10 ms·

Tiny satellites ushering in a new space revolution

174 points by binoyxj 9y ago

jessriedel 9y ago
This article is in desperate need of a r/spacex-style bullet point summary.
- sjcsjc 9y ago
  Yes, a tl;dr would be very much appreciated if anyone were to have the time and inclination.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
PaulMest 9y ago
I took a tour of their SF office last year. It's a pretty impressive operation. The satellites are indeed quite small; I always compare them to a loaf of bread with some wings. The people that work there are pretty sharp and seem to be very excited about what they do. I was one of the first people to consume their v0 and v1 APIs to get their analytic imagery dataset. It was more challenging than it should have been to transfer ~100TB into our compute cluster. I haven't touched their API in about 7 or 8 months, but from my last meeting with them they said they have eliminated my top pain point. Looking forward to seeing more great things from them.
- terravion 9y ago
  There's a lot more to do in remote sensing, but I think your comment that there's an API for looking at the world is perhaps the more accurate way to describe the power of this moment in technology history. It is a great feat Planet has accomplished.
  - rmason 9y ago
    Agree a lot more is possible with remote sensing. I worked with it in ag in 80's and 90's, the biggest problems were: 1. Price was to high for the value we could offer 2. 40% chance we wouldn't get a usable image of the field due to cloud cover 3. Its one data point, you can see a problem but can't always figure out what's wrong. I'm really hopeful for drones that can operate below the cloud cover and AI that can take bare soil images, tile maps, soil tests and provide a more intelligent answer for fixing the problems. What the farmer wants is a prescription with a shot at a decent ROI.
kumarvvr 9y ago
That is a pretty cool engineering feet. Never knew a shoe box sized telescope can give such detailed pictures. They have sent about 200 satellites, cost "six figures" each, so an estimate of 200,000 a piece, they have spent about 40 million dollars, excluding the price of launches. The data collected is definitely worth the price IMO. Imagine the ability to monitor storms and hurricanes, analyze their data and update our climate models. They have about 80 million in funding alone, which is incredible. I wonder what else is possible with so many eyes in the sky.
- westmeal 9y ago
  Global surveillance networks.
  - Ashtyn77 9y ago
    just as Bryan said I'm shocked that a student able to profit $7511 in 4 weeks on the computer . check this site out>.... http://bit.ly/2coUNgf http://bit.ly/2coUNgf
  - 659087 9y ago
    "Google/Facebook: Please step outside and look up for 10 seconds to verify your identity"
  - ant6n 9y ago
    This does seem reminiscent of some Bond movie: some young company/genius supposedly wants to save the world via a fleet of satellites tracking all sorts of environmental issues, a company called Planet (a logo written in greenery in their office). Then it turns out there's actually a nefarious reason for all this, like total surveillance of everybody etc.
- Shivetya 9y ago
  Another way to track animal and eventually bird migrations when resolution is high enough. Better coverage of large scale disasters, think earthquake and your mentioned hurricanes, but also fires in remote areas and possibly detection of avalanches. Perhaps even revealing ancient civilizations that haven't been identified yet? There is a lot of area on this planet not of interest and not extensively photographed to where its generally available.
patall 9y ago
That sounds very scary to me. If they don't care whether a single satellite is working or not, they are basically asking Kessler syndrom to start within years. Multiple start-ups (etc.) and the article covers not even have a tiny bit about what happens at the end of life of the satellites, what could go wrong ...
- jamesaross 9y ago
  You don't have to worry too much about the low Earth orbit (LEO) sateillites as they will deorbit soon enough. My understanding is that there is also ongoing research into methods to deorbit them at end of life.
  - kobeya 9y ago
    In the case of a Kessler syndrom event it remains a concern. Collisions will push some debris higher while causing other pieces to enter early. The result would be a debris cloud that persists for decades even in LEO.
    - snaily 9y ago
      From first principles, I'm not seeing how a LEO collision pushes a significant amount of debris notably higher, but I'm certainly missing something: Post collision, all debris orbits will still be passing through the point of collision. Any deflection with a vertical component (up or down towards the earth) will have a part of their orbit go through thicker atmosphere, which will make them deorbit faster. That leaves deflections which are in the plane spanned by the two orbits ("sideways" and "forwards/backwards"). If those deflections in any way slow down the piece of debris, that will also go through lower atmosphere and deorbit. Disregarding debris under those effects, the remaining debris will have two more things going for it: They'll be out of the LEO orbit for a large part of their (now elliptic) orbits, and they'll be smaller so they'll slow down more from friction (due to the square-cube law). Of course, cascading effects could still affect all satellites in LEO (and humanity's access to orbit for years), but it doesn't seem to me like it'd be a "permanent" issue in LEO? What am I not seeing?
nwrk 9y ago
https://spaceknow.com/ https://spaceknow.com/
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
hi41 9y ago
Kindly can someone tell me how these snall satellites are able to remain in orbit. Don't we need jet propulsion to have them stay in orbit and not fall into earth? I don't much about satellites.
- Ajedi32 9y ago
  Not really. Once something is in orbit, it's just going to naturally stay in orbit unless acted on by an outside force. That's just basic inertia. There is some amount of atmospheric drag in low earth orbit which will eventually cause satellites at that altitude to lose speed and fall back to earth, but that drag is small enough that the satellites should be able to remain in orbit for years without needing any additional thrust.
- teddyh 9y ago
  The moon doesn’t need any propulsion to stay in orbit around the Earth. A satellite is just a very small and very close moon. The fact that it’s closer than the moon just means that it will orbit faster than the moon does.
- Kroniker 9y ago
  The way it works is that the satellite has very high velocity tangent to the earth- so they are constantly falling to earth, but they are moving tangent at the same rate that they are falling- because the earth is a sphere, the ground "falls away" from underneath them. They're constantly "missing" the Earth.
aphextron 9y ago
What's the best way for someone to get involved in space hardware?
- 0xdead_beef 9y ago
  Engineering degree; willingness to work in Defense (to cut your teeth)
- currydove 9y ago
  Materials Science. Tinkering with off the shelf hardware (even start with RaspberryPis). Systems Integration (legit systems integration, not the shitty title Accenture/Deloitte/Generic Consulting Company gives you for working at an Enterprise client). FPGAs. Electrical Engineering. Thermal Engineering is huge. or the usual: Software Engineering. (because satellites need software too) Any of the above to name a few
digikata 9y ago
This is a good Embedded.fm podcast episode interviewing one of the professors that was key in starting the trend of small satellites. http://embedded.fm/episodes/195 http://embedded.fm/episodes/195

174 points by binoyxj 9y ago

jessriedel 9y ago

This article is in desperate need of a r/spacex-style bullet point summary.

sjcsjc 9y ago
Yes, a tl;dr would be very much appreciated if anyone were to have the time and inclination.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

PaulMest 9y ago

I took a tour of their SF office last year. It's a pretty impressive operation. The satellites are indeed quite small; I always compare them to a loaf of bread with some wings. The people that work there are pretty sharp and seem to be very excited about what they do. I was one of the first people to consume their v0 and v1 APIs to get their analytic imagery dataset. It was more challenging than it should have been to transfer ~100TB into our compute cluster. I haven't touched their API in about 7 or 8 months, but from my last meeting with them they said they have eliminated my top pain point. Looking forward to seeing more great things from them.

terravion 9y ago
There's a lot more to do in remote sensing, but I think your comment that there's an API for looking at the world is perhaps the more accurate way to describe the power of this moment in technology history. It is a great feat Planet has accomplished.
- rmason 9y ago
  Agree a lot more is possible with remote sensing. I worked with it in ag in 80's and 90's, the biggest problems were: 1. Price was to high for the value we could offer 2. 40% chance we wouldn't get a usable image of the field due to cloud cover 3. Its one data point, you can see a problem but can't always figure out what's wrong. I'm really hopeful for drones that can operate below the cloud cover and AI that can take bare soil images, tile maps, soil tests and provide a more intelligent answer for fixing the problems. What the farmer wants is a prescription with a shot at a decent ROI.

kumarvvr 9y ago

That is a pretty cool engineering feet. Never knew a shoe box sized telescope can give such detailed pictures. They have sent about 200 satellites, cost "six figures" each, so an estimate of 200,000 a piece, they have spent about 40 million dollars, excluding the price of launches. The data collected is definitely worth the price IMO. Imagine the ability to monitor storms and hurricanes, analyze their data and update our climate models. They have about 80 million in funding alone, which is incredible. I wonder what else is possible with so many eyes in the sky.

westmeal 9y ago
Global surveillance networks.
- Ashtyn77 9y ago
  just as Bryan said I'm shocked that a student able to profit $7511 in 4 weeks on the computer . check this site out>.... http://bit.ly/2coUNgf http://bit.ly/2coUNgf
- 659087 9y ago
  "Google/Facebook: Please step outside and look up for 10 seconds to verify your identity"
- ant6n 9y ago
  This does seem reminiscent of some Bond movie: some young company/genius supposedly wants to save the world via a fleet of satellites tracking all sorts of environmental issues, a company called Planet (a logo written in greenery in their office). Then it turns out there's actually a nefarious reason for all this, like total surveillance of everybody etc.
Shivetya 9y ago
Another way to track animal and eventually bird migrations when resolution is high enough. Better coverage of large scale disasters, think earthquake and your mentioned hurricanes, but also fires in remote areas and possibly detection of avalanches. Perhaps even revealing ancient civilizations that haven't been identified yet? There is a lot of area on this planet not of interest and not extensively photographed to where its generally available.

patall 9y ago

That sounds very scary to me. If they don't care whether a single satellite is working or not, they are basically asking Kessler syndrom to start within years. Multiple start-ups (etc.) and the article covers not even have a tiny bit about what happens at the end of life of the satellites, what could go wrong ...

jamesaross 9y ago
You don't have to worry too much about the low Earth orbit (LEO) sateillites as they will deorbit soon enough. My understanding is that there is also ongoing research into methods to deorbit them at end of life.
- kobeya 9y ago
  In the case of a Kessler syndrom event it remains a concern. Collisions will push some debris higher while causing other pieces to enter early. The result would be a debris cloud that persists for decades even in LEO.
  - snaily 9y ago
    From first principles, I'm not seeing how a LEO collision pushes a significant amount of debris notably higher, but I'm certainly missing something: Post collision, all debris orbits will still be passing through the point of collision. Any deflection with a vertical component (up or down towards the earth) will have a part of their orbit go through thicker atmosphere, which will make them deorbit faster. That leaves deflections which are in the plane spanned by the two orbits ("sideways" and "forwards/backwards"). If those deflections in any way slow down the piece of debris, that will also go through lower atmosphere and deorbit. Disregarding debris under those effects, the remaining debris will have two more things going for it: They'll be out of the LEO orbit for a large part of their (now elliptic) orbits, and they'll be smaller so they'll slow down more from friction (due to the square-cube law). Of course, cascading effects could still affect all satellites in LEO (and humanity's access to orbit for years), but it doesn't seem to me like it'd be a "permanent" issue in LEO? What am I not seeing?

nwrk 9y ago

https://spaceknow.com/ https://spaceknow.com/

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

hi41 9y ago

Kindly can someone tell me how these snall satellites are able to remain in orbit. Don't we need jet propulsion to have them stay in orbit and not fall into earth? I don't much about satellites.

Ajedi32 9y ago
Not really. Once something is in orbit, it's just going to naturally stay in orbit unless acted on by an outside force. That's just basic inertia. There is some amount of atmospheric drag in low earth orbit which will eventually cause satellites at that altitude to lose speed and fall back to earth, but that drag is small enough that the satellites should be able to remain in orbit for years without needing any additional thrust.
teddyh 9y ago
The moon doesn’t need any propulsion to stay in orbit around the Earth. A satellite is just a very small and very close moon. The fact that it’s closer than the moon just means that it will orbit faster than the moon does.
Kroniker 9y ago
The way it works is that the satellite has very high velocity tangent to the earth- so they are constantly falling to earth, but they are moving tangent at the same rate that they are falling- because the earth is a sphere, the ground "falls away" from underneath them. They're constantly "missing" the Earth.

aphextron 9y ago

What's the best way for someone to get involved in space hardware?

0xdead_beef 9y ago
Engineering degree; willingness to work in Defense (to cut your teeth)
currydove 9y ago
Materials Science. Tinkering with off the shelf hardware (even start with RaspberryPis). Systems Integration (legit systems integration, not the shitty title Accenture/Deloitte/Generic Consulting Company gives you for working at an Enterprise client). FPGAs. Electrical Engineering. Thermal Engineering is huge. or the usual: Software Engineering. (because satellites need software too) Any of the above to name a few

digikata 9y ago

This is a good Embedded.fm podcast episode interviewing one of the professors that was key in starting the trend of small satellites. http://embedded.fm/episodes/195 http://embedded.fm/episodes/195