|
|
|
|
|
by rrss
2389 days ago
|
|
It wasn't a "radio license." It was an authorization to "construct, deploy, and operate a proposed non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite system comprising 4,425 satellites for the provision of fixed-satellite service (FSS) around the world." I don't see why the FCC wouldn't consider impact to visual astronomy, when they did consider increased collision risk (also unrelated to any regulated frequencies). > IAU publicly decried satellite constellations in January, months before May Can you link to information about this public statement from January? When I google "IAU satellite constellations," I find only https://www.iau.org/news/announcements/detail/ann19035/ from June. |
|
It's fundamentally a radio license:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/25.114
> when they did consider increased collision risk
Yup, they are supposed to evaluate orbital debris and collision risk, too, 47 CFR 25.114(d)(14). That, and equitable service (for some services) to Alaska/Hawaii are the only non-radio concerns they are permitted by regulation to consider.