OTU Only: Satellites sometimes obsolete in the OTU?

[robject]

This thread idea was hijacked from a similar one in Random Static.

I think some worlds have satellites, but others don't. So what replaces them?

Maybe communications technology is advanced. For example, with meson communicators you don't need to worry about coverage.

Maybe sensor technology is advanced to the point where you don't need them in orbit.

Perhaps Hubble-style telescopes are sent beyond orbit. In Trojan points, or a Lagrange point. So they're still robotic vehicles of a sort, but they're not necessarily satellites of the mainworld. Or they can be planted on airless rocks in the system -- preferably ones with water ice for fuel.

Other ideas?

 

[CosmicGamer]

I'm a bit confused. The thread is tagged as OTU only but the whole post is about speculation. Isn't this more for IMTU?

 

[BytePro]

Gravitics make suborbital platforms viable. This has the advantage of faster signal travel time for terrestrial operations, not to mention higher detail imaging - and platform can remain stationary over a given point, yet easily move without the time delays inherent in a geostationary orbit. Not to mention being protected by the atmosphere from solar flares and meteorites (in more exotic systems).

Natural satellites (moons) in a locked orbit would accommodate terrestrial needs, albeit with potentially significant signal propagation delays.

 

[atpollard]

Why would any world with a Starport (Type A-E, excluding X) not have a ring of baseball sized objects in low orbit or geostationary orbit to simply and easily meet all of its imaging, weather and communications needs?

What OTU world doesn't have satellites?

 

[mike wightman]

I think BytePro has come up with a very good reason for the missing satellites.

 

[Timerover51]

Gravitics make suborbital platforms viable. This has the advantage of faster signal travel time for terrestrial operations, not to mention higher detail imaging - and platform can remain stationary over a given point, yet easily move without the time delays inherent in a geostationary orbit. Not to mention being protected by the atmosphere from solar flares and meteorites (in more exotic systems).

Natural satellites (moons) in a locked orbit would accommodate terrestrial needs, albeit with potentially significant signal propagation delays.

Gravitics are going to need some sort of maneuvering system to keep them in place, if they are in the atmosphere and are to stay in one spot, along with some sort of warning system that they are there.

 

[mike wightman]

That depends on which rules you are using.

In CT/MT grav modules provide lift and thrust - stick an autopilot on an air/raft and you have a platform to mount your comm relays, weather surveillance, traffic control etc...

In TNE/T4 contra grav provides lift only, so you would need a motor of some sort for station keeping.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Either way, Mike, you're going to need more power for that method, than for simply keeping a satellite on station. (Assuming you don't need to move it regularly - but you generally don't with comm and weather satellites.)

 

[Timerover51]

Either way, Mike, you're going to need more power for that method, than for simply keeping a satellite on station. (Assuming you don't need to move it regularly - but you generally don't with comm and weather satellites.)

You also have the constellation of GPS satellites now in orbit around the Earth, which would probably exist in the Traveller Universe at around Tech Level 7 or 8, and I do not see an easy way of replacing that type of satellite system.

 

[mike wightman]

Mobile phone mast triangulation...

 

[mike wightman]

Either way, Mike, you're going to need more power for that method, than for simply keeping a satellite on station. (Assuming you don't need to move it regularly - but you generally don't with comm and weather satellites.)

Can you use solar power for your grav modules

You have to compare the energy required to get a satellite into orbit with the energy required to keep a grav platform on station.

Since this is the OTU however lifting something to orbit is just as trivial as putting a grav platform in the upper atmosphere.

The advantage of the platform is it is more manoeuvrable and it is protected from radiation hazards by the atmosphere.

The advantage of the satellite is it is above the atmosphere for space surveillance purposes and has a wider field of view.

I can see good reasons for using both.

 

[Timerover51]

Mobile phone mast triangulation...

Aside from the fact that those are going to be line-of-sight systems, how does that work on the middle of an ocean?

 

[aramis]

Aside from the fact that those are going to be line-of-sight systems, how does that work on the middle of an ocean?

With certain mobile phones, up to 10 miles off shore...

 

[mike wightman]

The range of a mobile phone mast is related to its height. If your comm system is on a platform 10km in the air it has a much greater range than the land based network.

A network of grav platform could easily provide the same services as GPS satellites do today.

 

[Vladika]

Mobile phone mast triangulation...

Doesn't work at sea. Its "line of sight" and once over the horizon the signal is lost.

 

[mike wightman]

Which is why you put the mobile phone mast on a grav platform 10-30km up above the sea.

 

[atpollard]

I read about high altitude blimps that used solar panels and batteries for maneuvering and IIRC tethered blimps have been used for communication 'towers'. Combine those two and you have a VERY low orbit geostationary comm/weather/imaging network available at TL 4+ (TL 7+ for solar power station keeping vs ground tether).

[OK, I just like airships.]

 

[Vladika]

The range of a mobile phone mast is related to its height. If your comm system is on a platform 10km in the air it has a much greater range than the land based network.

A network of grav platform could easily provide the same "services as GPS satellites do today.

The strongest jet streams are the polar jets, at around 7–12 km (23,000–39,000 ft) above sea level, and the higher and somewhat weaker subtropical jets at around 10–16 km (33,000–52,000 ft).

As a sailor, yes, under actually sail, and Blue Water experience, I'd want satellites. They are right where they should be and aren't subject to weather movements and other variables.

In Traveller, with sensor technology, I could even "Triangulate" off of dead satellites, knowing exactly where they are.

What OTU publication say "there are no satellites"? Just because they aren't talked about doesn't mean they aren't there.

 

[Vladika]

I read about high altitude blimps that used solar panels and batteries for maneuvering and IIRC tethered blimps have been used for communication 'towers'. Combine those two and you have a VERY low orbit geostationary comm/weather/imaging network available at TL 4+ (TL 7+ for solar power station keeping vs ground tether).

[OK, I just like airships.]

How do you tether that thing "Stationary"? As in "still"? Also, how blessed many are going to be needed? And, how do you recharge the lift gas?

 

[McPerth]

Why would any world with a Starport (Type A-E, excluding X) not have a ring of baseball sized objects in low orbit or geostationary orbit to simply and easily meet all of its imaging, weather and communications needs?

What OTU world doesn't have satellites?

Aside from those commo satellites (that can be easily sustituted by meson commo hubs), I envision some powersats over any TL9-10+ habitated world (the number of satellites will depend on the population, of course).

And we cannot forget about defense satellites...