Daily Archives: September 27, 2021

SpaceX's Starlink satellites may be used for navigation and global positioning in addition to their core function of broadband Internet, a new research study suggests.

Engineering researchers external to SpaceX found a way to use the Starlink constellation signals for navigation similar to the capabilities provided by global positioning satellites (GPS), which are used in the United States and several other countries. The study represents the first time Starlink was used for navigation by researchers outside of SpaceX, the team members stated.

Researchers triangulated the signals from six Starlink satellites to fix upon a location on Earth with less than 27 feet (eight meters) of accuracy, the team reported in a statement. That's pretty comparable to the typical GPS capabilities of a smartphone, which typically pinpoints your spot on Earth to within 16 feet (4.9 m), depending on the conditions.

Related: Russian startup tests tech that filters SpaceX Starlink passes from astronomical observations

"We eavesdropped on the signal, and then we designed sophisticated algorithms to pinpoint our location, and we showed that it works with great accuracy," study author Zak Kassas, director of the Center for Automated Vehicles Research with Multimodal Assured Navigation (CARMEN) at Ohio State University, said in the statement.

"Even though Starlink wasn't designed for navigation purposes, we showed that it was possible to learn parts of the system well enough to use it for navigation," Kassas said.

The researchers developed their navigation system with no help from SpaceX, nor any access to data being shared over the broadband connection. Rather, they used the signals from several satellites and developed an algorithm to locate a position on Earth.

Next, they placed an antenna on the University of California, Irvine campus in an attempt to find its location using Starlink. Their experiment placed the estimated position of the antenna, using Starlink signals, within 25 feet (7.7 m) of its actual position.

The algorithm and Starlink working together are comparably accurate compared to past projects the team has worked on, Kassas said. Other low Earth orbit satellite constellations zeroed in on locations to within about 75 feet (23 meters). An unrelated project with the U.S. Air Force, to pinpoint locations of high-altitude aircraft, produced an accuracy of 16.5 feet (5 meters).

Kassas noted that Starlink's accuracy, using this methodology, will increase as more satellites in the fleet fly to orbit. SpaceX has about 1,700 working satellites today, the team stated, but the company hopes to launch more than 40,000 into orbit. (Recent launches have been delayed due to a liquid oxygen shortage induced by higher medical needs during the COVID-19 pandemic.)

The researchers suggested this method of using Starlink navigation could supplement traditional GPS navigation, the latter of which has vulnerabilities. Since GPS has been around for a generation (more than 30 years) and has a well-known signal, it is easy to use on smartphones or vehicles but also more "vulnerable to attacks", the team stated.

Starlink also has an advantage with its altitude, orbiting at roughly 750 miles (1,200 km), much closer to Earth than GPS in medium-Earth orbit. Starlink satellites are also launched more frequently once every few weeks, typically than GPS (once every few months or years), allowing Starlink to have more frequent hardware upgrades.

Coincidentally, in recent years SpaceX has launched several GPS satellites for the U.S. Space Force. Founder Elon Musk has so far offered no comment about the new study on Twitter in recent days.

Editor's note: This article has been updated to fix an error in GPS satellite orbit altitudes.

Follow Elizabeth Howell on Twitter @howellspace. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook.

See original here:

SpaceX's Starlink broadband satellites could be used for GPS navigation - Space.com

SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket just got another passenger.

The powerful Falcon Heavy is now scheduled to loft Astranis' first commercial communications satellite to orbit next spring, Astranis representatives announced Thursday (Sept. 23).

The satellite which will beam internet service down to Alaskans from geostationary orbit, about 22,200 miles (35,730 kilometers) up had previously been slated to ride atop a SpaceX Falcon 9.

Related: The evolution of SpaceX's rockets in pictures

"Launching on Falcon Heavy will get us on orbit months faster, allowing us to serve customers in Alaska that much sooner," Astranis CEO John Gedmark said in a statement. "This is a huge win for our customers in Alaska."

The Alaska-serving satellite will be just the beginning for Astranis, if all goes according to plan.

"By owning and operating its satellites and offering them to customers as a turnkey solution, Astranis is able to provide bandwidth-as-a-service and unlock previously unreachable markets," representatives of the San Francisco-based company wrote in the same statement. "This allows Astranis to launch small, dedicated satellites for small and medium-sized countries, Fortune 500 companies, existing satellite operators and other customers."

The 880-pound (400 kilograms) Astranis satellite will share space on the Falcon Heavy with another communications craft Viasat-3, which will be operated by fellow California company Viasat.

Falcon Heavy has just three launches under its belt to date, but it's poised to get quite a workout over the coming months. The rocket is scheduled to launch two classified missions for the U.S. Space Force by early 2022, the first of which will lift off next month. The Viasat-3/Astranis flight will follow shortly thereafter. And Falcon Heavy's manifest also includes NASA's Psyche asteroid mission, which is slated to launch next August.

The rocket will also fly some other high-profile missions in the near future, including NASA's ice-hunting VIPER moon rover in 2023 and Europa Clipper probe in 2024.

The Falcon Heavy consists of three modified, strapped-together Falcon 9 first stages. The central core is topped by a second stage, which carries the payload. Like the workhorse Falcon 9, the Falcon Heavy is partially reusable; all three first stages are designed to return to Earth, make vertical, powered landings, and fly again.

Mike Wall is the author of "Out There" (Grand Central Publishing, 2018; illustrated by Karl Tate), a book about the search for alien life. Follow him on Twitter @michaeldwall. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom or Facebook.

See original here:

SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket will launch internet satellite to serve Alaska in 2022 - Space.com

Whats holding up US plans to go back to the moon? An argument over pre-flight meetings.

NASA administrator Bill Nelson says he cant firm up plans to return Americans to the moon by 2024 until a lawsuit against the space agency, brought by Jeff Bezos space company Blue Origin, is resolved. The suit contends that NASA should not have chosen Elon Musks SpaceX to build a lander that will carry astronauts to the lunar surface.

Specifically, the suit hinges on flight readiness reviews, or FRRs, which are comprehensive briefings about every aspect of a space mission. They take place soon before a launch and represent the final approval to go ahead with a mission.

These meetings are important because of the relationship between NASA and its contractors. The agency is using the public-private partnership model that entails giving contractors limited guidance and paying them a fixed price. Since the agency is not doing as much of the nitty-gritty design work, FRRs offer a key opportunity for oversight.

Bezos and company say that SpaceX is risking the safety of astronauts because it will not do enough of these reviews. Musk says that we always do flight readiness reviews.

Whos correct?

NASAs plan to get to the moon involves launching astronauts in a spacecraft called Orion. Unlike the Apollo missions, when the astronauts brought a lander along with them, the next generation of moon explorers will meet a separate lander vehicle orbit above the moon, which will shuttle them back and forth to the surface below. NASA asked private companies to build it.

SpaceX proposed its newest vehicle, a large spacecraft called Starship. To do so, SpaceX will need to refuel the Starship in orbit before it goes to the moon and back; that will require the launch of fourteen tanker Starships, and another spacecraft whose description is redacted in public documents, but is widely believed to be some kind of propellant depot. (All those launches are required because of how much propellant large spacecraft require to break free of Earths gravity.)

The plan is to have Starship fly to orbit, fuel up, and then meet the astronauts in lunar orbit. And, according to the Government Accountability Organization, SpaceX proposed to NASA that there would be one flight readiness review before the launch of the Starship being used to transport astronauts; the rest of the fueling infrastructure would already be on orbit, and no astronauts would be onboard Starship until it actually met them in deep space.

Two competing bids, one from a consortium led by Blue Origin and another from an Alabama company called Dynetics, proposed smaller, more traditional lunar landers. Blue Origin has not settled if its lander will launch on one huge rocket or on three medium-sized vehicles. Dynetics lander will get to the moon with one launch but needs to be refueled in orbit by four tanker spacecraft.

NASA hoped to choose two contractors to build moon landers, but had only received funding from Congress to pick one. The space agency ultimately selected SpaceXs proposal, saying it was the cheapest and the most technically sound. But, again according to the GAO, NASA officials asked SpaceX to add two more FRRs to its plan, so that each vehicle type would be scrutinized before it launchedone review for the tankers, one for the potential depot, and one for the Starship that will carry the astronauts.

The other two contractors challenged the decision before the GAO. The protestors argued that because NASA did not require an FRR before every SpaceX launch, the company received an unfair advantage. The GAO agreed that NASA didnt stick to the original wording of its proposal when it allowed SpaceX to have three reviews, but said that didnt change the course of the contract and rejected the challenge. Blue Origin has now escalated the dispute to federal court.

Heres where the mystery comes in: SpaceX distributed a briefing document to lawmakers, whose decisions about NASA funding will influence the agencys choices, stating that SpaceX willand has always been planning toconduct an FRR with full NASA insight and participation prior to every Starship HLS launch. Elon Musk also tweeted that we always do flight readiness reviews! This argument makes no sense.

If thats the case, perhaps the lawyers SpaceX hired to make its case to the GAO should be concerned that they were unable to convey this. SpaceX did not answer questions attempting to tease out the distinction between Musks argument and the GAOs assessment of the contract.

To interpret the difference between GAOs three FRRs and SpaceXs claim that the company always does flight readiness reviews, you have to parse the semantics: When the briefing document says Starship HLS launch, it appears to refer to the human lander spacecraft, and not the other launches. SpaceX has always intended to have an FRR for that specific vehicle.

SpaceX seems to be arguing that the tanker spacecraft and potential fuel depot are infrastructure that NASA doesnt need to worry as much about, while the vehicle that will actually carry astronauts deserves fuller scrutiny. In a court filing unsealed today, the companys attorneys made the case that supporting spacecraft did not fall under the FRR requirements outlined in NASAs request for bids.

The argument over the FRRs mostly reflects the ambition of SpaceXs plans compared to its rivals. Blue Origin and Dynetics proposed fewer launches to get their smaller lander vehicles to the moon.

That is, in part, why the GAO rejected their challenge: It wasnt clear why SpaceX received an advantage when NASA allowed it to have three FRRs. Blue Origin would only be launching its lander vehicle, in either one or three pieces, and no fueling infrastructure. Dynetics proposal, meanwhile, had other weaknesses that outweighed its concerns about FRRs.

SpaceXs latest filing says that NASA expressly gave bidders the liberty to propose a different architecture, and the company did so. All the meeting madness holding up NASAs plans doesnt seem to rise to the level of disregard for safety, as Blue Origin alleges, but we wont know for sure until the lawsuit is over and all the facts come out.

While much of the court docket is sealed, the parties are currently debating what kind of records the judge will review, with Blue Origin seeking to obtain NASA emails, and other documents and SpaceX saying those additional records are unnecessary. One the administrative record is settled, a judge will determine if Blues challenge has merit.

This story has been corrected to clarify the moon landing plans developed by Blue Origin and Dynetics.

See the rest here:

NASA, Blue Origin and SpaceX can't agree on lunar flight reviews - Quartz

PHOENIX A capsule parachuting into the Atlantic Ocean off the Florida coast on Sept. 18 after a trip to space concluded what was a dream come true for a Valley college professor.

Sian Proctor, a professor at South Mountain Community College, was among the four-person crew of the SpaceX Dragon capsule.

It was an amazing experience, Proctor told KTAR News 92.3 FMs Arizonas Morning News on Thursday. It was out of this world.

Im kind of still in shock that weve gone up and come back down.

The capsule launched from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on Sept. 15, with Proctor piloting the fully automated capsule.

Everything went so smoothly from liftoff to being on orbit to de-orbiting, Proctor said, adding de-orbiting is a time where things could potentially go wrong.

Proctor, a one-time NASA astronaut finalist, along with trip sponsor Jared Isaacman and two others spent three days in space, being presented with views of a lifetime.

She didnt realize that because of their altitude and the design of the cupola a bubble-shaped window at the top of the capsule that they would be able to see the entire sphere of the Earth.

When you get up there and see that, you are just in awe and amazed, Proctor said, adding going into it as a poet and an artist added another layer to the experience.

Just absolutely stunningly beautiful.

The crew wasnt just up there to sight-see as Proctor said there were many tasks to complete during the three-day trip.

Went by way too fast and we had too much to do, Proctor said, adding there was no sense of boredom.

We had all these medical research experiments we were doing, I wanted to paint so I did one drawing and one full painting.

Proctor isnt sure what she will do next for the Maricopa County Community College District, serving as the districts astronaut resident, but is excited to bring the experience to the classroom.

Geology tends to attract a lot of non-science majors, and Im always excited to take those students and get them really fired up about science and our planet and the possibilities, Proctor said.

Now being able to add this orbital perspective to our planet really adds something.

After winning her ticket by beating a field of 200 applicants, Proctor said she would be open to going on another trip to space with the company.

Flying with SpaceX was a fantastic experience, they are the most amazing company, Proctor said.

Im not going to turn them down if they come knocking.

The capsule reached a high altitude of 363 miles, surpassing the International Space Station by 100 miles.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Have a story idea or tip? Pass it along to the KTAR News team here.

Here is the original post:

Valley college professor calls trip to space on SpaceX capsule out of this world - KTAR.com