>>13462629>you mean like they intentionally handicapper their ability to command it?From what I understood from the docs, pretty much. They were much more worried about a random signal because the command messages were tiny than about signal gain, since they had good stations to send commands to. Thankfully, that security design seems to have died in the 90s after the engineers retired...
>you probably just want to broadcast the peer list on repeat.That is exactly right, but it needs to be constantly updated with new peers to connect, so it's not like it's a very good idea. It is more a "I need to communicate with the satellite at least every 5 minutes" than a raw datarate, at least at first if the peerlist is to be kept at minimum. I think that this can be encapsulated into a university proposal quite easily, say sharing the Ubuntu trackerlist or something, but I haven't thought it out well enough to see how viable it is.
Brazil likes SAA so much that we even started to rename it from "South Atlantic Anomaly" to "South American Anomaly" during some conferences, lol. It is indeed a problem, but it depends heavily on the orbit. It infuriates me because those kinda of environmental effects should spur more research, but we just keep buying stuff from the US/EU/China and then just believing that they'll work well when transmitting here, but the effect is pretty annoying. Not sure if we had much more error rates during communication than other missions, though, that I gotta ask.
