Quote from: vsatman on 11/24/2021 11:01 amQuote from: Mandella on 11/24/2021 02:42 am is going to get the foot in the door in as many places as it can to get ahead of competition.Sorry, who do you mean by a competitor??all fiber or satellite via GSO are not competitor...That's a good question. Is anyone else doing, or about to do, low-latency satellite broadband direct to consumers? Kuiper seems to be the only one.ISTM overseas customers are getting service faster because the sats have a lot more available bandwidth over those areas than they do over North America. https://starlinkstatus.space/ supports this, with UK/FR/DE and AU customers typically getting significantly better download speeds than US and CA over the last couple months .
Quote from: Mandella on 11/24/2021 02:42 am is going to get the foot in the door in as many places as it can to get ahead of competition.Sorry, who do you mean by a competitor??all fiber or satellite via GSO are not competitor...
is going to get the foot in the door in as many places as it can to get ahead of competition.
Quote from: vsatman on 11/24/2021 11:01 amQuote from: Mandella on 11/24/2021 02:42 am is going to get the foot in the door in as many places as it can to get ahead of competition.Sorry, who do you mean by a competitor??all fiber or satellite via GSO are not competitor...By competitor I mean anybody that can get real broadband to rural areas at a competitive price. Speaking for myself, that could be cable (ha ha out here), that could even be Viasat upping my cap and lowering my price (right now I am paying $165 for 100 gigs a month), that could be Verizon putting up an extra cell tower so that I could actually get 4G, it could even be a WISP. I'm assuming the same holds true in other countries. Starlink may well spur the deployment of competitive options, which is great for the people who have been underserved, but not great for Starlink. That's not even considering the half UK owned OneWeb, or am I wrong in considering them a competitor?
Quote from: envy887 on 11/24/2021 02:57 pmQuote from: vsatman on 11/24/2021 11:01 amQuote from: Mandella on 11/24/2021 02:42 am is going to get the foot in the door in as many places as it can to get ahead of competition.Sorry, who do you mean by a competitor??all fiber or satellite via GSO are not competitor...That's a good question. Is anyone else doing, or about to do, low-latency satellite broadband direct to consumers? Kuiper seems to be the only one.ISTM overseas customers are getting service faster because the sats have a lot more available bandwidth over those areas than they do over North America. https://starlinkstatus.space/ supports this, with UK/FR/DE and AU customers typically getting significantly better download speeds than US and CA over the last couple months .So is it an amount of sats issue or a GW bandwidth/number of sats each GW can feed issue? I'm leaning towards the GW side from everything I have read to date but always willing to hear other peoples interpretation. There seems to be enough sats over the US at any given time but without the laser interlinks, the GW's have to handle all traffic and there are only so many gateways in the US....I mean...I'm waiting as I have no other choice, but saying "chip" issue for the CPE is the reason the rollout is slow but then them seeming to add dishys at many supercharger stations instead of people who already put money down just plain looks bad IMO IF...and I stress the IF....the reason is because they can't make dishys fast enough.Don't get me wrong, I am not really being impatient about it....but Starlink really needs to work on their customer service at this point. I know they hired someone specifically for that it seems....but it really needs work. Just a truthful update once a month or two would be quite welcome and would quite a lot of the people really screaming about it. I signed up for beta as soon as I possibly could. I pre-ordered Feb 9th @ 8am. I have gotten exactly 2 email since I signed up for beta...the day I put my deposit down and yesterday.I just don't understand what they gain by being so secretive about it personally. They build the next gen rockets/engines in the open for all to see both good and bad and be fully transparent in almost all regards...but then act like BO's PR team with Starlink.
So is it an amount of sats issue or a GW bandwidth/number of sats each GW can feed issue? I'm leaning towards the GW side from everything I have read to date but always willing to hear other peoples interpretation. There seems to be enough sats over the US at any given time but without the laser interlinks, the GW's have to handle all traffic and there are only so many gateways in the US....
By competitor I mean anybody that can get real broadband to rural areas at a competitive price. Speaking for myself, that could be cable (ha ha out here), that could even be Viasat upping my cap and lowering my price (right now I am paying $165 for 100 gigs a month), that could be Verizon putting up an extra cell tower so that I could actually get 4G, it could even be a WISP. That's not even considering the half UK owned OneWeb, or am I wrong in considering them a competitor?
Quote from: Mandella on 11/24/2021 05:18 pmBy competitor I mean anybody that can get real broadband to rural areas at a competitive price. Speaking for myself, that could be cable (ha ha out here), that could even be Viasat upping my cap and lowering my price (right now I am paying $165 for 100 gigs a month), that could be Verizon putting up an extra cell tower so that I could actually get 4G, it could even be a WISP. That's not even considering the half UK owned OneWeb, or am I wrong in considering them a competitor?1) Viasat operate from Geostacionary orbit with latency about 700 ms. It is ANOTHER internet that you normaly mean - forget about online games and VPN..2) OneWEB / OneWEb don`t have solutions for individual user . Look on Internet Point from OneWEb for small town in Alaska or Kymeta Terminal for ships or auto with price 5000+ USD
[email protected] expand Starlink's IP backbone as POPs in Chicago, NYC (incl @DECIX), Atlanta, Dallas, São PauloFlag of Brazil, Stgo de QroFlag of Mexico & LagosFlag of Nigeria show up in@PeeringDB (https://peeringdb.com/net/18747), more prefixes announced & upstreams added (https://bgp.he.net/AS14593#_asinfo). Moving away from @googlecloud?
Hopefully you have a Electric Co-op running Fiber to house and get that sonner
Quote from: Tomness on 11/24/2021 05:23 pmHopefully you have a Electric Co-op running Fiber to house and get that sonnerHa Ha. About a year ago, our Public Utility District was advertising along the road to my neighborhood that fiber service was available, call for info. So several of the people on my road (a private gravel road with less than a dozen properties) inquired. To run fiber from the local school district feed, down 2 miles of road to my neighborhood would total about $170K USD, so assuming 10 homeowners went in on the offer, that's $17K per house, not counting the cost of having a contractor run a fiber tap from the nearest utility pole, underground to your house, perhaps another few $K. Then, the ISP would charge $80/mo for 100Mb/s or $120/mo for 1Gb/s. So we all said "no thank you". And when Starlink took reservations in February, I jumped on it immediately. Eight months later, I got my kit. I geuss my cell was neither too empty nor too full.
Quote from: ulm_atms on 11/24/2021 03:43 pmSo is it an amount of sats issue or a GW bandwidth/number of sats each GW can feed issue? I'm leaning towards the GW side from everything I have read to date but always willing to hear other peoples interpretation. There seems to be enough sats over the US at any given time but without the laser interlinks, the GW's have to handle all traffic and there are only so many gateways in the US....Gateways are not a problem.1) The Gateway has a parabolic antenna of 1.5 m and the link budget shows that the spectral efficiency in the Gateway - Satellite channel is 5+ bits per Hertz, and for the satellite - terminal line - only 3.2) the GW works with both polarizations. User Terminal with only one3) The gateway has 9 antennas and will support 4 satellites at the same time without any problems. 2 antennas per satellite and one in reserve may be "hot" reserve.4) now in the USA 30+ gateways are already approved by FCC and 60+ filed5) 75..80 satellites are now visible over the USA at any moment of time. (It need only 20 GWs)6) GWs are located in such a way that each satellite at any given time can operate ("see") 3 gateways (this is for a gateway reservation)
The consequences for SpaceX if we can not get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship, which means we then can’t fly Starlink Satellite V2 (Falcon has neither the volume nor the mass to orbit needed for satellite V2). Satellite V1, by itself, is financially weak, while V2 is strong.In addition, we are spooling up terminal production to several million units per year, which will consume massive capital, assuming that satellite V2 will be on orbit to handle the bandwidth demand. These terminals will be useless otherwise.
Leaked Elon email confirms Starlink V2 needs Starship, plus some other Starlink news:Quote from: Leaked Elon EmailThe consequences for SpaceX if we can not get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship, which means we then can’t fly Starlink Satellite V2 (Falcon has neither the volume nor the mass to orbit needed for satellite V2). Satellite V1, by itself, is financially weak, while V2 is strong.In addition, we are spooling up terminal production to several million units per year, which will consume massive capital, assuming that satellite V2 will be on orbit to handle the bandwidth demand. These terminals will be useless otherwise.
Quote from: su27k on 11/30/2021 03:11 amLeaked Elon email confirms Starlink V2 needs Starship, plus some other Starlink news:Quote from: Leaked Elon EmailThe consequences for SpaceX if we can not get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship, which means we then can’t fly Starlink Satellite V2 (Falcon has neither the volume nor the mass to orbit needed for satellite V2). Satellite V1, by itself, is financially weak, while V2 is strong.In addition, we are spooling up terminal production to several million units per year, which will consume massive capital, assuming that satellite V2 will be on orbit to handle the bandwidth demand. These terminals will be useless otherwise.This is about schedule alignment. If Starship is only ready a year later, then millions of terminals and thousands of V2 satellites will sit idle, not generating any revenue.So Elon is rightly cracking the whip.
A slightly bit offtopic - regarding Elon's mail:If the current V1 satellites are financially weak (I guess not enough capacity) and V2 (much bigger) are required, what does it mean for other satellite constellations (Kuiper, OneWeb)?
Assuming he's not lying or exaggerating for effect
Quote from: JayWee on 11/30/2021 03:02 pmA slightly bit offtopic - regarding Elon's mail:If the current V1 satellites are financially weak (I guess not enough capacity) and V2 (much bigger) are required, what does it mean for other satellite constellations (Kuiper, OneWeb)?Elon did say about starlink at one point something like this:LEO satellite constellations have all gone bankrupt on the first try before(iridium).So the challenge is not to go bankrupt on the first try.So raptor is currently not looking good on the balance sheets.He needs raptor to be reliable and reusable and cheap to manufacture to close the economics case.