Quote from: archae86 on 04/16/2021 01:31 amMaybe I missed it, but I don't see, other than the 20% "overhead" any allocation of cost to actually interacting with customers....Level of customer interaction for support (as in live people) also depends on how much of the stack the provider controls, and the level of automation for identifying-correcting problems, preferably preemptively. One of my major gripes with Comcast is that they seem to depend on customers reporting problems. If enough people complain, they declare an outage, and if I have their app on my phone, I can go check (typically delayed). Or if it's just me, I end up on the phone with a customer service (CS) rep.I hope and expect Starlink is ahead of this. They control the user terminal. They control the sats. They control the ground station interface from sats to Internet backbone. Yes, Comcast et. al. have nominal control over their infrastructure, but they don't seem to do a very good job of communicating with their customers in an effective or timely manner. E.g., would love to see communication from Comcast that "we have noticed a significant reduction in performance at your location, please take the following steps ..."In short, timely and effective communication with customers would go a long way to reducing human CS interactions and costs. Given Musk's traditional MO, hope and expect that, and the automation to back it, is baked into Starlink.
Maybe I missed it, but I don't see, other than the 20% "overhead" any allocation of cost to actually interacting with customers....
Shotwell said the company has already tested two generations of that technology on some of its satellites. “The first ones that we flew were very expensive. The second round of technology that we flew was less expensive,” she said.A third generation of laser intersatellite links will start flying “in the next few months,” she said. She didn’t elaborate on those plans, but it’s likely those will be included on satellite the company is preparing to launch to polar orbits. The new technology, she said, will be able to operate over longer distances and provide high bandwidth, while being “much less expensive” than earlier versions.
QuoteThis is accurate. Service uptime, bandwidth & latency are improving rapidly. Probably out of beta this summer.
This is accurate. Service uptime, bandwidth & latency are improving rapidly. Probably out of beta this summer.
Shotwell noted that SpaceX does not “have a timeframe for getting out of the beta phase,” saying that the company still has “a lot of work to do to make the network reliable.”
What gives?
SpaceX presented the attached fact sheet with an accurate chronology of events that demonstrates the coordination was successful and there was never a risk of a collision. Despite recent reports to the contrary, the parties made clear that there was no "close call" or "near miss." SpaceX and OneWeb agreed that they had conducted a successful coordination, resulting in a positive outcome. The probability of collision never exceeded the threshold for a maneuver, and the satellites would not have collided even if no maneuver had been conducted. As further detailed in the attached fact sheet, and despite OneWeb's previous public claims, SpaceX's autonomous collision avoidance system was and remains fully functional at all times. SpaceX only turned off the capability at OneWeb's explicit request after OneWeb decided to conduct a maneuver.
OneWeb 's misleading public statements coincide with OneWeb's intensified efforts to prevent SpaceX from completing a safety upgrade to its system. For instance, immediately after the first inaccurate quotes came out in media accounts, OneWeb met with Commission staff and Commissioners demanding unilateral conditions placed on SpaceX’s operations. Ironically, the conditions demanded by OneWeb would make it more difficult to successfully coordinate operations going forward, demonstrating more of a concern with limiting competitors than with a genuine concern for space safety.
• the maneuver threshold for Starlink satellites is 1e-5 and that maneuvers occur approximately 12 hours before the predicted closest approach of the satellites• if a maneuver was needed, typically a single in-track burn would be conducted to reduce collision probability.• OneWeb acknowledged that the covariance (i.e., accuracy) in its propagated ephemerides (i.e., predicted location of satellites) are biased low and this bias is a known issue.
• SpaceX reiterated its recommendation to wait for another CDM from 18 SPCS before planning a maneuver because SpaceX systems indicated this was the least risky approach. • OneWeb satellites need more time to coordinate and plan their maneuvers than Starlink satellites require, so OneWeb did not want to wait and chose instead to maneuver OneWeb-0178.• Because OneWeb decided to plan a maneuver, it asked SpaceX to turn off Starlink-1546’s autonomous conjunction avoidance system. SpaceX obliged this request and confirmed to OneWebthat the system had been turned off.
• 18 SPCS reported actual miss distance as 1,120 m.• LeoLabs reported actual miss distance as 1,072 m.• Both 18 SPCS and LeoLabs reported final Pc below 1e-20—one in one hundred million million million—this was not a close call or a near miss
Quote from: OTV Booster on 04/15/2021 03:14 pmQuote from: geekesq on 04/15/2021 05:51 amQuote from: Vultur on 04/15/2021 05:34 amQuote from: Tomness on 04/15/2021 03:17 am...people are thinking regionally 10s of millions of subscribers and not in 10s of billions of subscribers equaling trillions in revue.I think Starlink has enormous potential, but there aren't 10s of billions of people in the world.The potential customer base is huge, but not that huge...The number of potential Starlink installations (i.e. customers) isn't related to a number of people. It's related to a number of structures (including commercial buildings, residences, and utility structures like towers) and a number of vehicles large enough to mount a Starlink terminal on (planes, ships, UPS delivery vans, and so on.)I have no idea what those numbers are; Internet searches revealed that there are apparently 1.2 billion homes world-wide and that UPS and FEDEX appear to have about 280,000 large vehicles (delivery trucks and tractors) between them.For FedEx and UPS, StarLink probably isn't a good solution. Trucking started using sat links a long time ago but as cell coverage spread the service moved to it. Starlink shines where the last mile infrastructure sucks. There's plenty of business to be had there.Seems like this could be relevant for long haul truckers though. I’m sure satellite coverage is better than cell coverage in some areas on these longer trips.
Quote from: geekesq on 04/15/2021 05:51 amQuote from: Vultur on 04/15/2021 05:34 amQuote from: Tomness on 04/15/2021 03:17 am...people are thinking regionally 10s of millions of subscribers and not in 10s of billions of subscribers equaling trillions in revue.I think Starlink has enormous potential, but there aren't 10s of billions of people in the world.The potential customer base is huge, but not that huge...The number of potential Starlink installations (i.e. customers) isn't related to a number of people. It's related to a number of structures (including commercial buildings, residences, and utility structures like towers) and a number of vehicles large enough to mount a Starlink terminal on (planes, ships, UPS delivery vans, and so on.)I have no idea what those numbers are; Internet searches revealed that there are apparently 1.2 billion homes world-wide and that UPS and FEDEX appear to have about 280,000 large vehicles (delivery trucks and tractors) between them.For FedEx and UPS, StarLink probably isn't a good solution. Trucking started using sat links a long time ago but as cell coverage spread the service moved to it. Starlink shines where the last mile infrastructure sucks. There's plenty of business to be had there.
Quote from: Vultur on 04/15/2021 05:34 amQuote from: Tomness on 04/15/2021 03:17 am...people are thinking regionally 10s of millions of subscribers and not in 10s of billions of subscribers equaling trillions in revue.I think Starlink has enormous potential, but there aren't 10s of billions of people in the world.The potential customer base is huge, but not that huge...The number of potential Starlink installations (i.e. customers) isn't related to a number of people. It's related to a number of structures (including commercial buildings, residences, and utility structures like towers) and a number of vehicles large enough to mount a Starlink terminal on (planes, ships, UPS delivery vans, and so on.)I have no idea what those numbers are; Internet searches revealed that there are apparently 1.2 billion homes world-wide and that UPS and FEDEX appear to have about 280,000 large vehicles (delivery trucks and tractors) between them.
Quote from: Tomness on 04/15/2021 03:17 am...people are thinking regionally 10s of millions of subscribers and not in 10s of billions of subscribers equaling trillions in revue.I think Starlink has enormous potential, but there aren't 10s of billions of people in the world.The potential customer base is huge, but not that huge...
...people are thinking regionally 10s of millions of subscribers and not in 10s of billions of subscribers equaling trillions in revue.
15% of the global surface area being revenue earning at any given time, , 20gb capacity per satellite,
Trucking is not a market to be ruled out but it's not the low hanging fruit.
Map of SpaceX Starlink gateways. Gateways are used to connect orbiting satellites to the core Starlink network/Internet. The circles show where a Starlink satellite at 550 km can connect to a gateway. Coverage provided by a satellite can extend beyond the connected gateway service area. All US gateways filed with the FCC are on the map. In other countries most likely not all gateways are shown.
Someone has gone to the trouble of making a map of Starlink ground stations:https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1H1x8jZs8vfjy60TvKgpbYs_grargieVw&ll=18.50343341913415%2C-61.40922437031843&z=5QuoteMap of SpaceX Starlink gateways. Gateways are used to connect orbiting satellites to the core Starlink network/Internet. The circles show where a Starlink satellite at 550 km can connect to a gateway. Coverage provided by a satellite can extend beyond the connected gateway service area. All US gateways filed with the FCC are on the map. In other countries most likely not all gateways are shown.
The FCC has approved SpaceX's request to fly a chunk of Starlink satellites at altitudes lower than initially planned, Bloomberg reports, an upset for satellite rivals who long argued the modification would ramp up collision risks.
SpaceX wins FCC approval to operate 2,814 Starlink satellites in lower orbits than originally planned. The FCC concluded "that this modification does not create significant interference problems" and allows SpaceX to make safety-focused changes to its constellation deployment.
Amazon statement on the FCC approving SpaceX's Starlink modification:"This is a positive outcome that places clear conditions on SpaceX ... These conditions address our primary concerns regarding space safety and interference."https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/04/27/fcc-approves-spacex-starlink-modification-despite-objections.html $AMZN
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1387099970705166337Quote Amazon statement on the FCC approving SpaceX's Starlink modification:"This is a positive outcome that places clear conditions on SpaceX ... These conditions address our primary concerns regarding space safety and interference."https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/04/27/fcc-approves-spacex-starlink-modification-despite-objections.html $AMZN
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 04/27/2021 05:52 pmhttps://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1387099970705166337Quote Amazon statement on the FCC approving SpaceX's Starlink modification:"This is a positive outcome that places clear conditions on SpaceX ... These conditions address our primary concerns regarding space safety and interference."https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/04/27/fcc-approves-spacex-starlink-modification-despite-objections.html $AMZNRight... Bezos' PR machine trying to spin yet another loss into a win.
Amazon is happy about SpaceX's Starlink modification. In a statement, they pointed to an FCC condition that requires SpaceX to "accept" any interference from Amazon's Kuiper constellation in the future.
News – The FCC approves SpaceX's third modification to its Starlink license, despite objections from companies including Amazon and Viasat, in a win for Elon Musk's growing satellite internet network:
FCC is fair & sensible. NHTSA & FAA too. 99.9% of the time, I agree with regulators! On rare occasions, we disagree. This is almost always due to new technologies that past regulations didn’t anticipate.
Elon Musk was SpaceX's lead on Starlink until mid-2020, when Gwynne Shotwell shifted her focus to the satellite program while Musk's focus moved to Starship: "His emphasis is to get the Starship program to orbit."