NASA Laser Breaks Space Communications Record! Holy That Download Speed

[Youbetternot]

NASA sent data 239,000 miles(384,633 kilometers) to earth, which at speeds of 622 megabits per second. YEP I SAID IT "622 MEGABITS PER SECOND." Imagine that download speed on a game,

 

 

I had to steal this meme from TopWargamer

 

 

A laser communications experiment flying on NASA's newest moon probe is now a record holder.

The Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) — a technology test flying on NASA's Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer spacecraft, or LADEE — has set a record for the fastest download rate between the moon and Earth.

LADEE recently began a month-long checkout period at the moon that included testing the communications demonstration, a system that employs laser technology instead of radio wave transmissions. Using a pulsed laser beam, the instrument sent data 239,000 miles (384,633 kilometers) home to Earth at the relatively speedy download rate of 622 megabits per second. The test also showed an "error-free upload rate" of 20 megabits per second from the primary ground station in New Mexico, NASA officials said. [How NASA's Moon Laser Tech Works (Infographic)]

 

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/zap-nasa-laser-breaks-space-communications-record-213055228.html

 

[megadarkwood]

They can get that speed at that distance, basically wirelessly, and they can't wire me more than 25/10?

[TooManyErrors]

They can get that speed at that distance, basically wirelessly, and they can't wire me more than 25/10?

Because ISPs suck.

[Kuzma]

They're getting this speed and I'm getting 3.5/.35

[LonliestofAll]

They can get that speed at that distance, basically wirelessly, and they can't wire me more than 25/10?

 

 

They're getting this speed and I'm getting 3.5/.35

That is because copper cable isn't capable of sending that much data, unless it is a super thick cable. This is why super thin fiber optic can't get here fast enough. 

[megadarkwood]

That is because copper cable isn't capable of sending that much data, unless it is a super thick cable. This is why super thin fiber optic can't get here fast enough. 

Well they can't lay me a new cable? #Sarcasm

[Kuzma]

That is because copper cable isn't capable of sending that much data, unless it is a super thick cable. This is why super thin fiber optic can't get here fast enough. 

dealing withh 400KB/s down and 40KB/s up when my friends are getting 2-4MB/s down and 1-2MB/s up simply because they live about 1km away >_> is not nice

[Fetzie]

They can get that speed at that distance, basically wirelessly, and they can't wire me more than 25/10?

 

25/10?

 

I get 16/1

 

And I can't get any faster.

 

And it is actually 13/1 >.>

[chromeboy42]

This is why super thin fiber optic can't get here fast enough. 

I hear you, I'm moving soon and the deciding factor between the two houses I was considering was fiber connection. Very cool for NASA although its probably just a cover up for a moon death laser that Logan funded 

 

EDIT: 500 posts! yea

[LonliestofAll]

dealing withh 400KB/s down and 40KB/s up when my friends are getting 2-4MB/s down and 1-2MB/s up simply because they live about 1km away >_> is not nice

And then there's crappy ISPs that don't help their customers.

[TopWargamer]

NASA: We can wirelessly send data to and from our space stations at a speed of 622 megabits. 

 

ISPs around the world (ex. Gigabit providers): I liiiiiike coperrrrrrrrrr (Tony Abbott)

[mgsstar]

This is probably very expensive. Guess now they will be able to stream at 4K

[TechSage]

Let's start our own ISP called "Interwebz" with 1gb down and up for $20 bucks a month. Anyone down to fund this?

[Beskamir]

Yet another reason I want Google Fiber since Google isn't oblivios to technological advances unlike just about every single IPS ever made

[LonliestofAll]

I might not be the first to say this but, porn!

 

Honestly, if you were downloading something, wouldn't hard drive speed bottleneck you a bit?

If I had internet this fast I'd be running RAMdisks

[Scheer]

That is because copper cable isn't capable of sending that much data, unless it is a super thick cable. This is why super thin fiber optic can't get here fast enough. 

 

Cat6a (pretty much the same size as Cat5e) carries 10 Gbps at 100 meters, RG6 coax can carry 500 Mbps and I believe that 1 Gbps has already been demoed.

 

Cable isn't the issue, it is that the other networking components (switches, etc.) being too damn expensive.

 

You also have to remember that even with fiber it goes point to point with a switch full of copper traces that the data travels across on each end.

[Lukiose]

Lol what the shit, if they can get those kinds of speed from THE FUCKING MOON then i can probably download a game from Origin/Steam whilst on Earth in 5 seconds

[ionbasa]

This is awesome. While you may not thing that download speed is that great, it is. This is a lot harder to achieve because satellites are constantly moving in space, and will generally suffer from the Doppler effect.

[Blackterror25]

Ping must really suck to the moon. yep, the speed of light is to slow for me.

[ionbasa]

Ping must really suck to the moon. yep, the speed of light is to slow for me.

Well we will just have to wait for data to be transferred with quantum entanglement!

[DoubleY]

That is nearly 5Gb/s. That is 5x Google Fiber... HOLY SHIT

[tahayassen]

That is nearly 5Gb/s. That is 5x Google Fiber... HOLY SHIT

Am I the only one here that doesn't get the big deal?

 

NASA: 622 megabits/second = 0.622 gigabits/second

Google Fiber: 1 gigabit/second

[DoubleY]

Am I the only one here that doesn't get the big deal?

 

NASA: 662 megabits/second = 0.662 gigabits/second

Google Fiber: 1 gigabit/second

I thought that he said Megabytes. So divided by 8 (to make it megabits) is nearly 5Gb/S

[tahayassen]

I thought that he said Megabytes. So divided by 8 (to make it megabits) is nearly 5Gb/S

To go from bytes to bits, you multiply by 8. Not divide.

[DoubleY]

To go from bytes to bits, you multiply by 8. Not divide.

Nooo, to go from bits to bytes, you multiply by 8. Bits are smaller than bytes. Can somebody else please help explain? Or am I just super confused?

 

EDIT: Looks like I was the person who was wrong, I had my stuff all mixed up. Still waking up a little Either way though, 622MB/s is nearly 5Gb/s