Author Topic: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2  (Read 1273091 times)

Offline Hummy

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 108
  • Los Angeles
  • Liked: 206
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1700 on: 07/24/2020 03:58 pm »
1. Starlink friends and family trials are underway according to Jonathan Hofeller, SpaceX’s vice president of Starlink and Commercial Sales.

2. “As soon as we can get inter-satellite links, I know that is something that we want to do,” Hofeller said. “We have to make sure it’s cost effective in order to provide it and implement into the constellation. That’s something we are attacking internally and aggressively and it’s something that we know will greatly enhance the system, both for consumers and enterprise customers, and our government customers as well.”

More in "8 Takeaways From Our SpaceX, Telesat LEO Constellation Webcast"

Offline Tulse

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 546
  • Liked: 395
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1701 on: 07/24/2020 04:09 pm »
Hofeller's comments make it sound like interconnects are a lot further away than I had thought. It sounds like they are still doing basic development and working out whether it's even feasible.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1702 on: 07/24/2020 04:25 pm »
Hofeller's comments make it sound like interconnects are a lot further away than I had thought. It sounds like they are still doing basic development and working out whether it's even feasible.

I didn't read the comments in the article that way.

Saying they "have to make sure it's cost effective" implies to me that they know they can do it and that they're now focusing on cost reduction.  The fact that he uses the word "aggressively" means that they are focusing on it as a high priority.  That doesn't sound like something they don't think is feasible.  That sound like something they are confident is feasible and they're now putting lots of effort into doing.

Online wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3112
  • Likes Given: 3861
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1703 on: 07/24/2020 05:13 pm »
Hofeller's comments make it sound like interconnects are a lot further away than I had thought. It sounds like they are still doing basic development and working out whether it's even feasible.

I didn't read the comments in the article that way.

Saying they "have to make sure it's cost effective" implies to me that they know they can do it and that they're now focusing on cost reduction.  The fact that he uses the word "aggressively" means that they are focusing on it as a high priority.  That doesn't sound like something they don't think is feasible.  That sound like something they are confident is feasible and they're now putting lots of effort into doing.


I agree, it sounds like something that they can do but for more $ than they want.  They'll get there.  They are essential to a global footprint, they need this.

I'm waiting to hear about some test satellites to be included in a launch.

We are in v1.0 still.  Who knows what version we will be in a few years from now and how many are being built and deployed using Starship.
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline savantu

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 227
  • Romania
  • Liked: 293
  • Likes Given: 131
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1704 on: 07/24/2020 07:26 pm »
Hofeller's comments make it sound like interconnects are a lot further away than I had thought. It sounds like they are still doing basic development and working out whether it's even feasible.

I didn't read the comments in the article that way.

Saying they "have to make sure it's cost effective" implies to me that they know they can do it and that they're now focusing on cost reduction.  The fact that he uses the word "aggressively" means that they are focusing on it as a high priority.  That doesn't sound like something they don't think is feasible.  That sound like something they are confident is feasible and they're now putting lots of effort into doing.


I agree, it sounds like something that they can do but for more $ than they want.  They'll get there.  They are essential to a global footprint, they need this.

I'm waiting to hear about some test satellites to be included in a launch.

We are in v1.0 still.  Who knows what version we will be in a few years from now and how many are being built and deployed using Starship.

I think it was the reasons why Starlink mng team was reshuffled in 2018. Basically they wanted to delay the launches until the interlinks were ready, Elon however pushed for launching asap even if lacking features.

Offline Mandella

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 524
  • Liked: 799
  • Likes Given: 2592
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1705 on: 07/25/2020 02:01 am »
Hofeller's comments make it sound like interconnects are a lot further away than I had thought. It sounds like they are still doing basic development and working out whether it's even feasible.

I didn't read the comments in the article that way.

Saying they "have to make sure it's cost effective" implies to me that they know they can do it and that they're now focusing on cost reduction.  The fact that he uses the word "aggressively" means that they are focusing on it as a high priority.  That doesn't sound like something they don't think is feasible.  That sound like something they are confident is feasible and they're now putting lots of effort into doing.


I agree, it sounds like something that they can do but for more $ than they want.  They'll get there.  They are essential to a global footprint, they need this.

I'm waiting to hear about some test satellites to be included in a launch.

We are in v1.0 still.  Who knows what version we will be in a few years from now and how many are being built and deployed using Starship.

I think it was the reasons why Starlink mng team was reshuffled in 2018. Basically they wanted to delay the launches until the interlinks were ready, Elon however pushed for launching asap even if lacking features.

Citation? From what I remember of the time the word was they just wanted to do a couple more prototype test satellites and Musk wanted to start launching and iterate on the go.

Offline OTV Booster

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5103
  • Terra is my nation; currently Kansas
  • Liked: 3553
  • Likes Given: 6004
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1706 on: 07/25/2020 02:51 am »
Hofeller's comments make it sound like interconnects are a lot further away than I had thought. It sounds like they are still doing basic development and working out whether it's even feasible.

I didn't read the comments in the article that way.

Saying they "have to make sure it's cost effective" implies to me that they know they can do it and that they're now focusing on cost reduction.  The fact that he uses the word "aggressively" means that they are focusing on it as a high priority.  That doesn't sound like something they don't think is feasible.  That sound like something they are confident is feasible and they're now putting lots of effort into doing.


I agree, it sounds like something that they can do but for more $ than they want.  They'll get there.  They are essential to a global footprint, they need this.

I'm waiting to hear about some test satellites to be included in a launch.

We are in v1.0 still.  Who knows what version we will be in a few years from now and how many are being built and deployed using Starship.

I think it was the reasons why Starlink mng team was reshuffled in 2018. Basically they wanted to delay the launches until the interlinks were ready, Elon however pushed for launching asap even if lacking features.
Do you have info on this or are you speculating?


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 savantu

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 227
  • Romania
  • Liked: 293
  • Likes Given: 131
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1707 on: 07/26/2020 04:10 am »
I agree, it sounds like something that they can do but for more $ than they want.  They'll get there.  They are essential to a global footprint, they need this.

I'm waiting to hear about some test satellites to be included in a launch.

We are in v1.0 still.  Who knows what version we will be in a few years from now and how many are being built and deployed using Starship.

I think it was the reasons why Starlink mng team was reshuffled in 2018. Basically they wanted to delay the launches until the interlinks were ready, Elon however pushed for launching asap even if lacking features.
Do you have info on this or are you speculating?


Phil

It's just what I read in the news and discussion around it at the time -> part info, part speculation.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-spacex-starlink-insight/musk-shakes-up-spacex-in-race-to-make-satellite-launch-window-sources-idUSKCN1N50FC

Edit/Lar: Fix quotes. Preview button, people! :)
« Last Edit: 07/27/2020 03:15 am by Lar »

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
    • Political Solutions
  • Liked: 450
  • Likes Given: 3163
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1708 on: 07/27/2020 04:22 pm »
Citation? From what I remember of the time the word was they just wanted to do a couple more prototype test satellites and Musk wanted to start launching and iterate on the go.

When a person says "I think", it is speculation.
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk
Spacestation proposal: https://politicalsolutions.ca/forum/index.php?topic=3.0

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8839
  • Lower 48
  • Liked: 60430
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1709 on: 07/27/2020 04:32 pm »
Citation? From what I remember of the time the word was they just wanted to do a couple more prototype test satellites and Musk wanted to start launching and iterate on the go.

When a person says "I think", it is speculation.
People are allowed to think without it being pure guesswork. Some actually have reasons for what they believe.
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline OTV Booster

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5103
  • Terra is my nation; currently Kansas
  • Liked: 3553
  • Likes Given: 6004
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1710 on: 07/27/2020 05:05 pm »
Citation? From what I remember of the time the word was they just wanted to do a couple more prototype test satellites and Musk wanted to start launching and iterate on the go.

When a person says "I think", it is speculation.
People are allowed to think without it being pure guesswork. Some actually have reasons for what they believe.
Agreed. There's always a line between what we think and what we know. I was just trying to find out where the line was.
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.

Online oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5304
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1711 on: 07/27/2020 09:20 pm »
Interlink timelines

Possible scenarios:

1- Awaiting launch of V2.0 sats on Starship. This could be sooner than most think. With likely NET 2Q 2021 and NLT 1Q 2022. You do not need a lot of launches. At 240 sats per launch to launch 6 Starships to replace 24 F9 launches and at 300 sats per launch to Launch just 5 Starship in a year. Less than 1 every 2 months which is currently slower than the SS build rate in Boca Chica of 1 a month. So even if recovery and reuse is not reliable the launch rate can be easily met in a simi developmental period where development of recovery of SH and SS is being improved and brought to operational reliable levels (at least 5 flights per vehicle).

2- Awaiting the current Beta Test results to see how significant having interconnects would be for general data traffic and its impacts of cost of operations and marginal capital costs for including on the sats. This one has a implement/ no implement decision point somewhere around 1Q 2021 with implementing on a sats about 3 to 6 months later or about 3Q 2021.

3. If implemented (Beta Test results decision positive) but not until V2.0 sats launched on Starship. Timeline dates same as case #1 but has the implement/ no implement decision prior to Starship operational dates.




The cost factor may be more associated with the added mass to the sat for these interconnects which includes more packet storage and switch equipment on each sat as well to handle to increase in traffic transferring through the sat. Mass has a tremendous cost. More mass less sats per launch. A 50 kg total mass increase is a $70K cost increase for launch cost per sat when launching on F9. When launching on Starship with Starship meeting only minimal reuse goals the launch cost impact for increased mass becomes close to just $10K per sat.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1712 on: 07/27/2020 09:24 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.
« Last Edit: 07/27/2020 09:25 pm by gongora »

Online oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5304
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1713 on: 07/28/2020 02:05 am »
At ~$300K for manufacturing cost of the sat + $400K for the cost of launch of a 300kg sat at about $1,300/kg. It does not take much to put the economic question of is it worth it beyond reach. If a 10% increase in cost per sat to manufacture and deploy does not improve the throughput capability of the constellation (number of subscribers a set number of sats will support) by >10% then there is a very big question if such an addition is worth it. A 10% cost increase per sat is $70K. That includes not only the manufacturing costs but additional costs for increased mass in launch. Such intersat links could be either a set of 2 or set of 4 links. Initially use of just 2 links, fore and aft in the relationship to the direction of orbit, would show some usefulness in expanding the area that the sats can support such as across oceans and other countries without Gateways installed.

Costing example where a 2 link would have a $50K cost but a greater than 10% increase in revenue. But a 4 link would have a $100K cost but have just a small advantage in revenue vs the 2 link.

It is working out the costs and potential revenue increase that may be not with a firm enough resolve to make a decision. Plus anything that would simultaneously lower manufacturing cost and mass could also tip the scale in favor of implementing sooner rather than later. If it remains marginal then implementation may be delayed.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1714 on: 07/28/2020 02:19 am »
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.
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 Confusador

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 294
  • Liked: 191
  • Likes Given: 381
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1715 on: 07/28/2020 01:05 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.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1716 on: 07/28/2020 01:10 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.
« Last Edit: 07/28/2020 01:13 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 Confusador

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 294
  • Liked: 191
  • Likes Given: 381
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1717 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: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Starlink : General Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1718 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 #1719 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

Tags: pole flip 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0