|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
NOAA VIDEO FOR YOU
David Spain wrote on Mon, 2 Apr 2018 15:22:08
-0400: On 3/31/2018 11:01 AM, Jeff Findley wrote: I was watching the SpaceX launch of 10 more Iridium satellites yesterday and they cut the live feed near the end of the 2nd stage's first burn, saying something about NOAA restrictions preventing them from continuing the broadcast. I was like WTF? As usual, Eric Berger came through with a story on this: NOAA VIDEO FOR YOU ? NOAA just prevented SpaceX from showing its rocket in orbit "SpaceX will be intentionally ending live video coverage of the 2nd stage." ERIC BERGER - 3/30/2018, 12:52 PM https://arstechnica.com/science/2018...-a-rocket-but- noaa-prevented-some-of-it-from-being-shown/ NOAA's response: http://www.noaa.gov/media-release/no...-broadcast-of- spacex-iridium-5-launch What's interesting to me is what if that GoPro camera is on the satellite not the 2nd stage? Then seems like US restrictions might only apply when the carriage is still over US airspace? How can NOAA enforce regulations against foreign sat carriers that are already in orbit? You'd get "good" pictures until that last sat was ejected. Yes it's a US rocket being launched by a US corporation, but the satellite as often as not is non-US and an orbit by definition is outside US airspace. Seems like it then becomes treaty obligation time to me rather than US code. If it's on a US launcher, US code applies. -- "It's always different. It's always complex. But at some point, somebody has to draw the line. And that somebody is always me.... I am the law." -- Buffy, The Vampire Slayer |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
NOAA VIDEO FOR YOU
JF Mezei wrote on Tue, 3 Apr 2018
01:41:06 -0400: On 2018-04-02 20:34, Jeff Findley wrote: From what I understand, the rule dates back to the LANDSAT days. No doubt it was originally intended to make it harder for "startups" to get into the earth observation business, which is *big* business. The satellite views in all of those online maps were paid for. But the rule wasn't intended as a 'barrier to entry' so much as a 'barrier to high resolution'. Does NOAA have some sort of authority/monopoly on earth observation satellites for weather? (aka: ability to prevent a competitor in satelite based weather observations) ? The requirement for permit might be to ensure nobody launches competing satellites? I don't think anyone gives a **** about weather observation. I am just trying to understand why this rule was created and still exists. Because high resolution satellite imagery is MILITARILY USEFUL and they wanted to prevent high resolution commercial imagery. That ship has largely sailed and you can now buy commercial georegistered imagery as good as half-meter resolution. The US government can get imagery at higher resolutions (still). For example, commercial Geoeye satellites are capable of resolutions at least down to 41cm. However, their operating license prohibits selling anything better than 50cm to anyone but the US government (which is why the rule exists). -- "It's always different. It's always complex. But at some point, somebody has to draw the line. And that somebody is always me.... I am the law." -- Buffy, The Vampire Slayer |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
NOAA VIDEO FOR YOU
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
NOAA VIDEO FOR YOU
JF Mezei wrote on Tue, 3 Apr 2018
03:51:00 -0400: On 2018-04-03 03:23, Fred J. McCall wrote: Because high resolution satellite imagery is MILITARILY USEFUL So NOAA administers as a deceptive way so USA doesn't have to admit it is a military restriction? What's deceptive about it? At least ITAR, encryption regulations, GPS SA degradation were directly blamed on military. INCORRECTLY blamed, if so, since the US military has nothing to do with what's on the ITAR list. When US company wants an orbital slot for a satellite, who do they go to? Is there a US body such as NOAA that acts as the UN representative in USA? (as I recall, orbital slots are registered/allocated by a UN body, right?) I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure the only 'controlled' slots are those at GEO. Those were all allocated by COUNTRY, so what folks mostly do is go to folks like Tonga and 'buy' their GEO slots. Do launchers need to get an orbital slot for their stage2 which stays up for quite a while? Nope. Or do they just get the launch permits (FAA stuff such as closing airspace and water areas near launch area) and assume that their customer (satellite onwer) has done all the paperwork for the orbit? If the launch is to GEO, it's generally on the owner of the satellite to procure the orbital 'slot'. And in the case of starman, since it was not intended for earth orbit, would they have needed an orbital slot? Or just launch permit with goal of putting payload in escape trajectory? It wasn't in GEO. -- "It's always different. It's always complex. But at some point, somebody has to draw the line. And that somebody is always me.... I am the law." -- Buffy, The Vampire Slayer |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
NOAA VIDEO FOR YOU
Jeff Findley wrote on Tue, 3 Apr 2018
06:02:11 -0400: In article , says... Because high resolution satellite imagery is MILITARILY USEFUL and they wanted to prevent high resolution commercial imagery. That ship has largely sailed and you can now buy commercial georegistered imagery as good as half-meter resolution. The US government can get imagery at higher resolutions (still). For example, commercial Geoeye satellites are capable of resolutions at least down to 41cm. However, their operating license prohibits selling anything better than 50cm to anyone but the US government (which is why the rule exists). Which is why applying the rule to get a permit to the GoPro cameras mounted on a Falcon upper stage is stupid. The rule has an exception for "hand held" cameras which can have much higher resolution than the GoPros (e.g. the DSLR cameras and lenses on ISS when they are pointed at the earth). If they didn't occasionally result in stupid things they wouldn't be 'regulations'... I wonder what NOAA would do if the camera mount was crafted as an artificial hand, so as to make the camera 'hand held'? -- "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." --George Bernard Shaw |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Video sequential video recordings after Apollo 11 - the actual way it happened. | J Waggoner | History | 0 | June 23rd 08 06:40 AM |
Does somebody at NOAA finally get it? | Thomas Lee Elifritz | Policy | 197 | March 24th 06 03:41 AM |
Does somebody at NOAA finally get it? | Michael Kent | Policy | 1 | March 23rd 06 05:00 AM |
NOAA 808 sunspot | Daniele Gasparri | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | September 14th 05 01:31 PM |
NOAA 7 tumbling | William R. Thompson | Satellites | 2 | February 13th 04 04:04 PM |