Google and Facebook Cancel Satellite Plans 33
schwit1 writes: Facebook and Google have both cancelled their plans to build satellite systems to provide global internet access.
It appears Google pulled out earlier this year, while Facebook's decision was revealed today (paywalled). Google remains a partner in Skybox, a space imaging company, as well as O3b, which is trying to provide internet using satellites.
"While Facebook’s cancelled project comes from the more traditional approach to satellite internet, the current hope of Wyler and other satellite entrepreneurs is that constellations made up of many small satellites could solve those two problems. They would offer faster service, since they are closer to earth than the typical communication satellites, which fly at high altitudes to maximize coverage; and they would cost less, since tiny satellites are typically less expensive than their larger siblings. But even this plan may over-promise—one of the pioneers of the satellite business, Martin Sweeting, chairman of Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd., compared interest in small satellites to the froth on top of a cappuccino. The technical challenges to flying and operating a full-fledged constellation of them may still prove too difficult to surmount."
"While Facebook’s cancelled project comes from the more traditional approach to satellite internet, the current hope of Wyler and other satellite entrepreneurs is that constellations made up of many small satellites could solve those two problems. They would offer faster service, since they are closer to earth than the typical communication satellites, which fly at high altitudes to maximize coverage; and they would cost less, since tiny satellites are typically less expensive than their larger siblings. But even this plan may over-promise—one of the pioneers of the satellite business, Martin Sweeting, chairman of Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd., compared interest in small satellites to the froth on top of a cappuccino. The technical challenges to flying and operating a full-fledged constellation of them may still prove too difficult to surmount."
But Motorola did it. (Score:3)
>> The technical challenges to flying and operating a full-fledged constellation of them may still prove too difficult to surmount.
But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)
Re:But Motorola did it. (Score:4, Interesting)
But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)
But the history of Iridium tells a tale that Google appears to have listened to.
It's 66 satellites, not 77 (the actual atomic number of Iridium, the purported reason for the name) because 66 satellites are cheaper to launch and maintain than 77. And still, the company went bankrupt because they couldn't get customers willing to subscribe to the service. And the successor company depends on the US DoD as a major customer -- 23% of their 2012 revenue. That's quite a lifeline -- not one I envision Google's corporate culture rushing out to embrace.
The technical challenges aren't hard, notwithstanding the validity of the "it's rocket science" jokes. The financial and market challenges are the real ones. It's not the same as sticking a website out there and labeling it "Google Foobar (beta)". It makes money from Day One or it gets the hose again.
Re:But Motorola did it. (Score:5, Informative)
But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)
But the history of Iridium tells a tale that Google appears to have listened to.
It's 66 satellites, not 77 (the actual atomic number of Iridium, the purported reason for the name) because 66 satellites are cheaper to launch and maintain than 77. And still, the company went bankrupt because they couldn't get customers willing to subscribe to the service. And the successor company depends on the US DoD as a major customer -- 23% of their 2012 revenue. That's quite a lifeline -- not one I envision Google's corporate culture rushing out to embrace.
The technical challenges aren't hard, notwithstanding the validity of the "it's rocket science" jokes. The financial and market challenges are the real ones. It's not the same as sticking a website out there and labeling it "Google Foobar (beta)". It makes money from Day One or it gets the hose again.
Google didn't abandon the idea, they invested $900 million in SpaceX instead of trying to do it themselves. And SpaceX isn't going to try to communicate directly to the handset, they are creating a worldwide, LEO based, Internet backbone. It's a completely different business model that will leverage lower cost launches and lots of existing real-estate and infrastructure (Tesla super charger stations and probably some SolarCity projects as well) to bootstrap in the US and much of the developed world. Profits from the project will then likely be used to expand into the developing world. And with almost a billion dollars backing the project it does not have to be profitable from day one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just took Moto, what? 20yrs and a lot of real aerospace and telecom engineers.... which facebook and google don't have.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"It's not your data if it's on our networks." - All ISPs, probably
Re: (Score:1)
I am less concerned if Google or Facebook know if I'd prefer to buy Pampers or Depends than if government can eavesdrop on all that without a warrant (and, apparently, no real technological barriers to spying without a warrant.)
Re: (Score:1)
Everyone thinks providing broadband is cheap. (Score:1)
Google and SpaceX (Score:2)
Google just invested a large sum of money in SpaceX
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/g... [wired.com]
SpaceX has a big leg up in this race since it's very likely Google or Facebook would have launched on SpaceX rockets anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: SpaceX and Iridium Next (Score:2)
This whole thing kinda smacks of hardline negotiating... suddenly everyone and their dog was going to launch another LEO constellation, just when Iridium was about to launch the next generation of their product via SpaceX:
http://spacenews.com/iridium-n... [spacenews.com]
From one side, I can sorta see this posturing as SpaceX trying to negotiate better rates from Iridium by says "hey, if you don't want to pay us more to launch your stuff, we'll just partner with Google / Facebook and launch our own LEO constellation."
Then t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This whole thing kinda smacks of hardline negotiating... suddenly everyone and their dog was going to launch another LEO constellation, just when Iridium was about to launch the next generation of their product via SpaceX: http://spacenews.com/iridium-n... [spacenews.com]
From one side, I can sorta see this posturing as SpaceX trying to negotiate better rates from Iridium by says "hey, if you don't want to pay us more to launch your stuff, we'll just partner with Google / Facebook and launch our own LEO constellation."
Then there was also that guy who got the FCC license that expires in 2019, except the consortium he was working with weren't going to have their launches scheduled in time, so he took his license and ran to Richard Branson's Virgin.
Anyway, it seems like the LEO constellation thing is a mess right now, and I can't really tell who's working together and who's working against each other. But it seems moderately interesting from a cloak-n-dagger story. http://spacenews.com/signs-of-... [spacenews.com]
There is nothing cloak and dagger going on and no strong arming. Iridium is in the satellite handset business. SpaceX is building a satellite based Internet backbone. Google and Fidelity have invested a billion dollars in SpaceX specifically to develop the LEO constellation and SpaceX has opened an office in Seattle and is hiring people to develop the satellites. Google gets access to a satellite based Internet backbone that will help expand access to the developing world, without having to develop it t
Re: (Score:2)
Cool, thanks for the clarification! It's been tricky trying to piece this together, since no one ever seems to mention Iridium and Google in the same article, even though it looks like they're all working on the same constellation. Is (well, was) Facebook piling in with them as well? And what kind of shot does the competing Virgin / Qualcomm group have?
Google is still in satellites (Score:3)
Bought or threatened? (Score:2)
Dwindling market? (Score:3)
At least globally speaking we're seeing an absolutely massive growth in cell phone use and coverage. According to the last figures from the ITU (pdf) [itu.int] some 95% of the world's population will live in range of a 2G network by the end of this year and 69% in 3G. With the rapid transition towards smartphones in low-cost markets as well even more 3G/4G coverage will be built out and the less room is it for satellite internet to fill in the cracks. I have a friend of mine who used to have it, between the caps and latency he switched the moment he could get something better than dial-up. Even if this is a less crappy alternative, I don't think it'll be competitive when you have other choices.
Very expensive lack of interest (Score:3)
Earlier this year Google and Fidelity national invested $1 Billion in SpaceX, presumably to help support their efforts to bring a satellite based ISP to fruition. Sounds like a rather odd way to express a lack of interest in a business venture. OneWeb seems to be the focus of the article, and that is only one of two major efforts. I wonder if Google is choosing sides? OneWeb I believe is a Qualcomm/Virgin effort whereas SpaceX is the other.
Re: (Score:2)
Geostationary satellites have their advantages, but when you're dealing with internet communications they also have some pretty significant disadvantages. First off is latency, the proposed LEO satellites would only have to bounce the signal about 1,500 miles as compared to 52,400 miles for GEO satellites. While the speed of light is pretty fast that distance along with the hardware required usually introduce 500-700 MS of latency in GEO systems. Secondly I think there are some significant bandwidth issu
Google and Facebook call off the wedding (Score:2)
SpaceX founder is going to give it a go (Score:2)
SpaceX founder files with government to provide Internet service from space
"The plan calls for launching a constellation of 4,000 small and cheap satellites that would beam high-speed Internet signals to all parts of the globe, including its most remote regions. Musk has said the effort “would be like rebuilding the Internet in space.”"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/... [washingtonpost.com]