Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
NASA Communications Space Wireless Networking Science Technology

NASA Wants New Space Net To Sustain Big Data Dumps; Moon and Mars Trips 63

Posted by Unknown Lamer from the world-of-mooncraft dept.
coondoggie writes "What kind of network can support future commercial and government space trips around Earth and support bigger distances to the moon and Mars? NASA is in the process of exploring exactly what technology will be needed beyond 2022 in particular to support future space communication and navigation. The agency recently issued a Request for Information (RFI) to begin planning for such a new architecture."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA Wants New Space Net To Sustain Big Data Dumps; Moon and Mars Trips More

NASA Wants New Space Net To Sustain Big Data Dumps; Moon and Mars Trips

Comments Filter:

  • space trips around Earth?? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    That's pretty much all we can manage. All we need is '60s technology for that, jeez.

  • Was just thinking this (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    There was a proposal recently for another Mars rover for 2020 and I was like, how? We don't have the bandwidth to transmit data appropriate for entering the 3rd decade of the 21st century there... Curiosity is completely gimped due to only being able to send (even by 2013 standards) small amounts of data at certain times etc. etc.

    By that time I'm really expecting, you know, some HD footage at 60fps of the landing and surface operations. At least make that your target and stretch yourself a little.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Not being able to send huge ammounts of relatively unimportant data doesn't really bother me.

      Sure, it would be nice to send HD footage, but it would be a huge waste as well. There are some very real and big limits they have to work with, considering all that, I think they have a pretty nice rover up there.

    • Time to overcome laws of physics?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hawguy ( 1600213 )

      There was a proposal recently for another Mars rover for 2020 and I was like, how? We don't have the bandwidth to transmit data appropriate for entering the 3rd decade of the 21st century there... Curiosity is completely gimped due to only being able to send (even by 2013 standards) small amounts of data at certain times etc. etc.

      By that time I'm really expecting, you know, some HD footage at 60fps of the landing and surface operations. At least make that your target and stretch yourself a little.

      What is scientifically appropriate bandwidth for 2013? What would the Mars Rover designers have been willing to give up to get better bandwidth? More bandwidth comes (generally) at the expense of weight, greater space requirements, and power demands. All of which are a very constrained on a space probe. Or maybe you think they should have delayed Curiosity's launch another 5 years so a newer orbital relay platform could be launched that has more bandwidth?

      The Curiosity Rover can send around 250 mbit [dpreview.com] of da

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ledow ( 319597 )

      I think imaging is the LEAST important part of any space mission. Especially live imaging of moving images. Sure, a couple of science missions give us things like close-up of the moons of Jupiter, etc. but that's really science and doesn't need HD or 60fps (in fact, the visible spectrum is barely worth looking at compared to other wavelengths).

      Pretty pictures don't give NASA money. They go into the gift-shop and a few online licensing rights and that's it. But a decent spectroscopy of something, beamed

  • Sustain big dumps? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I thought this was going to be related to the toilet problems they've been having.

    • If you want to take a refreshing big dump you NEED fast internet. Or are you implying you don't use your smartphone to browse facebook while in the pooper?

  • As long as the bodies in question agree, in this case the moon and Mars, to the release of their private data, I see no controversy here.

  • Pigeons (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Just put little space suits on pigeons and get them to carry blu-rays.

    • Why birds?

      You *do* realize that there is no air in space?

      Do you?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jaxxa ( 1580613 )
        Thats why they have the little space suits.

      • Don't believe that crap Obama feeds you!
        Those democrats want that air for themselves!

    • I recommend stationwagons (estate cars) loaded with tapes... never underestimate them.

  • Big plans (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dyolf Knip ( 165446 ) on Monday March 11, 2013 @09:48PM (#43145397) Homepage

    NASA sure does dream big, considering they can barely even get to LEO these days. Their launch capacity has been diminishing steadily for the past 40 years. Thank goodness it's not entirely up to them anymore.

    • I know that it's an unpopular sentiment to say anything pro-nasa/pro-us about the space race, but the United States is the only country developing a super heavy lift vehicle (SLS). Many label it as a jobs program, but that is simply not the case.

      • the United States is the only country developing a super heavy lift vehicle (SLS).

        ever been out to the suburbs and seen the average soccer mom haul her and her kids around?

        the US knows 'heavy'. that's one thing we know well.

    • Nasa can, and does, get regularly beyond LEO. Off the top of my head:

      1. Spirit and Opportunity rovers - huge success

      2. Cassini-Huygens: Despite some issues, still managed to collect an enormous amount of data on probably the most (or perhaps second most) interesting place in the solar system - including a landing on Titan. Arguably the high point of space exploration so far.

      3. Curiousity Rover - again, hugely successful

      4. MESSENGER probe - has has it's mission extended, having achieved every mission obj

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Myopic ( 18616 ) *

        Humans on other worlds is the standard by which NASA is and should be judged; otherwise it doesn't count. Rovers are sort of neat but they don't count. Telescopes are worthwhile but we don't need a whole NASA agency for that, and in they end they still don't count. Voyager-type spacecraft are worthwhile but again we don't need a whole NASA to simply sling a robot into space.

        Humans on other worlds. Pay for it, or save the money.

  • Reading that summary, it sounds like NASA thinks the distance to the moon and Mars is increasing enough to care about. Also that commercial development of Mars is something they should be concerned about in some nearby decade. Neither of those things is true.

    But here's the architecture:

    BIG fucking dish on Earth

    pointed at BIG fucking dish at LEO

    connected to BIG fucking dish pointed at Mars

    BIG fucking dish orbiting Mars.

    • Bad architecture.. (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      why have a big dish in LEO.. atmospheric attenuation is small (1dB ish) and everything is harder in LEO: power, maintenance, etc.

      Yes, big dish orbiting Mars (doesn't have to be that big.. easier to make the dish(s) bigger on earth than fly it to Mars. 3-4 meters at mars. And a big dish at L2 in a halo orbit that can always see the Earth around the Moon's limb. Or, a bunch of lunar orbiters (with a fair amount of fuel.. it's hard to keep things in a stable orbit at the Moon because the Earth keeps pullin

      • why have a big dish in LEO..

        I meant write GEO, not LEO. The reason is for exactly what you can't get in LEO: a more continuous link to Mars from your ground station. Yes, the earth station uplink antenna and the Earth-orbiting ground-link antenna don't really need to be very big, because the bandwidth is going to be limited by the interplanetary link speed anyway.

        atmospheric attenuation is small (1dB ish) and everything is harder in LEO: power, maintenance, etc.

        Yes, big dish orbiting Mars (doesn't have to be that big.. easier to make the dish(s) bigger on earth than fly it to Mars. 3-4 meters at mars. And a big dish at L2 in a halo orbit that can always see the Earth around the Moon's limb. Or, a bunch of lunar orbiters (with a fair amount of fuel.. it's hard to keep things in a stable orbit at the Moon because the Earth keeps pulling them off path)

        The antenna at Mars pointed at Earth needs to be as big as you can practically make it because received power (therefore bitrate) at Earth is proportional to the product of

  • Clearly not, if the Universe is infinite. So seems like there is no point to migrating to IPv6. Time to start working on IPv8 or whatever.

  • A link in TFA that I like... (Score:3)

    by Molochi ( 555357 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2013 @12:30AM (#43146137)

    http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/eps/bizops.cgi?gr=D&pin=51#154104 [nasa.gov]

    This is NASA's business oportunities page. Very cool...

  • "NASA Wants New Space Net To Sustain Big Data Dumps; Moon and Mars Trips"

    I thought this thread was about a huge net in space, but turns out to be about a network.

    Note to headline writer: there is a difference between the meanings of "net" and "network".

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close