
so maybe we should just not bother going
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 11:10, Reply)

I'd happily support sending all the Instagrammers there and only on arrival telling them that there's no internet.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 12:50, Reply)

The atmosphere would be deathly toxic... if it weren’t too thin to matter.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 13:07, Reply)

Toxicity might be around third or fourth on the list of potentially fatal issues. Some way below temperature and pressure.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 13:44, Reply)

But it still is what it claims to be.
We need a decent sized comms relay network around Mars before it's feasible to stream video back (and forth), which should hopefully be one of the first things a Starship does when it arrives there... You could fit a shitload of fairly large satellites into a Starship.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 17:48, Reply)

best one out there at the moment is on MRO - clicky
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 18:06, Reply)

Or linky no worky.
You could have fucking huge lightweight expanding dish antennas on fairly small satellites, power generation and battery storage would be the limiting factors, I think. Like, if your dish obscures your solar panels, you're not going to be able to transmit for very long.
Oh and just one big dish sat wouldn't cut it, you'd want a network dense enough to maintain constant line of sight with Earth's comms network.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 19:10, Reply)

it was to the comms system on the Mars Reconnaisance Orbiter, 3 metre antenna, 6 Mbit/s, but now only 2 iirc
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 22:18, Reply)

Yeah that's what I'd call a fairly large satellite. 1-2t. Pack a dozen or so of them in a Starship and Bob Kerman's your uncle.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 23:14, Reply)

Starlink makes sense where you've got people distributed all over the surface who need to talk to each other. Any initial Mars settlement is going to be concentrated in one place and the only distant thing they'll need to communicate with is Earth. You could just as easily do that with one or two large comms sats instead of 25,000 small ones.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 19:37, Reply)

but a good dozen or so decent sized (around 1t or so) comms satellites would do.
You could probably get away with three giant ones if they are all high enough up. Just having one in geostationary orbit (areosynchronous if you're a pedant) would mean being cut off from Earth whenever your side of Mars was facing away from Earth. A small network of big satellites in geo would make constant communication possible.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 19:53, Reply)

Three big ones is probably the way to go to get the bandwidth back to earth. They wouldn't need to be stationary either as long as they were 120 degrees apart in the same orbit, that orbit could be anything you choose. Tracking satellites is a solved problem.
If you could live with short breaks, you could probably stick two in a really high orbit at 180 degree separation. You've got the communication delay to factor in anyway, so you could probably live with that.
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 20:31, Reply)

And I'd want a further 9 for redundancy. :D
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 21:11, Reply)

( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 10:42, Reply)

Really? Are you sure?
( , Tue 21 Jul 2020, 14:18, Reply)