Why does reading this sound like a prequel to 1984? I wonder how the first pioneers of aircraft would have ever gotten off the ground had they lived in a similar stringent ‘regulatory environment’
You realize that satellites are not a new technology, right? There are literally thousands of them up there. Sputnik was launched in 1957.
Let's compare to mandatory pilots licensing. The first flights were in 1903 or so. Air traffic was regulated in various ways at the federal level by the 1920s. So about 20 years from first flight to regulation.
It has been over 60 years since the first satellite launch.
Also, airplanes have a distinct advantage: they are easier to track and always come down within a few minutes of breaking down. If anything, satellites should be more regulated.
The idea that putting satellites in LEO is some sort of brand new never-before-done thing that deserves wide latitude for greenfield engineering is crazy. Hell, I've owned a GPS receiver for about 20 years! Space is a frontier. LEO, however, has been a crowded commons for at least a decade or two.
> Why does reading this sound like a prequel to 1984?
Who knows, but this seems common enough that it deserved a name. I propose "1984 disease" as a new colloquialism for the act of comparing reasonable regulation to dystopian authoritarianism.
GPS (along with the other major navigation satellite constellations) are in Medium Earth Orbit.
LEO is about to become a lot more crowded, thanks to cheaper launch costs and miniaturisation. What was previously done with MEO and GEO satellites can now be done with LEO constellations, with the advantages of being closer to earth.
Some proposed constellations in LEO number in the thousands of satellites, which is unprecedented:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_constellation#Commun...
I'm not sure where I stated otherwise? Swarm is putting their satellites in LEO.
> Some proposed constellations in LEO number in the thousands of satellites, which is unprecedented
Which is much more analogous to today's highly-regulated airsplace than 1903's empty skies.
When the Wright brothers tested their plane they only put their own bodies at risk. When swarm is throwing up satellites too small to track they are threatening every other satellite and space station in orbit.
Should chemical companies be allowed to ditch their experiments into the local river because it let's them iterate faster? If the answer to that is no, then why should swarm be allowed to throw anything they want into a position to damage other orbital craft?
So what? Are there not valid reasons to bring up "safety" and "security"?
Unless you're claiming we're dealing with a "nefarious state", this statement doesn't carry any weight. For that matter even nefarious states may have valid safety concerns, including preventing orbital debris.
According to the regulations of the time, early air pioneers were perceived to be trespassing. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuius_est_solum,_eius_est_usqu...
Nowadays it may seem obvious that aircraft are not trespassing when they are flying over us, but it was not obvious at the time. A future regulatory regime for satellites could also conceivably see it as obvious that satellite design shouldn't be limited by the ability for them to be tracked by a common tracking system, but rather have a goal to avoid collisions through other means.
This would require quantum leaps in our propulsion and energy storage capabilities. A plane changing course and a satellite changing plane take vastly different energies. Small satellites which can manage plane changes are many, many breakthroughs away.
All I'm saying is that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and when regulations say "you must skin a cat in this way", that can lead to technical stagnation.
The regulations are broad. They basically say "there must be a way to track your satellite." Transponder-based tracking doesn't work for small satellites because of the power demands. Passive approaches are preferred. I've seen small satellite designers adapt the shape and materials of their birds, to maximize reflectivity. Swarm didn't do any of this.