Jump to content

Talk:Skynet (satellite)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Company Name

[edit]

Astrium is now Airbus Defense & Space — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.51.9.159 (talk) 00:41, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On-orbit spare

[edit]

Is it known whether the on-orbit spare will be used to provide sellable spare capacity in the likely event that all three satellites end up working? It would make lots of sense from Paradigm's point of view ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fivemack (talk • contribs) 00:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terminator

[edit]

Does anyone know if this influenced its fictional milatary namesake in the Terminator series of films?Schnizzle 13:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the page says that it is merely "an unfortunate coincidence." I'll file that under "O" for "O RLY?"

________________________________________

Who in the fuck was responsible for naming these satellites? --Selfish Gene 2009 (talk) 02:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. It looks like they came up with the name in the '60's, long before Terminator. --Selfish Gene 2009 (talk) 02:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

________________________________________

When I worked for Matra Marconi Space (IT support) in the late 90s/early 2000s one chap who was working on Skynet had a framed Terminaror:Skynet poster behind his desk.

Battle Honours

[edit]

The Skynet satellites are war machines. Should their battle honours be mentioned?


The Skynet 2 satellites provided voice communications between Britain and its armed forces in the Falklands_War in 1982.

Skynet 4 provided long range communications between Britain and its forces in the first Gulf_war in 1990/1. Tactical telephone, telex, telegraph and data communications were also provided between the main head quarters in Saudi Arabia and the British Army's front line officers. This force multiplier has provided similar services in several other fights including the Bosnian_War, Afghanistan, Sierra_Leone and the Second Gulf War.

Andrew Swallow 23:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vehicles don't get battle honours, this is not the US.
There is probably scope for some discussion of operational use of the system as the space vehicles and ground terminals have advanced over time, but lets not over dramatise it.
ALR 07:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note Skynet 2 could not provide comms at the Falkland Islands, outside range from Indian Ocean GSO position. US allowed Britain to use their satellite comms there - see the 'RN Communications Branch Museum' cite. This embarrassment was part of the rationale for Skynet 4. Rwendland (talk) 16:00, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Skynet (fictional)

[edit]

The following text used to be in Skynet (fictional); it didn't belong there. Someone should try to integrate it into this article, if appropriate.

These Skynet relay satellites provide secure communication services for the British armed forces, with a current focus on increasing bandwidth to control modern technologies such as unmanned air vehicles.[1]
Its technologies have been designed to resist any attempts to disable or take control of the spacecraft.[2]
Skynet is funded through a private firm Paradigm Secure Communications, the Ministry of Defence does not own the hardware.[3]

149.8.226.148 18:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, trouble brewing?

[edit]

Stop and back up. SKYNET has bad connotations. It's also a real-life military defense network that controls things that kill people. Did anyone think that through at the MOD?

Britain's SKYNET was in orbit well before James Cameron's SKYNET was conceived Fivemack 00:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is Skynet, not like The terrminator Movies i hope —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.72.215 (talk) 12:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good thing there isn't a detailed timeline in the article. OH WAIT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.219.203 (talk) 15:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Skynet 1

[edit]

Where did the information on Skynet 1 originate from? I ask because my father designed it, and assured me that at least one of them didn't conk out after a year. He even went on Blue Peter to do a presentation of it! There was also a model of it on display in the Science Museum. Whether it is still there I don't know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Puzbie (talk • contribs) 21:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Skynet 5B

[edit]

Why is there no Skynet 5B page, whereas there are pages for Skynet 5A, Skynet 5C and Skynet 5D ? 62.254.68.36 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about merging the lot? AFAIK they're all technically much the same (yet another E3000) and with much the same functions. A merged article can present brief history in a section, then a table to allow direct comparisons. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll create it now. Given that current practise is to consider all spacecraft notable if there is enough material available to produce a reliably-sourced article, all four spacecraft should have articles and I would very strongly oppose Andy's proposal. --W. D. Graham 23:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is the opportunity to have a standalone article. Readability could well override this, if it's more readable as a single article. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's nothing to stop us having a list as a summary, linking to detailed articles. This is what we do with just about every other spacecraft, so I can't see why this wouldn't work here. --W. D. Graham 00:45, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Missing info

[edit]

On the first topic there is missing info, just wanted to let someone know, you can ban my account now — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiWhendy (talk • contribs) 15:49, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Skynet (satellite). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:20, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Skynet (satellite). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gravity wells?

[edit]

Using this BBC source[4], I added text about the current location of Skynet 1A here. As mentioned by the BBC, I made a reference to a "gravity well", wikilinking it. But Gravity well is a redirect to the Sphere of influence (astrodynamics) article. An IP identified (probably correctly) that this isn't the right article to link to and changed the link to Geostationary orbit#Stability here. But I don't think that's the right either. The BBC piece is saying the gravity well is one of two specific areas near the equator. The one it's in is causing it to "[wander] backwards and forwards like a marble at the bottom of a bowl". There's nothing in the linked to article that covers that. For the moment I've delinked it completely. Does anyone know what it should be linked to? Or is it better not to link it and put it quotes or just delete it altogether? DeCausa (talk) 15:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the latter wikilink was correct; the article mentions "two stable equilibrium points (at 75.3°E and 108°W)", which can be colloquially described as "gravity wells"; and these coordinates roughly coincide with those of the BBC. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 18:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly. Even if that were right, how would the general reader know that? There's no mention of gravity wells in the target. WP:EGG applies. I think it's probably better to remove the reference to gravity well altogether. It doesn't add much (although I added it) and I think it only confuses. DeCausa (talk) 19:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Skynet_(satellite)&oldid=1256395874"