast commitment to operating
safely."In other words: "Why won't scientists believe the words that we wrote down without any actual data, information, citations, or sketches?"
HAHAHA wow apparently they shouldn't have to provide any kind of debris mitigation plan because they haven't built the satellites yet.
OK but like... why are you filing if you haven't built the fucking satellites yet?? Weren't you complaining earlier about "warehousing" orbits? WHAT ARE YOU FUCKING DOING RIGHT NOW HMMMM??
Then they go on to say that the FCC shouldn't have to think about aggregate collision risk. Just consider one satellite at a time please, ignore the other 19,999
-
They make it pretty clear that they are in fact over-asking and also don't intend to actually launch 20,000 satellites in 5 years. So... I guess that's good. But also fucking annoying.
Oh no here's the astronomy section. I'm sure this will be great.
@sundogplanets Seems like data centers in space are just a new grift.
-
WOW it gets even more whimsical and hand-wavy in the orbital debris section. Actual quote: "Certain commenters raise concerns regarding the extent of the orbital debris mitigation information provided in the application but ignore Cowboy Space’s steadfast commitment to operating
safely."In other words: "Why won't scientists believe the words that we wrote down without any actual data, information, citations, or sketches?"
@sundogplanets Special pleading.
-
@sundogplanets Their demo video is not reassuring: https://youtu.be/xt_Kn4DggPg?t=122
Bond villains yes you need to start calling them bond villains! Specter!
Start ridiculing them as boys who watched James Bond flicks and wanted it to be Spectre
-
HAHAHA wow apparently they shouldn't have to provide any kind of debris mitigation plan because they haven't built the satellites yet.
OK but like... why are you filing if you haven't built the fucking satellites yet?? Weren't you complaining earlier about "warehousing" orbits? WHAT ARE YOU FUCKING DOING RIGHT NOW HMMMM??
Then they go on to say that the FCC shouldn't have to think about aggregate collision risk. Just consider one satellite at a time please, ignore the other 19,999
@sundogplanets
Well you must know they are able to exist in two time frames at the same time and across different dimensions. In one their Idea is actually good due to other physical rules and the other is ours, where they now plan to build the solution to the problem of the tech-bro-verse. -
Sure, completely untested, brand-fucking-new company that has never built or launched a satellite. You can definitely launch 20,000 of the biggest satellites ever built.
Oh apparently their first demo mission is scheduled for OCTOBER 2026? Gosh these guys are fucking unreal. The mission is listed as "power beaming demonstration"
What does that even fucking mean? Guess they're going to fry some birds and maybe some pilots? Hm. Watch for that I guess.
@sundogplanets The power beaming thing would presumably involve tech such as that from this company (perhaps even this very company, I don’t know): https://powerlighttech.com/
-
Bond villains yes you need to start calling them bond villains! Specter!
Start ridiculing them as boys who watched James Bond flicks and wanted it to be Spectre
@GhostOnTheHalfShell @sundogplanets I actually got a note today from a compsci guy I've known for many, many years asking if those things could be repurposed to actually burn stuff on the ground. So this is already in people's minds.
-
HAHAHA wow apparently they shouldn't have to provide any kind of debris mitigation plan because they haven't built the satellites yet.
OK but like... why are you filing if you haven't built the fucking satellites yet?? Weren't you complaining earlier about "warehousing" orbits? WHAT ARE YOU FUCKING DOING RIGHT NOW HMMMM??
Then they go on to say that the FCC shouldn't have to think about aggregate collision risk. Just consider one satellite at a time please, ignore the other 19,999
And then there's a whole section where they say that the FCC isn't allowed to consider environmental regulations, and they point to Reflect Orbital getting approved where the FCC specifically said they're not allowed to consider anything except radio broadcasts. This section might actually make me cry.
Next section is just... complaining, I think?
And then they end with saying that clearly they need to be approved.
Fuck you, FCC. Kessler Syndrome is on you.
-
@ScottMGS Not the CEOs of certain companies and certain billionaires. Many of them are pathologic narcissists or act otherwise against social behaviour. If a wolf acted like this, the pack would exclude them.
@NatureMC @sundogplanets Good point.
-
@sundogplanets Their demo video is not reassuring: https://youtu.be/xt_Kn4DggPg?t=122
@lauren HA
-
Apparently ALL the opposition letters mentioned how 20,000 bright satellites would absolutely destroy astronomy, so that's nice.
Ok, well, this section is 100% gaslighting, which I expected. "No no no, radio astronomers, you are overreacting! We will totally not clobber your bands and we magically don't have harmonics or unintended radio emissions, despite not having actually ever built a satellite before. Also we'll use lasers to fix everything. Radio astronomers, shut up."
@sundogplanets
Isn't laser communication hard? Like I feel aligning the lasers and receivers on 20000 satellites is kinda a hard thing, even if you don't have annoying disturbances by air.
I'd assume this is a problem a firm never having built any space tech wouldn't just solve. -
"While one commenter derides Cowboy Space’s approach to data centers as mere 'avoidance' of terrestrial environmental regulation"
Uh yep that was me (via @space_environmentalism)
The rest of that section appears to be greenwashing, IN SPAAAACE!
@sundogplanets @space_environmentalism
I think we need to make videos of Link Hogthrob doing spoof promotions of these things to show their idiocy.
-
And then there's a whole section where they say that the FCC isn't allowed to consider environmental regulations, and they point to Reflect Orbital getting approved where the FCC specifically said they're not allowed to consider anything except radio broadcasts. This section might actually make me cry.
Next section is just... complaining, I think?
And then they end with saying that clearly they need to be approved.
Fuck you, FCC. Kessler Syndrome is on you.
@sundogplanets I think I need to do another piece on this for my weekly national radio report. Just proposed it to the network for Monday -- they almost never don't approve these.
