Author Topic: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2  (Read 1117066 times)

Offline Confusador

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 372
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1720 on: 07/28/2020 01:15 pm »
ISLs don't just allow increase in revenue but decrease in costs as you don't need as many ground stations or interconnection fees.

But I do suspect significant increase in revenue. With ISLs, you can now serve customers far away from any ground stations.

Especially since their primary customer wants truly global coverage, and putting together that ground station network would be a LOT of work.
Their primary customer is consumers and businesses. The US govt will be a minority of Starlink business, even if they appear to be somewhat of an early anchor customer.

I know it’s hard to imagine, but consumers and businesses have a LOT more money to spend on this than the US DoD does. The DoD has like a couple billion at most to spend on stuff like Starlink. Comcast’s revenue was >$100 billion last year.

Those consumers and businesses are clustered in cities where Starlink's value proposition is a lot lower.  Don't overestimate how much of Comcast's business they're going to capture in the next decade.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36422
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20786
  • Likes Given: 10796
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1721 on: 07/28/2020 01:19 pm »
ISLs don't just allow increase in revenue but decrease in costs as you don't need as many ground stations or interconnection fees.

But I do suspect significant increase in revenue. With ISLs, you can now serve customers far away from any ground stations.

Especially since their primary customer wants truly global coverage, and putting together that ground station network would be a LOT of work.
Their primary customer is consumers and businesses. The US govt will be a minority of Starlink business, even if they appear to be somewhat of an early anchor customer.

I know it’s hard to imagine, but consumers and businesses have a LOT more money to spend on this than the US DoD does. The DoD has like a couple billion at most to spend on stuff like Starlink. Comcast’s revenue was >$100 billion last year.

Those consumers and businesses are clustered in cities where Starlink's value proposition is a lot lower.  Don't overestimate how much of Comcast's business they're going to capture in the next decade.
I’m not. Just pointing out the scale of consumer and business spending is FAR greater than military spending. That’s the real nut.

Keep in mind Comcast is just one business among several... there’s AT&T (market cap $209B), Verizon (market cap $235B), and foreign telecoms. Starlink can compete with all of them (altho at first only with their fixed, non-mobile services) to the extent that their constellation has enough capacity. Maybe they can get 5-10% in cities, but a lot more in rural areas. And not just in the US but globally.

The US military’s telecoms budget is small potatoes and does not drive SpaceX/Starlink’s valuation except as a risk-reducing anchor customer.

There are a few fan (or hater) theories about Starlink that are really silly. The biggest is that they’ll get enormous revenue from high frequency trading telecoms (the market for those services is less than $1 billion, and things like shortwave radio have lower latency). The next one, a bit less ridiculous but still a little silly is that “the REAL customer for Starlink is the US military.” Yes, Starlink is great for the military, but the actual amount of revenue that provides is minscule. Consumers and businesses provide literally orders of magnitude greater revenue possibility, and THAT possibility is why SpaceX is able to raise money even at a $44B valuation.
« Last Edit: 07/28/2020 01:28 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline intelati

Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1722 on: 07/28/2020 01:28 pm »
ISLs don't just allow increase in revenue but decrease in costs as you don't need as many ground stations or interconnection fees.

But I do suspect significant increase in revenue. With ISLs, you can now serve customers far away from any ground stations.

Especially since their primary customer wants truly global coverage, and putting together that ground station network would be a LOT of work.
Their primary customer is consumers and businesses. The US govt will be a minority of Starlink business, even if they appear to be somewhat of an early anchor customer.

I know it’s hard to imagine, but consumers and businesses have a LOT more money to spend on this than the US DoD does. The DoD has like a couple billion at most to spend on stuff like Starlink. Comcast’s revenue was >$100 billion last year.

Those consumers and businesses are clustered in cities where Starlink's value proposition is a lot lower.  Don't overestimate how much of Comcast's business they're going to capture in the next decade.
I’m not. Just pointing out the scale of consumer and business spending is FAR greater than military spending. That’s the real nut.

Keep in mind Comcast is just one business among several... there’s AT&T (market cap $209B), Verizon (market cap $235B), and foreign telecoms. Starlink can compete with all of them (altho at first only with their fixed, non-mobile services) to the extent that their constellation has enough capacity. Maybe they can get 5-10% in cities, but a lot more in rural areas. And not just in the US but globally.

The US military’s telecoms budget is small potatoes and does not drive SpaceX/Starlink’s valuation except as a risk-reducing anchor customer.

Oh absolutely.

I see the Military as the initial customer to get the network to its full strength. Once that gets set up I see the military keeping the same small footprint, but the majority of the service will be used as an invisible backbone for low latency applications
Starships are meant to fly

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36422
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20786
  • Likes Given: 10796
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1723 on: 07/28/2020 01:36 pm »
ISLs don't just allow increase in revenue but decrease in costs as you don't need as many ground stations or interconnection fees.

But I do suspect significant increase in revenue. With ISLs, you can now serve customers far away from any ground stations.

Especially since their primary customer wants truly global coverage, and putting together that ground station network would be a LOT of work.
Their primary customer is consumers and businesses. The US govt will be a minority of Starlink business, even if they appear to be somewhat of an early anchor customer.

I know it’s hard to imagine, but consumers and businesses have a LOT more money to spend on this than the US DoD does. The DoD has like a couple billion at most to spend on stuff like Starlink. Comcast’s revenue was >$100 billion last year.

Those consumers and businesses are clustered in cities where Starlink's value proposition is a lot lower.  Don't overestimate how much of Comcast's business they're going to capture in the next decade.
I’m not. Just pointing out the scale of consumer and business spending is FAR greater than military spending. That’s the real nut.

Keep in mind Comcast is just one business among several... there’s AT&T (market cap $209B), Verizon (market cap $235B), and foreign telecoms. Starlink can compete with all of them (altho at first only with their fixed, non-mobile services) to the extent that their constellation has enough capacity. Maybe they can get 5-10% in cities, but a lot more in rural areas. And not just in the US but globally.

The US military’s telecoms budget is small potatoes and does not drive SpaceX/Starlink’s valuation except as a risk-reducing anchor customer.

Oh absolutely.

I see the Military as the initial customer to get the network to its full strength. Once that gets set up I see the military keeping the same small footprint, but the majority of the service will be used as an invisible backbone for low latency applications
Disagree. Low latency services is still a small part of their total revenue. Backbone companies are MUCH smaller than you’d think. Cogent Communications, one of the biggest internet backbone providers, has a market cap of just $4 billion, 50 times smaller than Comcast, Verizon, or AT&T. Even a smaller regional player like Cox communications has a market cap 5 times that size. Consumers are where the real money is.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4866
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2602
  • Likes Given: 3308
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1724 on: 07/28/2020 01:38 pm »
I think the laser ISL are just waiting for them to reach the performance, price, and manufacturability points they want on that assembly.  They'll need to make thousands of them a year.

I’d still expect to see some test satellites included in one or more of the launches.  Perhaps they have done this and not said anything.  But typically they do let the public know the outlines of what they are doing.

Cost, size and weight are important but maybe they haven’t gotten the tech to work yet.   It’s a very difficult problem.

However, it’s critical to having a global footprint and coverage over oceans. 

I’m not worried about it at this point, it will come along in some future version.
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36422
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20786
  • Likes Given: 10796
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1725 on: 07/28/2020 01:42 pm »
Starlink has been more under-wraps than most SpaceX activities.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4866
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2602
  • Likes Given: 3308
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1726 on: 07/28/2020 02:39 pm »
Starlink has been more under-wraps than most SpaceX activities.

LOL, I appreciate the tease. 
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5224
  • Florida
  • Liked: 4841
  • Likes Given: 1097
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1727 on: 07/28/2020 09:56 pm »
Initial operational state milestone has been stated as being having 1400 operational sats. Current is ~540 to 600 depending on how you count the V0.9 sats and all those that have been deactivated it could be a few less than 540. In order to get to 1400 at 2 launches a month average will take ~8 months or somewhere around April 2021. So delaying ILS until later such as beginning of 2021 when Beta test is finishing up and has collected significant amounts of data is not that unrealistic. Meaning waiting 6 more months before testing first ILS V0.9 implementation on a batch of 60 that comprises completely a couple of close neighboring rings is a likely case. This is likely to include as many as 4 launches of this ILS V0.9 version while working on an upgraded better performing version. Followed in a couple of months with possible upgraded ILS V1.0 and thereafter a lot more of that version until something better is designed with less cost and more capability.

Such that by Mid 2021 there could be as many as 700 ILS capable sats in a sat constellation of 1700 sats. By EOY that would be 1400 ILS capable sats in a constellation of 2400 sats. Global sat link comm would be available 24/7 with capability to connect direct back to a US Gateway from anywhere in the world.

NOTE the US DOD communication evaluation study ends in 2022.
« Last Edit: 07/28/2020 09:56 pm by oldAtlas_Eguy »

Offline vsatman

Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1728 on: 07/29/2020 07:47 am »
ILS is only needed for services in the seas and oceans. On land, most countries still require gateways to control traffic by local police. The question is what is the assessment of the telecom market of sea and air transportation (IFC - In Flight Communication).

//The global maritime satellite communication market size is expected to grow from USD 2.3 billion in 2020 to USD 3.2 billion by 2025, at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 7.1% during the forecast period. Escalating need for enriched data communication to improve operation efficiency, on-board security and surveillance, and employee/passenger welfare in the maritime industry is driving the market. https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/maritime-satellite-communication-market-113822978.html

Offline OTV Booster

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4464
  • Terra is my nation; currently Kansas
  • Liked: 3085
  • Likes Given: 5014
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1729 on: 07/29/2020 04:39 pm »
Integrating ISL into a non ISL constellation has been bugging me. I think I've got a seed idea for a transition that adds the capability while still using the older sats.


The core idea is to salt ISL sats throughout the existing constellation such that there are always at least two visible to each ground station at all times. When a ground station needs to forward data that will need more than one hop it will preferentially use an ISL sat. The ISL sats in turn will be dedicated to ISL and ground stations with no end user access, but will still have the capability.


As the number of ISL sats increases, the cross link bandwidth demands on any one sat decreases and end user connections become feasible.


An exception to the early ISL sats not doing end user service would be over water where end user bandwidth will not be great while that market is developing. Another exception might be to edge end user service a bit further south (in the northern hemisphere).


A new service area, Europe for example, would still need a ground station(s) early in the transition but as the number of ISL sats increases a ground station for a new service area would not be needed unless local regulatory requirements demand it. Likewise, preexisting ground stations would need to stick around only as long as non ISL bandwidth, cable head needs and hitting FCC milestones dictate.


Phil
We are on the cusp of revolutionary access to space. One hallmark of a revolution is that there is a disjuncture through which projections do not work. The thread must be picked up anew and the tapestry of history woven with a fresh pattern.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1973
  • Liked: 1988
  • Likes Given: 8700
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1730 on: 08/04/2020 06:27 pm »
On July 29 and 30, SpaceX had conference calls with Commissioner Carr and folks at the FCC International Bureau.  SpaceX's ex-parte notice of the calls contains some interesting information (see Slide 3).

*SpaceX has invested hundreds of millions of dollars to date
*Manufacturing satellites at a rate of 120 per month
*Invested over $70 million developing and producing thousands of user terminals
*Currently manufacturing user terminals at rate of thousands per month
*High-rate manufacturing of user terminals soon
*Beta service started with hundreds of testers

Offline mdee

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Portugal
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1731 on: 08/05/2020 10:15 pm »
ISLs don't just allow increase in revenue but decrease in costs as you don't need as many ground stations or interconnection fees.

But I do suspect significant increase in revenue. With ISLs, you can now serve customers far away from any ground stations.

Especially since their primary customer wants truly global coverage, and putting together that ground station network would be a LOT of work.
Their primary customer is consumers and businesses. The US govt will be a minority of Starlink business, even if they appear to be somewhat of an early anchor customer.

I know it’s hard to imagine, but consumers and businesses have a LOT more money to spend on this than the US DoD does. The DoD has like a couple billion at most to spend on stuff like Starlink. Comcast’s revenue was >$100 billion last year.

Those consumers and businesses are clustered in cities where Starlink's value proposition is a lot lower.  Don't overestimate how much of Comcast's business they're going to capture in the next decade.
I’m not. Just pointing out the scale of consumer and business spending is FAR greater than military spending. That’s the real nut.

Keep in mind Comcast is just one business among several... there’s AT&T (market cap $209B), Verizon (market cap $235B), and foreign telecoms. Starlink can compete with all of them (altho at first only with their fixed, non-mobile services) to the extent that their constellation has enough capacity. Maybe they can get 5-10% in cities, but a lot more in rural areas. And not just in the US but globally.

The US military’s telecoms budget is small potatoes and does not drive SpaceX/Starlink’s valuation except as a risk-reducing anchor customer.

Oh absolutely.

I see the Military as the initial customer to get the network to its full strength. Once that gets set up I see the military keeping the same small footprint, but the majority of the service will be used as an invisible backbone for low latency applications
Disagree. Low latency services is still a small part of their total revenue. Backbone companies are MUCH smaller than you’d think. Cogent Communications, one of the biggest internet backbone providers, has a market cap of just $4 billion, 50 times smaller than Comcast, Verizon, or AT&T. Even a smaller regional player like Cox communications has a market cap 5 times that size. Consumers are where the real money is.

I totally agree with you, initially the first customer must be the army!.

If we look at the majority of past technologies, the army first tested it before it was released to the public.

Let's see if the new generation of starlink will not affect the vision of astronomers.
« Last Edit: 08/06/2020 12:28 pm by mdee »
Neil Armstrong : Houston, Tranquillity Base here. The Eagle has landed.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4987
  • Likes Given: 6458
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1732 on: 08/05/2020 10:32 pm »
If we look at the majority of past technologies, the army first tested it before it was released to the public.

I don't think that's true at all.  Some technologies were first used by the military, but the vast majority of technologies I can think of were not.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4866
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2602
  • Likes Given: 3308
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1733 on: 08/05/2020 10:34 pm »
If we look at the majority of past technologies, the army first tested it before it was released to the public.

I don't think that's true at all.  Some technologies were first used by the military, but the vast majority of technologies I can think of were not.


Agreed, especially in the recent tech age.  The venture capital system in the US is ahead of DOD on alot of fronts.
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline Krossbolt

  • Member
  • Posts: 12
  • Australia
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1734 on: 08/06/2020 11:32 pm »
Starlink got some bad press from the Australian Broadcasting Commission today in their online news -

Why Elon Musk's satellite swarm is an accident waiting to happen

Smaller, cheaper satellites are flooding the most popular orbit, increasing the likelihood of an accident that could trigger a catastrophe in space and calamity back on Earth.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-07/spacex-amazon-satellites-scramble-for-space-around-earth/12512978?nw=0

I'm pretty annoyed at the author's one sided write up and using obviously an astronomer's viewpoint who obviously is not sympathetic to Starlink. The article is not balanced in that there is no mention of the satellites' anti collision systems and deorbit capabilities. I've sent a complaint to the ABC Online editor.

Offline OTV Booster

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4464
  • Terra is my nation; currently Kansas
  • Liked: 3085
  • Likes Given: 5014
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1735 on: 08/07/2020 10:38 am »
If we look at the majority of past technologies, the army first tested it before it was released to the public.

I don't think that's true at all.  Some technologies were first used by the military, but the vast majority of technologies I can think of were not.
There are a lot of little invisible bits of tech (mostly electronics)buried in our beloved stuff that either started with the military or matured there. A trend that started post WW2. Phased array, spread spectrum, GPS, radar, even computers and overhead valve V engines.


The military tech itself usually isn't what we use but is more of an enabler.


I'm not sure an inventory of 'stuff' looking for military bits has ever been rigorously done. The results would be interesting.


Phil
We are on the cusp of revolutionary access to space. One hallmark of a revolution is that there is a disjuncture through which projections do not work. The thread must be picked up anew and the tapestry of history woven with a fresh pattern.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4987
  • Likes Given: 6458
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1736 on: 08/07/2020 10:58 am »
If we look at the majority of past technologies, the army first tested it before it was released to the public.

I don't think that's true at all.  Some technologies were first used by the military, but the vast majority of technologies I can think of were not.
There are a lot of little invisible bits of tech (mostly electronics)buried in our beloved stuff that either started with the military or matured there. A trend that started post WW2. Phased array, spread spectrum, GPS, radar, even computers and overhead valve V engines.

There is even more tech that was developed by the private sector for the private sector. such as the printing press with moveable type, the steam engine, railroads, automobiles, the telegraph, the incandescent light bulb, the telephone, television, the transistor, the laser, the microprocessor, and millions of other innovations that pervade our world today.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33479
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 58857
  • Likes Given: 26309
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1737 on: 08/08/2020 06:01 am »
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1291863550504443905

Quote
lSpaceX told the FCC in a late July presentation that the company’s Starlink unit is “now building 120 satellites per month” and has “invested over $70 million developing and producing thousands of consumer user terminals per month.”

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13438
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11808
  • Likes Given: 11015
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1738 on: 08/08/2020 05:28 pm »
If we look at the majority of past technologies, the army first tested it before it was released to the public.

I don't think that's true at all.  Some technologies were first used by the military, but the vast majority of technologies I can think of were not.


Agreed, especially in the recent tech age.  The venture capital system in the US is ahead of DOD on alot of fronts.

Not to go too far off topic, but I think DARPA knows this and that's why they structure some of their stuff the way they do... prizes and incentives for inventors and scrappy entepreneurial companies to give it a go.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33479
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 58857
  • Likes Given: 26309
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1739 on: 08/10/2020 05:47 am »
https://twitter.com/cosmos4u/status/1292661826866610177

Quote
Only one data point but from a very experienced observer: the 1st #Starlink of the VisorSat type (as https://t.co/seZL1j7zdT explains) is on station now - and dimmer by several magnitudes: http://www.satobs.org/seesat/Aug-2020/0044.html. Should mean that all future Starlinks become invisible to the eye.

Tags: pole flip 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0