> We're not going to have bits of data. We're going to have gigabits of data," said Philip Baldwin, acting director of the network services division at JPL. "I don't want 1080p for video resolution. I want 8K video."<p>Is this a reason why India's moon craft had such low resolution images? I checked and the rover only has 2x 1 megapixel cameras for some 3d stuff. The pictures from the lander were the usual low res generic stuff we've always gotten.<p>Why cant they put a 4k lense on these things? That has to have scientific value even for looking at their own rovers/landers for defects.
I don't understand why one of the first priorities for NASA and the moon isn't a satellite communications systems designed for the moon.<p>I truly believe that NASA would fare much better if they focused on regulation, deep space research, and communication. They already do the first 2, but for some reason, they neglect communication.<p>They build these fantastic probes, but then don't build out a communication network. This *despite the fact that they have people like Vint Cerf at their disposal !! This just boggles my mind.<p>Once they build out for the moon, they could have a blueprint for deep space, while still being easy enough to iterate on designs (the moon being a much closer and easier to reach target, thereby reducing the development/test/feedback loop, as they wouldn't have to wait 6+ months for travel time.
For near-earth communications, I don't see why they can not use the SpaceX network or similar instead. Tracking these tiny CubeSats with only 3 DSN dishes are insane! DSN should really work for deep-space missions only.<p>I believe that NASA recognized the problem and potential solutions, but they moved slowly probably due to their clunky bureaucracy.<p>> NASA relies on commercial ground stations for more than half of its ground station support for the agency's satellites in low-Earth orbit. NASA last year selected SpaceX, Amazon, Viasat, Telecast, SES, and Inmarsat to begin developing commercial capabilities to replace the government-owned Tracking and Data Relay Satellite network, which is used for near-continuous connectivity with the International Space Station and other satellites closer to Earth.
TL;DR the quantity is killing the quality. There are so many small cubesat-style missions that we're actually losing communications time with James Webb to keep track of them all. And Artemis is going to swamp everything with downlink data rates.<p>I worked at JPL, sometimes with the folks mentioned in this article. I suspect this is a money problem, not a technology problem. IIRC, everyone knows optical (laser) comms are going to carry a lot more load, and the DSN build-out plan already specs more ground-stations with smaller radii (better for closer tracking) vs larger dishes (better for voyager / juno style missions). There's also been commercial support (e.g., Amazon[1])<p>These folks know how to do it effectively and efficiently (and cheaply) just need the resources and permission.<p>1. <a href="https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/amazon-launches-aws-ground-station-service/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/amazon-launches-a...</a>
This is ridiculous from NASA point of view :-( They're shooting their self in the foot.<p>They should fund the DSN and make sure that not only all antennas are operational, but build new ones at the 3 locations or even better create additional locations.<p>A strike from DSN personnel would teach NASA to spend some money on dish antennas. It's insane to "throw" hundred of billions of USD for Artemis and not invest 1 billion for the comms infrastructure.<p>I guess it won't be long until a "genius" manager comes up with the idea of DSNaaS (Deep Space Network as a Service)
:-)<p>Bonus link, live console/status of the DSN: <a href="https://eyes.nasa.gov/dsn/dsn.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://eyes.nasa.gov/dsn/dsn.html</a>
Why are we just hearing about this? Should have been trickling this out because I can't see the citizens jumping to provide funding for this. They are trying to figure out how their teenagers can afford food, car, and college while taking care of grandma. Sounds like a first world problem and the message to struggling citizens has been: make do.
Aren't missions paying for the usage of DSN? How come a small cubesat gets the amount of time on the network comparable to JWST?<p>Could this be commercialized? If there's high demand it should be profitable to build new dishes to increase bandwidth.
So the DSN has some properties of cooperative multitasking ... what could go wrong?<p>> “When Artemis comes online, everybody else moves out of the way, and it’s an impact to all the science missions, even the flagship science missions," Dodd said.<p>> What makes CubeSats appealing to NASA and research scientists is what makes them unappealing to the Deep Space Network, Dodd said. ... "When your DSN is oversubscribed, I don't think it's a good use to put throwaway missions on the same set of antennas.
The problem of intergalactic communication is a plot point in this fantastic sci-fi novel I am currently reading (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fire_Upon_the_Deep" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fire_Upon_the_Deep</a>) cannot recommend enough although it doesn't really inform the current conversation :-)
If You think it's bad now, wait until Starship starts dumping hundreds of tons of space probes all over.<p>The obvious solution is more big antennas on Earth and network if store-and-forward relays all over the Solar System.<p>I predict they'll get cheap instead of fixing it.
DSN: Deep Space Network:
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Deep_Space_Network" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Deep_Space_Network</a>
Loophole-free solutions that do not violate Bell's; entanglement communication: Entangled satellites and QKD repeaters do exist.<p>Godel had a few interesting spacetime solutions that may be helpful for Deep Space Communications.<p>Evolved Antenna: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna</a><p>Rogue wave: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave</a><p>Can DSN be scaled? Or would it be best to use quantum radio?<p>Hawking radiation: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation</a><p>Perhaps if Hawking radiation is in all the things, Hawking radiation could be used for DSN-like communications.<p>When phenomena in the quantum foam "dissolve", is there an ~ejection fraction? Couldn't there be ±t per minimally perturbable effect in the quantum foam, though? Maybe internet/p2p-like routing algorithms, or, which field/wave/fluid perturbations are omnidirectional?<p>Rydberg antenna / Rydberg sensor: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rydberg_atom" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rydberg_atom</a><p>> <i>The Rydberg sensor can reliably detect signals over the entire spectrum and compare favourably with other established electric field sensor technologies, such as electro-optic crystals and dipole antenna-coupled passive electronics.[59][60]</i>