Google invests $1 billion in Space X

[jimmy olsen]

Anything that expands or footprint in space and increases Space X capabilities is good to me.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/01/26/google-spacex-satellite-internet/22337267/

Google investment revives satellite Internet talks

James Dean, Florida Today 3:32 a.m. EST January 26, 2015

It was a hot idea in the '90s: Provide global Internet access with mega-constellations of dozens or hundreds of small satellites flying in low Earth orbit.

The result was "a bloodbath of serial bankruptcies," one financial analyst wrote last week.

Several companies including Teledesic, which planned to launch more than 800 satellites and claimed Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates as an investor, failed.

Now big investments in two new ventures, including Google backing for SpaceX, bet that the idea's time has come.

"Even though we had the false dawn of all the excitement about Internet in the sky back in the late '90s, good ideas can still come around again," said James Muncy, a space policy analyst with PoliSpace.

Google and Fidelity last week poured $1 billion into SpaceX, which had just announced plans to open a satellite development office in Seattle.

That followed news of Richard Branson's Virgin Group and Qualcomm investing in start-up OneWeb, which has similar goals to expand high-speed Internet access.

"Assuming that one or both of these efforts achieve success, their impact on the global telecom industry could be profound," wrote analyst Chris Quilty of Raymond James and Assoc. in St. Petersburg, Fla.

Quilty said the companies face "daunting" technical, financial and regulatory challenges.

But much has changed over the past 20 years, including Google's creation and emergence as a technology titan.

Today small satellites are far more capable, launch costs are improving, demand for high-speed data continues to grow and deep-pocketed entrepreneurs and investors are hunting for ways to make money in space.

"I think it is a different era," said Bob Richards, CEO of Moon Express, a Silicon Valley-based startup developing a commercial moon lander. "It doesn't mean everyone is going to succeed; some will fail. But when you put the names behind it like are behind the new constellation between Google and SpaceX, I wouldn't bet against them."

'CONSTELLATION' OF SATELLITES

Many details about the proposed new Internet satellites are unknown, but they are expected to range in size from roughly 200 to more than 600 pounds.

That's small compared to traditional communications satellites flown 22,000 miles over the equator, but larger than the tiny "CubeSats" some new companies are using to generate images of Earth with commercial value.

San Francisco-based Planet Labs, which is deploying such nano-satellites from the International Space Station, recently announced it had raised $95 million in new financing.

"The state-of-the-art in small satellite systems really has taken off, and they can do the kinds of things that maybe weren't as feasible back when Teledesic was on the drawing boards," said Edward Ellegood, space industry analyst for the Space Coast Tech Council.

That technology shift leads to a new approach to building and deploying networks of small satellites instead of a single, highly capable bird that might cost hundreds of millions dollars and be handled like a delicate work of art.

"Normally the way satellites are done is they're like Battlestar Galactica – there's like one of them and it's really giant and if this thing doesn't work it's terrible, like the whole business collapses," SpaceX CEO Elon Musk told an audience in Seattle this month. "But if you have a large constellation, you can afford to lose individual satellites and it doesn't affect the constellation very much."

SpaceX envisions deploying more than 4,000 satellites, and OneWeb nearly 650.

Large numbers of spacecraft are needed to cover parts of the world lacking good Internet access from ground or space-based providers.

That means the satellites have to be cheap, said John Olds, CEO of Atlanta-based SpaceWorks Enterprises.

"That's what's changed in the last 10 years, that's different from Teledesic," he said. "The satellites are getting less expensive, and that's sort of enabling these things to be reconsidered."

[mongers]

Was the breakdown of Facebook due to you spamming that place whilst you couldn't get on here? 

[Ed Anger]

As a shareholder, what a waste of money. MOAR DIVIDEND

[DontSayBanana]

As a shareholder, what a waste of money. MOAR DIVIDEND

More uptime for porn sites.  How much more dividend could you possibly want?

[Ed Anger]

As a shareholder, what a waste of money. MOAR DIVIDEND

More uptime for porn sites.  How much more dividend could you possibly want?

For my 10 shares? ALL THE PROFIT

[jimmy olsen]

Cool video of a space X rocket crash landing and exploding 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/04/15/spacex_landing_booster_almost_made_it.html

Despite the explosion, they seem to be making decent progress on their goal of reusable rockets.

[MadImmortalMan]

That was just the booster coming back to earth. The rocket itself delivered its payload to ISS.

[jimmy olsen]

That was just the booster coming back to earth. The rocket itself delivered its payload to ISS.

That's the main part of the rocket though, and the part they need to recover successfully if they're to drive down launch prices.

[Tonitrus]

I would think making the booster somewhat buoyant and using parachutes would be more effective for recovering than trying to vertical-land it. 

[jimmy olsen]

I would think making the booster somewhat buoyant and using parachutes would be more effective for recovering than trying to vertical-land it.

Wouldn't being partially submerged in seawater, or even fresh water for that matter, fuck it up pretty bad.

[Tonitrus]

How about giant balloons that would inflate on the outside (like that one Mars rover landing), so it will float/bob above the water? 

Though in seriousness, isn't this issue why some have been pushing for developing an effective space-plane?

[MadImmortalMan]

Though in seriousness, isn't this issue why some have been pushing for developing an effective space-plane?

You mean a sort of, shuttle? One that can land on a runway?

[Tonitrus]

Though in seriousness, isn't this issue why some have been pushing for developing an effective space-plane?

You mean a sort of, shuttle? One that can land on a runway?

But without the giant disposable booster rockets used on launch.

[grumbler]

Though in seriousness, isn't this issue why some have been pushing for developing an effective space-plane?

You mean a sort of, shuttle? One that can land on a runway?

But without the giant disposable booster rockets used on launch.

The one with the giant booster rockets was fucking expensive as hell.  One that has to give up payload to haul even more engine into space?  Probably a worse idea than the shuttle itself turned out to be.