Hacker News Reader

Comment by Seanambers | Hacker News Reader

If there is limited space, why shouldn't it be first come first serve?

Anyways, it is my impression that space is kinda big..

Space is, but low earth orbit isn't. At least not when you want to fill it with millions of circles (not points!) that must keep certain distances from another.

> fill it with millions of circles (not points!) that must keep certain distances from another.

This is, at best, misleading. The objects that have to keep clear of each other are (effectively) points, and they can share orbits with different phasing. The most obvious real-world example of multiple objects sharing an orbit is geostationary orbit.

According to Wikipedia [1], LEO is up to 2000km, though e.g. the ISS is at about 400km; geostationary orbit is 35,768 km. Minimum difference in orbital length is 2 pi times 33,768km.

So the obvious case for geostationary orbits is significantly better than for LEO.

Nevertheless, LEO isn't bad. A height of 400 km translates into a circle of about 42,655 km (orbital length of ISS according to NASA). That is enough to park several satellites in without them being parked bumper to bumper.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orbits

First come first serve becomes a lot less beneficial when you start trying to get things off the planet, or see things with this many obstructions.

> If there is limited space, why shouldn't it be first come first serve?

Because it encourages squatting and low-value rent seeking from the first people to get there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com