not the most elegant solution
this story is amazing.
the former governor of North Dakota, Ed Schafer, apparently runs a telecommunications company that is planning on providing all of the state with cell phone coverage. this idea is great, except for the part about using giant latex balloons floating 20 miles up in the air to get it done.
i'm all for trying out new ideas and all that, but can this plan really make sense?
here's an example of some math that i just did:
*North Dakota is about 360 miles wide.
*these balloons would travel at about 30 mph as they drift across the state.
that means that if you released one balloon on, let's say, the western border, it would take only 12 hours to cross into Minnesota.
*so, for 24 hour coverage, you'd need two balloons per day.
*that's 730 balloons per year.
*but, Ed says that they'll always have nine balloons in the air in order to provide total coverage. so, 730x9 = 6,570 total balloons.
that's a lot.
then, consider that some poor team of guys has to spend their days chasing these things as they come crashing to earth, only to re-install them and send them flying again.
if i had to pick some music to go along with all of this nutsiness, THIS would have to be it. obviously.
of course, maybe somehow all of this will end up working.
but seriously though, there's NO way, right?
this story is amazing.
the former governor of North Dakota, Ed Schafer, apparently runs a telecommunications company that is planning on providing all of the state with cell phone coverage. this idea is great, except for the part about using giant latex balloons floating 20 miles up in the air to get it done.
i'm all for trying out new ideas and all that, but can this plan really make sense?
here's an example of some math that i just did:
*North Dakota is about 360 miles wide.
*these balloons would travel at about 30 mph as they drift across the state.
that means that if you released one balloon on, let's say, the western border, it would take only 12 hours to cross into Minnesota.
*so, for 24 hour coverage, you'd need two balloons per day.
*that's 730 balloons per year.
*but, Ed says that they'll always have nine balloons in the air in order to provide total coverage. so, 730x9 = 6,570 total balloons.
that's a lot.
then, consider that some poor team of guys has to spend their days chasing these things as they come crashing to earth, only to re-install them and send them flying again.
if i had to pick some music to go along with all of this nutsiness, THIS would have to be it. obviously.
of course, maybe somehow all of this will end up working.
but seriously though, there's NO way, right?
posted by anthony at 10:53 AM
3 Comments:
that's an interesting post. i think what we'd like to avoid are more garish, expensive structures like the oil derricks that rise up over the western part of the state. it's pretty out there.
i can see problems with balloons landing in montana's trout streams and everything, though. we should release them S-N so they fly up to winnipeg...
that's fun, but
mr. schaeffer will be careful, because it's his money. i really like him; he's smart and had a solid entrepeneurial history (tilapia farms notwithstanding). maybe this will come together better than the windmills everyone was talking about when we were in college.
get on board, tony!
yah, it does seem a little far-fetched at first. When I was reading the article I kept thinking I was reading The Onion, especially when Schafer said "we just let these babies go". But the more I think it through...I think it could work. I really do.
-Lisa
if you build it they will come.
p.s. will baskets be provided for rides?
Post a Comment
<< Home