• threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        This used to be the case, but now the tables have turned. There was a time when SpaceX launches were streamed in 4k and NASA launches were only 720p. Now NASA streams launches in 4k and SpaceX streams moved to Xitter.

        • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Which only allows 1080p streams. That means the highest pixel quality streams of SpaceX launches are from third parties like everyday astronaut.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Should all of NASA’s budget go to SpaceX? Obviously not. But should they outsource their rocket development and launches to SpaceX, at least until the next competitive bid? Without question.

        The Falcon 9 has already revolutionized earth observation and science projects with how cheap it has become to get science satellites into orbit, and Starship is an even crazier reduction in cost and expansion of capabilities. It will be able to lift 100 to 150 tons for $30M per launch, and will be able to launch 30+ times a year. SLS, NASA’s traditionally designed and built rocket, will be able to lift 95 tons to orbit for $2200M per launch, and can only ever launch twice per year.

        Do you know how crazy of a difference that is for NASA’s science programs? For their exact same budget, they can either launch 100 tons of experiments once per year, or they can launch 100 tons of experiments every 5 days.

  • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    400km is nothing, if you have/had satellite TV the signal comes from a geostationary orbit (35 786 km) and it has to get there first and if you’re not exactly below the satellite it’s even farther away. Streams from the ISS having low quality (do they actually have low quality?) is due to either bad cameras or cameras aging faster in space due to high energy particles hitting it.

    • BluesF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      5 months ago

      The ISS also moves relative to the receiver, whereas geostationary satellites don’t.

      • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s a trade-off, either you have to do tracking and compensate for doppler shift or you have to deal with really bad SNR.

  • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    5 months ago

    There was an unfortunate overwriting incident:

    The Apollo 11 missing tapes were those that were recorded from Apollo 11’s slow-scan television (SSTV) telecast in its raw format on telemetry data tape at the time of the first Moon landing in 1969 and subsequently lost.

  • Steal Wool@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Is 400 km a lot? 🤷‍♀️ I’m american…

    Edit: thank yall, I was being cheeky