Jump to content

Starlink should be available for boats... according to Elon Musk


Recommended Posts

If you had a superyacht. The dish and terminal uses 120 watts, the entire focus is not about resiliency in maritime support. People who think they're going to go cruising and also surf the internet should check their enthusiasm. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Miffy said:

If you had a superyacht. The dish and terminal uses 120 watts, the entire focus is not about resiliency in maritime support. People who think they're going to go cruising and also surf the internet should check their enthusiasm. 

120W is not a problem... ( and one does not have to have it on all the time.. if it is ) For a reasonable battery bank (and a 24V LiFePO4 battery bank) 120W is a big drain, but not a real problem. especially with solar panels on a cruising boat.  Radar is a drain, radio is a drain, laptop is a drain...  but to ensure one has 120W for high speed internet access....  That is something that can be found. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

120 watts?  Horror of horrors.

Now, let's see, how much does an M-802 draw?  How long does it take to download email and weather?  Which uses more amp-hours for daily comms as presently practiced?

Iridium draws power too if you actually use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If every yacht bought the Starlink system and the most expensive subscription it would not move the needle on Elon's financial plans. We are that small of a market. In his comments he did let on to a small attraction though: All the bandwidth of the satellites over the seas is unused. So the marginal revenue could be of some interest.

Regarding power consumption, that will come down. It is likely the very least of their present concerns. Besides, a four hour surf session is only 480 W•h (40 A•h  for neanderthals) which is not a big deal for the heavy cruisers these days (on those rare days they are actually off moorings).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only benefit boats will hope to get will be some sort of trickle down in the billionaires race to give internet to the world.  For anyone who has been around to see the evolution of iridium from day one it hard to see it as anything other. 

No money in comms in the middle of nowhere never will be. Most remote access is in the red in a huge way when you take away subsided revenue for providing access.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

And rural Amurika complains about the Digital Divide and lack of Internet for their fly-over country economy.  Not a single politician has mentioned Starlink

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the email from Elon a few weeks ago, offering a slot in the StarLink beta.  I had two hours to decide (and commit to the fees) before they offered it to someone else.  I passed for the time being.  

In the current iteration, StarLink is NOT a mobile service.  If you move your unit outside of its assigned geographic cell, it will not work. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So that's different than we have now? Cost wise.

30 minutes ago, toddster said:

In the current iteration, StarLink is NOT a mobile service.  If you move your unit outside of its assigned geographic cell, it will not work. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have Starlink at my home on the Oregon coast and it works very well.  However, at this time it is limited to fixed locations.  I understand that as more satellites are launched and the satellites can communicate with each other, mobile use will be possible.  There are also limites in the number of users in a cell.  I doubt that that will be an issue on the ocean, but the main users will be commercial and military.

From the Starlink web site:

Starlink satellites are scheduled to send internet down to all users within a designated area on the ground. This designated area is referred to as a cell.

Your Starlink is assigned to a single cell. If you move your Starlink outside of its assigned cell, a satellite will not be scheduled to serve your Starlink and you will not receive internet. This is constrained by geometry and is not arbitrary geofencing.

Lohring Miller

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lohring said:

I have Starlink at my home on the Oregon coast and it works very well.  However, at this time it is limited to fixed locations.  I understand that as more satellites are launched and the satellites can communicate with each other, mobile use will be possible.  There are also limites in the number of users in a cell.  I doubt that that will be an issue on the ocean, but the main users will be commercial and military.

From the Starlink web site:

Starlink satellites are scheduled to send internet down to all users within a designated area on the ground. This designated area is referred to as a cell.

Your Starlink is assigned to a single cell. If you move your Starlink outside of its assigned cell, a satellite will not be scheduled to serve your Starlink and you will not receive internet. This is constrained by geometry and is not arbitrary geofencing.

Lohring Miller

That isn't too bad if the cell is large enough and in a good location.     As an example most of the Chesapeake bay is in one cell:

starlink.thumb.jpg.cda67f06d81e025f63d4b085f389650b.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article on Starlink:  https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/02/14/elon-musk-predicted-starlink-would-generate-30-bil/

In short, don't believe the hype.  With 3x oversubscribed service and 12,000 satellites, it can support 8.3M users worldwide generating ~$10B in revenue.  Not the $30B Musk is proposing.  By cutting bandwidth, it can support more users, but would it?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cje said:

So that's different than we have now? Cost wise.

 

What we have now is "CenturyLink Broadband" DSL which when it works at all is about as fast as 1990's dial-up.  14 - 30kbps on average.  They won't make any commitment up front as to speed or cost, but the bill ends up being about $80 per month.

A local guy set up his own ISP via microwave antennas, which are good for 5mbps, if you live within line-of-sight of his location. He charges $55. It's about the same as living on cellular data.  

Then there are geosynchronous satellite services.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, toddster said:

What we have now is "CenturyLink Broadband" DSL which when it works at all is about as fast as 1990's dial-up.  14 - 30kbps on average.  They won't make any commitment up front as to speed or cost, but the bill ends up being about $80 per month.

A local guy set up his own ISP via microwave antennas, which are good for 5mbps, if you live within line-of-sight of his location. He charges $55. It's about the same as living on cellular data.  

Then there are geosynchronous satellite services.  

If that is the best speed you get out of CenturyLink Broadband DSL then you should get their tech to come and check your twisted pairs! I pay $45 per month for the dual line DSL2 and I think that includes the modem lease. I just ran the speed test and got these results.

image.thumb.png.19a21684ac6e38b9c65f074d289b7208.png

 

     I was only getting about a third of that and one pair of wires was not contributing at all to that. We just had underhouse insulation installed thanks to Hurricane Sally a few months ago and the hobbits that do that sort of work in crawlspaces had yanked the Cat 5 cable out of the floor! I was able to re-connect without calling the tech and thought I was getting my full speed but then it seems that the insulation installers managed to staple through the other line in several places when putting in the final vapor barrier sheet. Service seemed to be random speeds and long disconnects so I called and the tech was out the next day. He was surprised I had been getting any service thanks to the bumbling insul goons sabotage and he was kind enough to not bill me for his efforts. He ran fresh new Cat 5 from the box on the outside of the house to my inside RJ45 connection to the modem. Now I'm off to the races and very happy. 

     When I just ran the test on the CenturyLink website, there were offers for pending FiberOptic service so I entered my address to see it that was in the works. The tech had told me that would probably not be available in my neighborhood as it was going into new subdivisions and the like. No fiber available but the address search returned this option which is more than I presently pay with only a third of the speed. I think I was one of the first to get the dual line DSL2 service and it looks like I am not even paying the model lease! I did get agree to pay for the new conduit which had to get trenched in from the street and those goons with the Ditch Witch cut through our sewage line!  After that FU I don't think I even got charged for the new conduit. I guess I will be happy for a while, my phone carrier is now saying when they get 5G in our area I can drop the DSL2 completely and get all my gigs over the Cell Network but I'm not holding my breath on that...

image.thumb.png.947c420018f169f34754702d2d55d643.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Rasputin22 said:

If that is the best speed you get out of CenturyLink Broadband DSL then you should get their tech to come and check your twisted pairs!

No - it's the whole area.  They call it "permanent exhaustion" but you have to get through to an upper-level supervisor to find anyone who will admit that.  It means they've grossly over-subscribed the wire but there aren't enough people out here to make it worth their while to upgrade.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, toddster said:

No - it's the whole area.  They call it "permanent exhaustion" but you have to get through to an upper-level supervisor to find anyone who will admit that.  It means they've grossly over-subscribed the wire but there aren't enough people out here to make it worth their while to upgrade.   

What is now known as CenturyLink was originally founded here in Baldwin County AL by a rather forward thinking man named Ward Snook. Gulf Telephone was very innovative in the telco business and Ward was particularly paranoid about protecting the lines of communication during WW2. Baldwin county had been settled by German immigrant farmers and there was a good bit of German sympathizers in the area which was a  reason for his fears so he took extraordinary measures to protect the system he had created.  The terminal bldg for my 'neck of the woods' is about a mile from my house and is a small non-descript brick building with two huge outdoor fireplaces with elaborate hearths. I asked my old tech what that was all about and thought maybe they liked to hold company picnics and imagined whole hogs and cattle being spit roasted on those. He smiled and said that they only looked like chimneys and hearths as a disguise for the telcom building adjacent. He thought that Nazi aerial surveillance and the local German farmers would be fooled by these measures. He took me on a tour and those were actually machine gun emplacements with carefully laid out crossfire 'kill zones' to protect the terminal building which was actually built more like a bunker with interconnecting tunnels for ventilation and escape! At his headquarters building in Foley he had an underground tunnel that ran to the train depot across the street as well.

 

On This Day in Telephone History May 5TH 1940 War Games in Gulf States Test Availability of the Bell System

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it is not as viable at sea for the immediate future. The satellites are fixed above the location it serves. Starlinks over the mid-ocean are not likely in the near term.

It would be cool if it happens, but I wouldn’t get my hopes up.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, airacer said:

Unfortunately it is not as viable at sea for the immediate future. The satellites are fixed above the location it serves. Starlinks over the mid-ocean are not likely in the near term.

It would be cool if it happens, but I wouldn’t get my hopes up.  

Um... no.  That's not the way it works.  Kinda the whole point is that these are much closer than geosynchronous orbit.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, toddster said:

Um... no.  That's not the way it works.  Kinda the whole point is that these are much closer than geosynchronous orbit.

You’re correct, after some reading up I realize I misunderstood the orbit. Although, I’m still not going to hold my breath. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, toddster said:

Um... no.  That's not the way it works.  Kinda the whole point is that these are much closer than geosynchronous orbit.

Yeah, so the satellites must be doing some kind of cellular-like hand-off as they move overhead.  Seems to me that mobile service in the ocean should be just a software change away.  Likely they are constraining the number of users geographically while they are in beta test mode to prevent overloading a single satellite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not dug deep into what info is out there (or enough to determine which is speculation and which is info) however the best explanation I've heard at this time is that each "cell" on the ground has to have a gateway ground station within it.  The current constellation just relays signals between your dish and the gateway station.  It's kind of like your local cell tower.  Satellite-to-satellite communication via laser links which would allow wider coverage is not yet operational or licensed. Initial testing of these links seems to have just begun in the last couple of weeks.

https://satellitemap.space/indexA.html

https://spacenews.com/spacex-adds-laser-crosslinks-to-polar-starlink-satellites/

https://www.satellitetoday.com/broadband/2021/01/25/latest-starlink-satellites-equipped-with-laser-communications-musk-confirms/

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Why do I need a clear “field of view” to use Starlink?

If you could see the connection between a Starlink satellite and your Starlink, it would look like a single beam between the two objects. As the satellite moves, the beam also moves.

The area within which this beam moves is the “field of view”. If any object such as a tree, chimney, pole, etc. interrupts the path of the beam, even briefly, your internet service will be interrupted.

In early service, the required clear field of view is a 100-degree cone around the center of the dish (after tilting) with a 25 degree elevation minimum. Some obstructions are worse than others. Obstructions low in the sky will cause more outages because satellites are in this area of the sky more frequently.

The best guidance we can give is to install your Starlink at the highest elevation possible where it is safe to do so, with a clear view of the sky. Users who live in areas with lots of tall trees, buildings, etc. may not be good candidates for early use of Starlink. However as more satellites are launched, the field of view constraints will decrease, enabling a wider variety of users.

Most people do not accurately assess their Starlink's field of view. To ensure the best possible service, download the Starlink app to assess field of view in your desired install location before installing.

(from the Starlink FAQ: https://www.starlink.com/faq)

It sounds to me like the Starlink consumer hardware is a ground station. Otherwise it wouldn't need line of sight to the constellation.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, toddster said:

I have not dug deep into what info is out there (or enough to determine which is speculation and which is info) however the best explanation I've heard at this time is that each "cell" on the ground has to have a gateway ground station within it.  The current constellation just relays signals between your dish and the gateway station.

The topology I understood you to be describing was a ground station within each cell and then customers link up to it via terrestrial RF links. That seems like a reasonable way to do a beta rollout if the ground stations aren't quite ready for prime time but you still want picky customers sending packets through the network.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the RF links are through the satellites. The gateway ground stations are far beyond the horizon - like 100 miles away. Except in Alaska since the latest batch of satellites in that orbit have laser-links which allow the cell to be somewhat wider. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, airacer said:

Unfortunately it is not as viable at sea for the immediate future. The satellites are fixed above the location it serves. Starlinks over the mid-ocean are not likely in the near term.

It would be cool if it happens, but I wouldn’t get my hopes up.  

No that's not how it works. These are not geo stationary sats - they are LEO (very LEO) and are moving from horizon to horizon and covering orbits spaced so as to maximise coverage - each orbit takes about 90 minutes. If you sit in the middle of the ocean (northern lats at the mo) then you could probably "see" 4/5 sats  at any point. As one moves out of range, another is coming into view and the dish adjusts electronically to pick up and scan for the sats.

The issue with over ocean coverage is that the sats are programmed to scan for users terminals only in locations where it knows the subscribers are. As you sail the ocean you are effectively roaming from your known address and so the sat is not providing coverage there. I suspect this is just a software limitation and a change down the road could make the sats scan for a signal, sleep if you don't find one. If it does find one then mark that location as needing coverage for X time and so on.

BTW - this 'Roaming' is not just for boats. If they ever want Starlink on commercial airlines then they have the same problem to address although with a more limited number of devices.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing they need to work on to make it truly mobile is the power requirements. It seems that the dish takes around 100 watts of power.

"Reducing power use and latency
Noting that the Starlink dish uses about 100 watts of power, one user asked if that will be reduced to allow more usage scenarios that require portable power supplies, such as on a sailboat. Power reduction is "a key item we are focusing on for the future," the Starlink team said."
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who in this thread actually has Starlink to know what you are talking about?  My dish actually worked on the ground in front of my house.  There was a clear path only to the north down the street.  While the system uses multiple satellites, The dish itself remains stationary, pointed to the path the required satellites take.  Below is the speed test I did just now.

Lohring Miller

 

Starlink speed test 2-18-21.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

what is the current cost for starlink ? per month and equipment cost/rental ect ?

does the ant receiver move to track the sat ?

would the normal movement of a boat roll pitch ect effect the ant receiver reception

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, apophenia said:

The topology I understood you to be describing was a ground station within each cell and then customers link up to it via terrestrial RF links. That seems like a reasonable way to do a beta rollout if the ground stations aren't quite ready for prime time but you still want picky customers sending packets through the network.

There are two types of ground stations:

  1. Gateways used by the satellites to connect to the Internet.
  2. Individual ground stations that connect each user (or router for multiple users) to the satellites.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, apophenia said:

The topology I understood you to be describing was a ground station within each cell and then customers link up to it via terrestrial RF links. That seems like a reasonable way to do a beta rollout if the ground stations aren't quite ready for prime time but you still want picky customers sending packets through the network.

 

That's not how Starlink works - Your antenna/station is yours and not shared and not connected to any other station. The SpaceX ground stations are used for sat to ground relays because most of the sats lack the lasers to connect them together.  Eventually the sat you are connected to will relay your data to the next sat and on down the chain until it finds a sat with a link to a ground station. The current setup requires all the sats to be in view of a ground station and each station has a range of about 400 miles.

spacex_starlink_beta_coverage_fig2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2021 at 12:46 PM, nota said:

what is the current cost for starlink ? per month and equipment cost/rental ect ?

does the ant receiver move to track the sat ?

would the normal movement of a boat roll pitch ect effect the ant receiver reception

500 equipment. 99 a month after.  The dish figures out where it is on its own and moves to aim at the nearest satellite path. I do not know the width of the beam, but I doubt it's more than 5 or 10 degrees.  Not suitable for boats unless they are stationary.  Even rocking in a slip would likely be too much motion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Grrr... said:

500 equipment. 99 a month after.  The dish figures out where it is on its own and moves to aim at the nearest satellite path. I do not know the width of the beam, but I doubt it's more than 5 or 10 degrees.  Not suitable for boats unless they are stationary.  Even rocking in a slip would likely be too much motion. 

Well they have them installed on their own boats for booster recovery and they do pitch and roll a lot.  Will be interesting to see if they give feedback on how they are working. You could always add a stabilised mount for the antenna as with current marine installs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Starlink uses a phased array antenna that "can track satellites across the sky without moving mechanically... with picosecond precision" so is potentially responsive enough to work on boats at sea.  The primary restriction appears to be geo-fencing, a policy/software decision, which limits where each antenna will work.

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/starlink-phased-array-antenna.996493/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

SpaceX plans Starlink broadband for trucks, ships, and planes
Dishes will be modified for vehicles, vessels, and aircraft, SpaceX tells FCC.
JON BRODKIN - 3/8/2021
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/03/spacex-plans-starlink-broadband-for-cars-boats-and-planes/

Quote

SpaceX Service's ESIMs are electrically identical to its previously authorized consumer user terminals but have mountings that allow them to be installed on vehicles, vessels, and aircraft, which are suitable for those environments. SpaceX Service's ESIMs will communicate only with those SpaceX satellites that are visible on the horizon above a minimum elevation angle of 25 degrees. The proposed phased array user terminal will track SpaceX's NGSO [non-geostationary orbit] satellites passing within its field of view. As the terminal steers the transmitting beam, it automatically changes the power to maintain a constant level at the receiving antenna of its target satellite, compensating for variations in antenna gain and path loss associated with the steering angle.
[...]
Musk tweeted in October 2020 that Starlink could be deployed on fast-moving vehicles. "Everything is slow to a phased array antenna," he wrote at the time.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the FCC support documentation, Starlink is seeking licencing for expanded use on  planes, vessels and vehicles..

 

Quote
In this application, SpaceX Services seeks a blanket license authorizing operation of such end-user earth stations for deployment as Vehicle-Mounted Earth Stations (“VMESs”), Earth Stations on Vessels (“ESVs”), and Earth Stations Aboard Aircraft (“ESAAs”) (collectively, Earth Stations in Motion (“ESIMs”)). SpaceX Services seeks authority to deploy and operate these earth stations (1) as VMES throughout the United States and its territories, (2) as ESVs in the territorial waters of the United States and throughout international waters worldwide, and (3) as ESAAs on U.S.-registered aircraft operating worldwide and non-U.S.-registered aircraft operating in U.S. airspace.

 

Ever closer....

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that satellites with usable intercommunication relay links have not yet been launched so boats must be within a few hundred (?) miles of a ground station. Not far offshore. Also Mexico and Caribbean countries are not yet licensed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Borracho said:

My understanding is that satellites with usable intercommunication relay links have not yet been launched so boats must be within a few hundred (?) miles of a ground station. Not far offshore. Also Mexico and Caribbean countries are not yet licensed. 

Looking at https://wccftech.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-laser-test/

A quote from Senior Systems Certification Engineer at SpaceX Kate Tice

Quote

Recently as the Starlink team completed a test of two satellites in orbit that are equipped with our inter-satellite links which we call space lasers. With these space lasers, the starlink satellites were able to transfer hundreds of gigabytes of data. Once these space lasers are fully deployed, Starlink will be one of the fastest options to transmit data all over the world"

I think the operative words are  "fully deployed".

The above quote was from May 2020... I believe the first 2 gen satellites were launched on Jan 24, 2021 ( https://www.elonx.net/starlink-compendium/ )

An interesting site that shows starlink coverage is here:

https://sebsebmc.github.io/starlink-coverage/index.html

( Disclosure: I have no interest or participation in it )

 

I believe that by 2022 we should realistically see starlink as a viable option in the marine world.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, CapDave said:

Yet Elon's twitter reply was newer and claims software upgrades shall unlock geo restrictions.

And Gen2 Sats have been launched...

Yet I do agree that it is probably going to be 2022 before this is going to be a viable option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2021 at 11:01 AM, Grrr... said:

Not suitable for boats unless they are stationary.  Even rocking in a slip would likely be too much motion. 

Paraphrasing Elon "compared to a satellite, the fastest vehicle on the planets surface is standing still".   The issue with starlink in a mobile capacity right now is satellite density.  The constellation is still being launched. But there are Starlink Terminals on boats operating right now, both beta users doing it on the sly, and SpaceX testing them on their drone ships way out in the Atlantic. 

It appears there is a starlink terminal on the side of the SpaceX SN15 Starship Booster that is preparing for a launch in the upcoming week.  That thing will be moving fast and they will likely be using it for live video feeds of the cameras aboard the ship as it does its test flight.  That terminal is mounted on the side of the rocket, so it is basically facing parallel to the earth, putting the sats at an oblique angle. 

The limitation on location right now is due to the coverage being insufficient, so they don't want people putting them on RVs then posting on the internet that they don't work (after they drive their RV south where the sats are not dense enough yet.) 

While the Sats with onboard laser links have been launched starting since late last summer, we don't have info as to whether a significant inter-satellite network is operational now.  There has been a statement that they have tested the links between satellites, and apparently that was successful enough that they did not revise the satellite hardware they are currently launching. 

There has been a statement that they hope to have global coverage by the end of this year.  But I believe that means ground coverage in countries where they have been granted a license to operate.   I think coastal areas will probably be allowed for boats as there is no technical reason not to support them, with a limitation about how far you can go offshore (to maintain simultaneous view of your terminal and an on shore ground station.) 

Most of the above info was gleaned from Elon's various tweets. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2021 at 9:17 AM, ProaSailor said:

Starlink uses a phased array antenna that "can track satellites across the sky without moving mechanically... with picosecond precision" so is potentially responsive enough to work on boats at sea.  The primary restriction appears to be geo-fencing, a policy/software decision, which limits where each antenna will work.

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/starlink-phased-array-antenna.996493/

That phased array antenna is so cool. The US military has used phased array radars (the AEGIS system is built around them) on ships for many decades now. The lack of a physically moving element should mean that correcting for the motion of a moving boat is a software problem and therefore much easier to solve. The military can shoot down ballistic missiles and satellites using phased array radar guidance from ships in a variety of sea states, so hopefully this tech can trickle down to Starlink pointing from moving vessels as well.

 

I hope to move to rural NH before I'm 30 and am planning on using Starlink or similar unless the nature and cost of their service changes hugely in the intervening time. Hadn't thought about bringing it on my sailboat, but my father with 2 commercial fishing boats is very interested in getting a Starlink station. It'd make government and scientific clients much happier if you could facetime them from 250 miles SE of Nantucket instead of sending the occasional terse Iridium message. Power isn't a problem either when you have a 750 HP diesel cranking away!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time I hear about Starlink the first thing I think about is space junk. It pisses off almost every astronomer and satellite operator on the planet. The low reliability satellites are sure to fail within a few years then they will become just more shit to avoid for other satellites. Elon's stated purpose for Starlink is not to bring internet to the world, it's "to make a shitload of money so Elon can go to Mars". Not trying to be a downer, but I turned down the job to be the assembly, test, and launch operations manager for Elon's fleet of shit-sats. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Commercial Boater said:

That phased array antenna is so cool. The US military has used phased array radars (the AEGIS system is built around them) on ships for many decades now. The lack of a physically moving element should mean that correcting for the motion of a moving boat is a software problem and therefore much easier to solve.

The Starlink terminals do have a motor that is used to spin and orient the "dish" (which is really flat) to the part of the sky with the best satellite density, to make it easier on the phased array component.   So you may see references to it moving.  There are teardown of it on YouTube, it is quite an engineering effort getting an expensive phased array down to consumer prices.  Still apparently the terminals are subsidized-- cost them $3,500, you pay $500. 

2 hours ago, Kolibri said:

Every time I hear about Starlink the first thing I think about is space junk. It pisses off almost every astronomer and satellite operator on the planet. The low reliability satellites are sure to fail within a few years then they will become just more shit to avoid for other satellites. Elon's stated purpose for Starlink is not to bring internet to the world, it's "to make a shitload of money so Elon can go to Mars". Not trying to be a downer, but I turned down the job to be the assembly, test, and launch operations manager for Elon's fleet of shit-sats. 

Uh, this is a Low Earth Orbit system. They are in space, but there is still friction from the atmosphere.  That means a dead satellite will deorbit in a matter of weeks.  They have already done this.  They have ion drives to keep them in the correct orbit. So they require active station keeping to keep in place.   They burn up %98 on re-entry, so it is really not a case of any space junk.  The complains we have  seen from "astronomers" were people using really long exposures to capture the light from a recently launched fleet of 60 statellites (where they are still grouped up) which are not yet in their orbit and are much more visible at the right time of day.  Basically fake news. 

They will not occlude telescopes because they are moving far too fast.  By definition a telescope has a narrow field of view.  The narrower the field of view the less light and the less of the night sky can be seen.  This means longer exposure and a very short period of possible occlusion. It's not an issue. 

The stated purpose is to bring internet to the world, and also to bring internet to mars.  Do you think that Elon expects to be digging trenches and laying fiber on mars? 

This constellation will bring high speed, low latency internet to people who have never had access to it before.  Including offshore boats.  Including rural communities who are excluded from global markets or trade at a handicap because they cannot get good pricing information, etc.

That is an objectively good thing for the world, and I really am enthusiastic about giving him money for it-- as he is providing a service that is 1,000 better in price/performance to the alternative (offshore.) 

I do applaud you for turning down that job, though. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there is a shitload of DSP in any real astronomy these days so to some extent starlink interference can be programmed out.  But really, any serious astronomy from now on is going to be done at L4 or the dark side of the moon*.  And Elon can give you a lift there.  

*Until the Chinese start building condos there.  Then we’ll need to go Daniel Boone on their ass again.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, NedZepplin said:

The Starlink terminals do have a motor that is used to spin and orient the "dish" (which is really flat) to the part of the sky with the best satellite density, to make it easier on the phased array component.   So you may see references to it moving.  There are teardown of it on YouTube, it is quite an engineering effort getting an expensive phased array down to consumer prices.  Still apparently the terminals are subsidized-- cost them $3,500, you pay $500. 

Uh, this is a Low Earth Orbit system. They are in space, but there is still friction from the atmosphere.  That means a dead satellite will deorbit in a matter of weeks.  They have already done this.  They have ion drives to keep them in the correct orbit. So they require active station keeping to keep in place.   They burn up %98 on re-entry, so it is really not a case of any space junk.  The complains we have  seen from "astronomers" were people using really long exposures to capture the light from a recently launched fleet of 60 statellites (where they are still grouped up) which are not yet in their orbit and are much more visible at the right time of day.  Basically fake news. 

They will not occlude telescopes because they are moving far too fast.  By definition a telescope has a narrow field of view.  The narrower the field of view the less light and the less of the night sky can be seen.  This means longer exposure and a very short period of possible occlusion. It's not an issue. 

The stated purpose is to bring internet to the world, and also to bring internet to mars.  Do you think that Elon expects to be digging trenches and laying fiber on mars? 

This constellation will bring high speed, low latency internet to people who have never had access to it before.  Including offshore boats.  Including rural communities who are excluded from global markets or trade at a handicap because they cannot get good pricing information, etc.

That is an objectively good thing for the world, and I really am enthusiastic about giving him money for it-- as he is providing a service that is 1,000 better in price/performance to the alternative (offshore.) 

I do applaud you for turning down that job, though. 

You are wrong on several things. I know...I've been building satellites for over 30 years and have a few degrees in aerospace engineering & remote sensing. Over the years I've developed many connections throughout the spacecraft operations world and ground based observatory world. Your claim of "fake news" illustrates that your depth of knowledge on the topic is fairly shallow. 

LEO s/c regularly pass in front of ground based telescopes that are looking at deep space objects for long periods of time. End result is a streak of light through the imaging system. In the case of the early Starlink SC that streak is quite pronounced because solar array glint was not a design consideration. It became one when astronomers raised hell. The solar panels on the next generation ones were improved relative to glint, but it's still an issue. This was not just a problem with the early cluster of 60, it's a problem with many LEO SC on orbit....not just Starlinks. I wonder if you remember the "Iridium flare" issue from that constellation of satellites. It was easily viewable with the naked eye. See photo below and do a little google research.  

You missed the part about "low reliability satellites". Several have already died and cannot be de-orbited by means of their onboard propulsion. It will take years for their orbits to degrade and for them to burn up. In the mean time they are "space junk" for 5 or more years.

Another type of space junk to consider - The communications subsystems for hundreds of SC regularly interfere with the operations of other spacecraft. This is a becoming a bigger and bigger problem every year.

Bringing internet to the world - yes, this is a great thing. I agree as will everyone who can afford $99 / mo and the $499 onetime setup fee for the dish and wi-fi router. Sadly that is way out of reach for many people in this world. 

 

image.png.7debf8ba40181c2b17243c1f24611953.png

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

'Bout wrecked my car on the way to work this morning...with what first looked like a stationary comet above the road.

Then it morphed into a UFO with a wide-ass jet trail jellyfish effect.  SpaceX!

1?ui=2&ik=2ec75c69fe&attid=0.1&permmsgid=msg-a:r-3241474253116609691&th=178fe69d606e59eb&view=fimg&sz=s0-l75-ft&attbid=ANGjdJ9jiVuDmywRe6rDllck9Kh8WRGcS5UcMy9MYcRHH2YAkfgltga8_nM3wsblFRO4ob84I0lFgIcBhlu31x1kCLrFD8RqQiGaCsoBis6CYDJvjFA3reVYTz6nZ4k&disp=emb&realattid=178fe5bc2f74155bd3c1

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Kolibri said:

Every time I hear about Starlink the first thing I think about is space junk. It pisses off almost every astronomer and satellite operator on the planet. The low reliability satellites are sure to fail within a few years then they will become just more shit to avoid for other satellites. Elon's stated purpose for Starlink is not to bring internet to the world, it's "to make a shitload of money so Elon can go to Mars". Not trying to be a downer, but I turned down the job to be the assembly, test, and launch operations manager for Elon's fleet of shit-sats. 

Wow. So astronomers now own the sky and nobody else is allowed to put anything else up there? Also your comments about it being space junk and shit sats really call into question if there is anything of value in your opinions at all.

biased much?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, kof said:

Wow. So astronomers now own the sky and nobody else is allowed to put anything else up there? Also your comments about it being space junk and shit sats really call into question if there is anything of value in your opinions at all.

biased much?

Nice cherry picking on portions of my comments. It's obvious that you have a limited understanding of the issues caused by massive constellations of low earth orbiting spacecraft. Have a nice day. 

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Kolibri said:

I've been building satellites for over 30 years and have a few degrees in aerospace engineering & remote sensing. Over the years I've developed many connections throughout the spacecraft operations world and ground based observatory world. Your claim of "fake news" illustrates that your depth of knowledge on the topic is fairly shallow. 

LEO s/c regularly pass in front of ground based telescopes that are looking at deep space objects for long periods of time. End result is a streak of light through the imaging system. In the case of the early Starlink SC that streak is quite pronounced because solar array glint was not a design consideration. It became one when astronomers raised hell. The solar panels on the next generation ones were improved relative to glint, but it's still an issue. This was not just a problem with the early cluster of 60, it's a problem with many LEO SC on orbit....not just Starlinks. I wonder if you remember the "Iridium flare" issue from that constellation of satellites. It was easily viewable with the naked eye. See photo below and do a little google research.  

You missed the part about "low reliability satellites". Several have already died and cannot be de-orbited by means of their onboard propulsion. It will take years for their orbits to degrade and for them to burn up. In the mean time they are "space junk" for 5 or more years.

Another type of space junk to consider - The communications subsystems for hundreds of SC regularly interfere with the operations of other spacecraft. This is a becoming a bigger and bigger problem every year.

Bringing internet to the world - yes, this is a great thing. I agree as will everyone who can afford $99 / mo and the $499 onetime setup fee for the dish and wi-fi router. Sadly that is way out of reach for many people in this world. 

 

image.png.7debf8ba40181c2b17243c1f24611953.png

It's kinda hilarious that on one hand you decry Starlink because it will likely make SpaceX a lot of money, by helping millions of people who cannot currently get broadband in their locations-- because it is currently cost prohibitive-- and at the same time whine that "this is way out of reach for many people in the world."    Bringing costs down by orders of magnitude allows many more people access to this service than would have it before, and of course over time these costs will come down further. 

Your purpose here is collectivist virtue signaling and like many others who pretend to be moral, you end up bashing a project that benefits millions of people while simultaneously whining that millions more can't (you insist with no evidence) afford any access and won't benefit.  I'm sure it never occurred to you that a village could install a terminal and a cheap wifi adapter, and share the connection, because-- despite this being a popular practice in Africa for decades-- I don't believe you really understand the people in whose name you want to virtue signal.  

Hell, given the fact Elon has already wired up remote Alaskan villages, many of them probably will never have to pay a dime. 

Further, given the nature of the way Starlink works, many of those areas would be much cheaper for Elon to help because the bandwidth would not be used otherwise.  So the pricing for them may be again drastically cheaper than for the west.  Or free, as out of pocket it just costs Elon the cost of a ground station.  But you don't understand the economics of the situation or apparently the technical details of this system or maybe you don't care.  It doesn't matter.

At the end of the day, taking this position is a confession that you really don't care about the millions who do benefit, and that your position is ideological.  

As for the rest of your response you admit these are in fact LEO sats, that they will in fact deorbit by themselves, even if they fail completely.  

But the best part is when you are forced to pretend that deep space telescopes are all still using 1850s technology where a single streak ruins the photographic plate!  

Shiver me timbers!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Kolibri said:

Nice cherry picking on portions of my comments. It's obvious that you have a limited understanding of the issues caused by massive constellations of low earth orbiting spacecraft. Have a nice day. 

This is standard issue evasion-- he makes a point, you evade it by simple accusing him of "cherry picking" because he didn't take the time to go thru and refute every single bit of your FUD. 

Then you try to turn your evasion into a personal attack by disparaging his "understanding of the issues" -- I notice you did the same thing to me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, NedZepplin said:

It's kinda hilarious that on one hand you decry Starlink because it will likely make SpaceX a lot of money, by helping millions of people who cannot currently get and good broadband in their locations--because it is currently cost prohibitive-- and at the same time whine that "this is way out of reach for many people in the world."    Bringing costs down by orders of magnitude allows many more people access to this service than would have it before, and of course over time these costs will come down further. 

Your purpose here is collectivist virtue signaling and like many others who pretend to be moral, you end up bashing a project benefit millions of people while simultaneously whining that millions more can't (you insist with no evidence) afford any access and won't benefit.  I'm sure it never occurred to you that a village could install a terminal and a cheap wifi adapter, and share the connection, because despite this being a popular practice in Africa for decades I don't believe you really understand the people in whose name you want to virtue signal.  

Hell, given the fact Elon has already wired up remote Alaskan  villages this way, many of them probably will never have to pay a dime. 

In fact, given the nature of the way Starlink Works, those areas would be much cheaper for Elon to help because the bandwidth would not be used otherwise, so the pricing for them may be again drastically cheaper than for the west.  But you don't understand the economics of the situation or apparently the technical details of this system or maybe you don't care.  It doesn't matter.

At the end of the day, taking this position is a confession that you really don't care about the millions who do benefit, and that your position is ideological.  

As for the rest of your response you admit these are in fact LEO sats, that they will in fact deorbit by themselves, even if they fail completely.  

But the best part is when you are forced to pretend that deep space telescopes are all still using 1850s technology where a single streak ruins the photographic plate!  

Shiver me timbers!

Yeah...you read the marketing pitch on the Starlink website, slept in a Holiday Inn express, and then regurgitate the marketing pitch with the verbiage of a 1st grade science student. That makes. you more of an expert than someone with 30 years of experience in the space industry and all of his colleagues in earth and space sciences with countless years of experience. Not to mention the thousands of advanced degrees shared by said group. Have a nice day dipshit. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kolibri said:

Yeah...you read the marketing pitch on the Starlink website, slept in a Holiday Inn express, and then regurgitate the marketing pitch with the verbiage of a 1st grade science student. That makes. you more of an expert than someone with 30 years of experience in the space industry and all of his colleagues in earth and space sciences with countless years of experience. Not to mention the thousands of advanced degrees shared by said group. Have a nice day dipshit. 

You have engaged in a personal attack or ad hominem in every single one of your posts on this thread. Including before I stepped in to correct you.  Further, you have failed to even attempt to defend your claims, instead insisting you are an expert-- which is the logical fallacy of argument from authority.  Further, since I proved you wrong in your claims about basic physics, the configuration of this constellation and how astronomy works, why should any of us believe you are an expert at all?

What is it called when you make and argument from authority fallacy -- but aren't an authority at all?  I guess for you it's time to roll out the explicatives.  So devastating. 

Nowhere near as devastating-- I admit I'm gleeful to remind you-- as the moral hypocrisy I just laid bare where you opposed improving millions of peoples lives based on your unsupported claim that someone people might not also benefit.

And so here we are.  All I have to do is describe what you have done, and you are reduced to telling obvious lies and using foul language to construct insults.

How are you not embarrassed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Kolibri said:

Nice cherry picking on portions of my comments. It's obvious that you have a limited understanding of the issues caused by massive constellations of low earth orbiting spacecraft. Have a nice day. 

No cherry picking from me, just trying to see whether you have a valid argument or just a biased poster who skews data to suit your perspective. 

So are you going to take an equal stance against Oneweb, Amazon, the Chinese (they have plans to put 10k sats in low orbit) and not just SpaceX and their “shit sats”?

Also maybe you don’t realise that the Starlink sats are very low orbit so even if (very few and their reliability is improving) fail and their deorbit kit also fails, they will deorbit due to atmospheric drag in 2  to 3 years at a max( and not your “at least 5 years”). High earth orbit sats will take 10+ years to come back down. 
 

oh and in the space industry, an operational sat is not usually termed space junk. It’s there doing it’s job and only when it’s left loitering unused is it called junk. Far as I can tell SpaceX are doing everything to avoid leaving unused kit behind.
 

have a good one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2021 at 3:20 AM, kof said:

No cherry picking from me, just trying to see whether you have a valid argument or just a biased poster who skews data to suit your perspective. 

So are you going to take an equal stance against Oneweb, Amazon, the Chinese (they have plans to put 10k sats in low orbit) and not just SpaceX and their “shit sats”?

Also maybe you don’t realise that the Starlink sats are very low orbit so even if (very few and their reliability is improving) fail and their deorbit kit also fails, they will deorbit due to atmospheric drag in 2  to 3 years at a max( and not your “at least 5 years”). High earth orbit sats will take 10+ years to come back down. 
 

oh and in the space industry, an operational sat is not usually termed space junk. It’s there doing it’s job and only when it’s left loitering unused is it called junk. Far as I can tell SpaceX are doing everything to avoid leaving unused kit behind.
 

have a good one.

Yes, there are issues with all of the low earth orbit super constellations. And yes, I realize that StarLinks are in low earth orbit. I guess you missed the bit where I noted that I have 30 years experience building satellites and advanced degrees on the various subject matters involved. 

You are correct, you were not cherry picking. You just suffer from reading comprehension issues. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2021 at 5:08 AM, NedZepplin said:

You have engaged in a personal attack or ad hominem in every single one of your posts on this thread. Including before I stepped in to correct you.  Further, you have failed to even attempt to defend your claims, instead insisting you are an expert-- which is the logical fallacy of argument from authority.

I don't have a dog in this fight. But can I just register in to say that clearly what you wrote was a personal attack, albeit done in a very passive-aggressive manner? 

Everyone here is probably most interested in what is factually accurate and what is not. And then, when there are disagreements as to the facts in technical discussions, that's okay too, and flaming each other can make for entertaining reading when the writing is clever (so long as it doesn't go to extremes of on forever).

But the when I read the phrases "ad hominem" and "logical fallacy of argument from authority," it makes me want to ignore anything else you've written. It suggests that you have a cancel-culture mindset and don't have respect for seniority or authority, because you think you are smarter than everyone else.  Maybe you should start your own satellite company, and show the rest of us engineers a thing or two!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"you don't have respect for seniority or authority".  

You're god damn right. I respect anyone who has experience and can demonstrate it by explaining how I am wrong by talking to the point.  Hell, I'm used to the terrible arguments people make-- I'll work to figure out what they are trying to say and address it.  But make actual arguments. And to the point. 

I have zero respect for anyone who demands that I not question them based on *their* claims of "seniority" or "authority". 

I don't lick boots, I don't bend the knee and I won't kiss your ring.  Only pussies do that.

Cause if this is one of those forums lorded over by a bunch of insecure premadonna pussies who can't handle disagreement, no matter how reasoned, and whom know they can get away the kind of hypocrisy displayed above-- safe in the knowneldge the moderators will give the boot or censor anyone who dares present a counter argument -- let me know now.

Just send me a DM and warn me if that's the case.

Because I don't do safe spaces.  Yeah, yeah, I know we are supposed to call them "brave spaces", but fuck that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously have a dog in this fight.  If you cared at all about facts you would be honest about the fact that my responses to every claim have been factual.   You would be honest about the fact that, rather than respond to his blatant personal attacks, I merely documented them.  

Of course it is hypocrisy to characterize me in a derogatory fashion based only on your speculation, also known as a personal attack, while ignoring the fact Kolbari has insulted people in response to them pointing out facts that embarrassed him.   But you "have no dog in this fight". 

You want to ignore anything I write because I pointed out logical fallacies?  Great!  I would be quite happy for you and Kolbari both to practice that, as I would much rather talk about the topic.  But when you attack me with these lies, it's so easy --and so delicious -- to destroy you with the truth!

The cherry of course is:  "Maybe you should start your own satellite company, and show the rest of us engineers a thing or two!"

After all, all I did was point out easily verifiable facts that I discovered from Elon Musks public statements-- and yes, I do in fact think that Elon Musk is smarter than both of you. 

But why would I start a satellite company?  I'm grateful for Starlink.   No, it is Kolbari who is demanding obsequiousness based on his claims that he knows better than Musk.

So that kind of snotty comment hits a bullseye when directed at Kolari. 

Why aren't you asking him why he doesn't start a satellite company, since you claim to have "no dog in this fight"?

No need to reply, we all know the answer.

Absolutely hilarious.

 

On 4/26/2021 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hands said:

I don't have a dog in this fight. But can I just register in to say that clearly what you wrote was a personal attack, albeit done in a very passive-aggressive manner? 

Everyone here is probably most interested in what is factually accurate and what is not. And then, when there are disagreements as to the facts in technical discussions, that's okay too, and flaming each other can make for entertaining reading when the writing is clever (so long as it doesn't go to extremes of on forever).

But the when I read the phrases "ad hominem" and "logical fallacy of argument from authority," it makes me want to ignore anything else you've written. It suggests that you have a cancel-culture mindset and don't have respect for seniority or authority, because you think you are smarter than everyone else.  Maybe you should start your own satellite company, and show the rest of us engineers a thing or two!

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NedZepplin said:

I don't lick boots, I don't bend the knee and I won't kiss your ring.  Only pussies do that.

Cause if this is one of those forums lorded over by a bunch of insecure premadonna pussies who can't handle disagreement, no matter how reasoned, and whom know they can get away the kind of hypocrisy displayed above-- safe in the knowneldge the moderators will give the boot or censor anyone who dares present a counter argument -- let me know now.

Just send me a DM and warn me if that's the case.

Because I don't do safe spaces.  Yeah, yeah, I know we are supposed to call them "brave spaces", but fuck that.

You must be the new kid around here (<20 posts). Just so's you knows: the denizens here only like amusing trolls. "DM me" was a good start. Kolibri has already established his creds - what are yours?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2021 at 3:24 PM, Kolibri said:

Yes, there are issues with all of the low earth orbit super constellations. And yes, I realize that StarLinks are in low earth orbit. I guess you missed the bit where I noted that I have 30 years experience building satellites and advanced degrees on the various subject matters involved. 

You are correct, you were not cherry picking. You just suffer from reading comprehension issues. 

Yawn. 
 

and moving on to other less annoying discussions…

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, NedZepplin said:

Cause if this is one of those forums lorded over by a bunch of insecure premadonna pussies who can't handle disagreement, no matter how reasoned, and whom know they can get away the kind of hypocrisy displayed above-- safe in the knowneldge the moderators will give the boot or censor anyone who dares present a counter argument -- let me know now.

Hell, you can't get booted off here without trying really really hard. Even then, Scot might just give you a 2-week timeout.

So, either try harder or stop being an asshole.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2021 at 5:06 AM, Jim in Halifax said:

You must be the new kid around here (<20 posts). Just so's you knows: the denizens here only like amusing trolls. "DM me" was a good start. Kolibri has already established his creds - what are yours?

Easy-- I proved Kalimari wrong on so many counts that he had to airlift his friends in here to torpedo discussion with personal insults.  So whatever you believe his credibility is, obviously mine is higher.

PS-- Love the irony of pointing out that I am new in response to my question of whether this was forum where longstanding members would dish out attacks and new people were expected to just take it-- you just proved me right while trying to pretend like I'm trolling!  Hilarious unintentional confession there.

On 4/29/2021 at 10:27 AM, Ishmael said:

Hell, you can't get booted off here without trying really really hard. Even then, Scot might just give you a 2-week timeout.

So, either try harder or stop being an asshole.

Oh, no, exposing frauds is a public service.  Makes me a hero, not an asshole.  That you guys are piling on with the name calling only proves me right.  Every personal attack, every post off topic just piles on the proof of my point.

But please, feel free to keep crying!

On 4/29/2021 at 9:03 AM, Israel Hands said:

We have 2 newbie kids here. Both wankers. :rolleyes:

Haha, I know it sucks to have your own words used against you, with such devastating fashion, but your tears are delicious!

But thanks again for confirming my perception-- I am apparently quite perceptive-- that people like you think that longevity on the forum determines truth!  Unfortunately, the "Abuse newbies until they kiss our ass" only works if you have an enforcer to censor or kick off the ones who actually are willing to stand up to your tactics. You know, people who are armed with facts, logic, science, etc.  All those evil "racist" tactics.  -- Or worse, gives as good as he gets.

<waves>

Every time you respond with name calling it just shows how completely bankrupt you are-- in intellect, integrity, rhetoric, etc.

You are all free to actually start posting about starlink.  I encourage it.

Every time you choose not to, you just give me an opportunity to point out how, you are now reduced to just hurling your impotent insults.  Probably because as an authoritarian bootlicker, you have chosen to cuck yourself.  For here you are, instead of learning something, you are sobbing about how you were embarrassed by someone with only a few posts on this forum. 

Every time you open the door with your insults, and all I have to do is document what you are doing, and what it says about you.  I don't even have to insult you-- because your actions insult yourself!

Alas, I am starting to think  that your IQs are too low to recognize this.  Look, there's another opportunity to prove me wrong!

But on the other hand, if you decide to actually post on the topic, with no stupid insults, then you stop giving me an opportunity to illuminate your hypocrisy... and we can return to the topic.

BE BETTER!

Your choice, "wanker". 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just gonna repost this because it is highly relevant to the future of Starlink.   Ignore the fact I'm refuting a commies virtue signaling about how poor people can't afford it, but notice that the nature of this constellation turns the economics of delivery on its head.

Traditionally the "last mile" has been the most expensive part of any internet service.  Backbones have been long established and are high capacity, but running cable, fiber or whatever to an individual home has been really expensive.

Starlink is radically different. It is rather expensive (though cheap for a satellite constellation of this size) it is both backbone and last mile.  Already this year the sats being launched have inter-sat laser connections after the successful tests of those links last fall. 

This means that -- as other have pointed out-- ground stations are less necessary.

But given the global coverage due to the nature of the orbits, places like Africa, which may never justify ground stations can still be covered. 

This goes for the ocean as well.

Thus the constellation is a fixed capital cost with a fixed recurring maintenance cost, but the revenue is the gym membership model.

Every additional subscriber has near zero incremental cost.  Meaning great profitability eventually, but also cheap service for place that need it most.

So the Starlink haters are of course ideological, as they have revealed above. The perversion of communism is that when you keep people down, they need you for survival.  They hate the idea of near free fast internet for africa. 

Quote

It's kinda hilarious that on one hand you decry Starlink because it will likely make SpaceX a lot of money, by helping millions of people who cannot currently get broadband in their locations-- because it is currently cost prohibitive-- and at the same time whine that "this is way out of reach for many people in the world."    Bringing costs down by orders of magnitude allows many more people access to this service than would have it before, and of course over time these costs will come down further. 

Your purpose here is collectivist virtue signaling and like many others who pretend to be moral, you end up bashing a project that benefits millions of people while simultaneously whining that millions more can't (you insist with no evidence) afford any access and won't benefit.  I'm sure it never occurred to you that a village could install a terminal and a cheap wifi adapter, and share the connection, because-- despite this being a popular practice in Africa for decades-- I don't believe you really understand the people in whose name you want to virtue signal.  

Hell, given the fact Elon has already wired up remote Alaskan villages, many of them probably will never have to pay a dime. 

Further, given the nature of the way Starlink works, many of those areas would be much cheaper for Elon to help because the bandwidth would not be used otherwise.  So the pricing for them may be again drastically cheaper than for the west.  Or free, as out of pocket it just costs Elon the cost of a ground station.  But you don't understand the economics of the situation or apparently the technical details of this system or maybe you don't care.  It doesn't matter.

At the end of the day, taking this position is a confession that you really don't care about the millions who do benefit, and that your position is ideological.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, NedZepplin said:

I'm just gonna repost this because it is highly relevant to the future of Starlink.   Ignore the fact I'm refuting a commies...

Holy crap you are tedious. Nobody here gives a shit about your facts or credentials. Do you think this is Cruiser's Forum? We already have one or two of your elk where one is too many.

  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NedZepplin said:

I'm just gonna repost this because it is highly relevant to the future of Starlink.

 

Jesus. You didn't manage to get those 3 of 300HP engines into your catamaran but there's no need to take it out on us for being right. Or perhaps you're just another tedious blowhard who thinks we give a fuck.

Well, I don't because you're not funny and you're irritating so - goodbye.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just figured it out- this tear-drinking couch commando who "uses our own words against us in such a devastating fashion" is none other than Kim Jung Un himself! 

Who else but a North Korean leader writes in this manner? "you are now reduced to just hurling your impotent insults.  Probably because as an authoritarian bootlicker, you have chosen to cuck yourself.  For here you are, instead of learning something, you are sobbing about how you were embarrassed by someone with only a few posts on this forum."

Next he will be calling us dotards! 

Here's the funny part- I'm interested in the possibilities of Starlink. I want to read about technical pros and cons. Just not from this guy. If you want to discuss technology, don't act like a twat.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Israel Hands said:

I've just figured it out- this tear-drinking couch commando who "uses our own words against us in such a devastating fashion" is none other than Kim Jung Un himself! 

Who else but a North Korean leader writes in this manner? "you are now reduced to just hurling your impotent insults.  Probably because as an authoritarian bootlicker, you have chosen to cuck yourself.  For here you are, instead of learning something, you are sobbing about how you were embarrassed by someone with only a few posts on this forum."

Next he will be calling us dotards! 

Here's the funny part- I'm interested in the possibilities of Starlink. I want to read about technical pros and cons. Just not from this guy. If you want to discuss technology, don't act like a twat.

I already put the dimwits on mute. I could post my resume along with the resumes of > 100 spacecraft engineers, mission operations engineers, astronomers, and satellite data using earth scientists along with their opinions on Starlink and he would squawk, "fake news" because they don't understand the issues. Oh well...at least they know that satellites in low earth orbit, "move really fast". 

On to the requested technical discussion. Here's another constellation of satellites that may blow Starlink out of the water once it's operational in a couple years. They intend to provide space based, cell phone coverage as an add on option to your existing cell phone plan. https://ast-science.com/

The big advantage of AST SpaceMobile's approach is that they don't need repeater towers all over the place like Starlink. I reviewed the make up of their staff and checked out how many patents they have gotten. They know what they are doing on the communications & SC manufacturing fronts. The standard downside is that it's another big constellation of potential space junk....Even if the satellites are operational these massive constellations are making satellite launches and on orbit operations much more difficult. The number of collision avoidance maneuvers having to be performed due to massive constellations is rapidly growing. Then there's the problem of some SC operators who refuse to perform avoidance maneuvers or are not equipped to keep up the scale of the issues that they helped create. Here's an interesting primer article. There are many more that are easily found via Google searches.

https://www.esa.int/Safety_Security/ESA_spacecraft_dodges_large_constellation

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2020 at 10:27 AM, h20man said:

Elon Musk in response to a twitter question said that Starlink should work on boats....

 

So.. Fantastic.. as then we can be connected wherever we are...

 

 

 

 

Not fantastic.  The last thing I want to be is connected to civilisation when out there.
I want to get away from all that bullshit at least for a time.

Each to their own, and if you think it i fantastic, good for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites