|
|
|
|
|
|
by echoangle
10 days ago
|
|
|
> Sure: which is a higher and less accessible orbit. The relative fuel cost might be small, but in absolute terms the ship carrying payload is carrying a lot more to do it - see the number of Starships to refuel a Starship in LEO. No it’s not, it’s not either SSO or LEO. You can have SSO at 600km which is lower than the normal LEO satellite. I agree that it doesn’t make a lot of sense (look at the root comment of this thread), but you absolutely can make a LEO datacenter with 100% sun coverage if you want to. |
|
|