https://www.wsj.com/articles/space-startup-aims-to-connect-satellites-directly-with-cellphones-11550979518
UbiquitiLink has built the first cell tower in space. Soon, everyone in the world will be connected, everywhere, with just the phone in their pocket. No new hardware required. No new software needed. The UbiquitiLink network will enable everyone with a standard mobile phone to stay connected … everywhere.Today, only about 25 percent of the world’s landmass is served by cell towers. The rest of the land—and all of the world’s oceans—have no coverage.The 5.2 billion people with mobile phones often have no service because they are outside the range of a cell tower.Another 2.5 billion people, many in remote areas without cellular networks, don’t even have a mobile phone.When disaster strikes, first responders are frequently hampered by inoperable terrestrial communications.This is about to change. UbiquitiLink is creating a global constellation of satellites to connect the phones in our pockets anywhere on the planet, all of the time.
Quote from: Danderman on 02/24/2019 04:44 amhttps://www.wsj.com/articles/space-startup-aims-to-connect-satellites-directly-with-cellphones-11550979518Paywall.
Hrm, UbiquitiLink says phase one is 24-36 sats at 500km. Tethers Unlimited GobalFi direct-smartphone broadband (DTSB) system says 27 sats for "Cell Towers In Space"
Quote from: Asteroza on 02/25/2019 04:37 amHrm, UbiquitiLink says phase one is 24-36 sats at 500km. Tethers Unlimited GobalFi direct-smartphone broadband (DTSB) system says 27 sats for "Cell Towers In Space"UbiquitiLink says they will need to orbit thousands of satellites for full coverage.
https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/25/ubiquitilink-advance-means-every-phone-is-now-a-satellite-phone/According to that article the initial plan is to all 5 minutes of coverage every hour, then to build up the constellation until it's 24/7 coverage. 5 minutes every hour though would work well for lost hiker etc, app could tell you how long till your window opens so you can save battery until then. I wonder how weather will impact it? Only modification that was needed was for doppler timings to be increased as they were limited to 30km originally in the phone wireless chips. Interesting concept. First test sats on orbit.
Quote from: gongora on 02/25/2019 12:16 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 02/25/2019 04:37 amHrm, UbiquitiLink says phase one is 24-36 sats at 500km. Tethers Unlimited GobalFi direct-smartphone broadband (DTSB) system says 27 sats for "Cell Towers In Space"UbiquitiLink says they will need to orbit thousands of satellites for full coverage.GlobalFi is in the same boat. 27 sats is for hourly coverage (IoT/alert oriented) I believe, according to the documents available
Quote from: WindnWar on 02/27/2019 03:28 amhttps://techcrunch.com/2019/02/25/ubiquitilink-advance-means-every-phone-is-now-a-satellite-phone/According to that article the initial plan is to all 5 minutes of coverage every hour, then to build up the constellation until it's 24/7 coverage. 5 minutes every hour though would work well for lost hiker etc, app could tell you how long till your window opens so you can save battery until then. I wonder how weather will impact it? Only modification that was needed was for doppler timings to be increased as they were limited to 30km originally in the phone wireless chips. Interesting concept. First test sats on orbit. Nothing in the phone needs to be altered in the Ubiquitilink system, and Doppler is no problem.
Quote from: Danderman on 02/27/2019 08:40 amQuote from: WindnWar on 02/27/2019 03:28 amhttps://techcrunch.com/2019/02/25/ubiquitilink-advance-means-every-phone-is-now-a-satellite-phone/According to that article the initial plan is to all 5 minutes of coverage every hour, then to build up the constellation until it's 24/7 coverage. 5 minutes every hour though would work well for lost hiker etc, app could tell you how long till your window opens so you can save battery until then. I wonder how weather will impact it? Only modification that was needed was for doppler timings to be increased as they were limited to 30km originally in the phone wireless chips. Interesting concept. First test sats on orbit. Nothing in the phone needs to be altered in the Ubiquitilink system, and Doppler is no problem.I don't get that, as it states they had to modify the wireless stack in the phones in the article but then later says they don't need to modify the phones. Did they move the mods to just the sat side? Or maybe I'm not understanding what they are describing.
Is this a hoax? I don't think a cellphone has enough power to talk to a satellite. At least not according to this:https://smallbusiness.chron.com/far-can-cell-tower-cellphone-pick-up-signal-32124.html
Quote from: saliva_sweet on 02/28/2019 08:42 amIs this a hoax? I don't think a cellphone has enough power to talk to a satellite. At least not according to this:https://smallbusiness.chron.com/far-can-cell-tower-cellphone-pick-up-signal-32124.htmlCellphones have plenty of power to talk to satellites, that's how SIGINT satellites in GEO work. They're not ordinarily designed to make it easy to talk to one, though. I assume that's what the modifications in their software are about, they might make the phone ignore that it's not receiving a strong, timely response from a tower.
Lockheed now is crowing about a 4G LTE over satellite system...Lockheed Martin Develops World-First LTE-Over-Satellite System
Quote from: Asteroza on 02/26/2019 11:15 pmQuote from: gongora on 02/25/2019 12:16 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 02/25/2019 04:37 amHrm, UbiquitiLink says phase one is 24-36 sats at 500km. Tethers Unlimited GobalFi direct-smartphone broadband (DTSB) system says 27 sats for "Cell Towers In Space"UbiquitiLink says they will need to orbit thousands of satellites for full coverage.GlobalFi is in the same boat. 27 sats is for hourly coverage (IoT/alert oriented) I believe, according to the documents availableHold on a minute. How can this company provide hourly coverage with 27 satellites?
Quote from: Danderman on 05/20/2019 07:42 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 02/26/2019 11:15 pmGlobalFi is in the same boat. 27 sats is for hourly coverage (IoT/alert oriented) I believe, according to the documents availableHold on a minute. How can this company provide hourly coverage with 27 satellites?For GlobalFi, 3 sats per orbital plane, 9 orbital planes with poor high latitude coverage perhaps? I don't have a working copy of STK handy at the moment to check the veracity of that, but if Ubiquitilink is proposing 24 on the low end for initial IoT capability, 27 is probably not an unreasonable number.
Quote from: Asteroza on 02/26/2019 11:15 pmGlobalFi is in the same boat. 27 sats is for hourly coverage (IoT/alert oriented) I believe, according to the documents availableHold on a minute. How can this company provide hourly coverage with 27 satellites?
GlobalFi is in the same boat. 27 sats is for hourly coverage (IoT/alert oriented) I believe, according to the documents available
Quote from: Asteroza on 05/21/2019 11:34 pmQuote from: Danderman on 05/20/2019 07:42 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 02/26/2019 11:15 pmGlobalFi is in the same boat. 27 sats is for hourly coverage (IoT/alert oriented) I believe, according to the documents availableHold on a minute. How can this company provide hourly coverage with 27 satellites?For GlobalFi, 3 sats per orbital plane, 9 orbital planes with poor high latitude coverage perhaps? I don't have a working copy of STK handy at the moment to check the veracity of that, but if Ubiquitilink is proposing 24 on the low end for initial IoT capability, 27 is probably not an unreasonable number.Let’s say we are in the Real World. How is GlobalFi going to put 3 satellites in an orbital plane, and then fill out another 8 evenly spaced planes? Give me some sort of launch manifest for that configuration.....
Quote from: Danderman on 05/22/2019 09:01 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 05/21/2019 11:34 pmQuote from: Danderman on 05/20/2019 07:42 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 02/26/2019 11:15 pmGlobalFi is in the same boat. 27 sats is for hourly coverage (IoT/alert oriented) I believe, according to the documents availableHold on a minute. How can this company provide hourly coverage with 27 satellites?For GlobalFi, 3 sats per orbital plane, 9 orbital planes with poor high latitude coverage perhaps? I don't have a working copy of STK handy at the moment to check the veracity of that, but if Ubiquitilink is proposing 24 on the low end for initial IoT capability, 27 is probably not an unreasonable number.Let’s say we are in the Real World. How is GlobalFi going to put 3 satellites in an orbital plane, and then fill out another 8 evenly spaced planes? Give me some sort of launch manifest for that configuration.....I have no skin in the game here, but GlobalFi sats appear to make use of SpiderFab on-orbit assembly to assemble the phased array hex dome at a minimum. So if the bus mass for 3 sats and a SpiderFab are appropriate, you could potentially mount the SpiderFab and sat parts on a RocketLabs Photon bus and Launch via Electron, but that would then require 9 launches. At roughly $5 million a launch, you're looking at $50 million for the set launch.The alternative is a single Falcon 9 launched Spiderfab host bus with some maneuver capability (something in the vein of a mobile ESPA ring like SHERPA perhaps?) carrying the parts for 27 sats. Since on-orbit assembly is not quick, you can take the opportunity to use the time required for orbital plane phasing to manufacture one plane of sats, release 3 and repeat, until all 9 planes are filled. The partial existence proof is 60 flat packed StarLink sats on one Falcon 9. If you cut that number in half, and effectively design a parts carrier bus host for Spiderfab, that should be roughly in the same mass range. Launch costs would be in a similar range?There's the dev costs for the mobile parts carrier that hosts Spiderfab though. Photon is somewhat a ready made bus for this purpose for riding on Electron, and SHERPA might be appropriate considering the non-propulsive versions have flown on Falcon 9.To be clear, GlobalFi also was meant by TUI to show the superiority of Spiderfab manufactured sats that need extremely large antennas and solar arrays in a compact launch package that can not be affordably done with existing deployment mechanisms (and without the deployment mechanism design penalties). 9 plane orbital phasing with one Spiderfab host would take a while though and puts all your eggs in one basket if Spiderfab doesn't live up to the hype. Splitting the deployment to multiple Photons would let you iron out some wrinkles (hell, using a Photon as an initial test/dev sat, then do the full deployment push on Falcon 9 is also reasonable to raise confidence in Spiderfab).
A bit of hand waving there.How exactly would a GlobalFi spacecraft “phase” from one plane to the next?
Quote from: Danderman on 05/23/2019 04:13 amA bit of hand waving there.How exactly would a GlobalFi spacecraft “phase” from one plane to the next?Earth has an equatorial bulge that cause plane changes over time at different rates for different altitudes
Quote from: ZChris13 on 05/23/2019 04:43 amQuote from: Danderman on 05/23/2019 04:13 amA bit of hand waving there.How exactly would a GlobalFi spacecraft “phase” from one plane to the next?Earth has an equatorial bulge that cause plane changes over time at different rates for different altitudesExactly.So, how to move GlobalFi satellites from one plane to another? What’s the initial orbital altitude, what’s the transfer orbit altitude? How long to move from one plane to another via precession?The difference between planes is 40 degrees. Unless the difference in altitude between the working orbit and the transfer orbit is hundreds of kilometers, using precession to change the plane by 90 degrees may take much more than a year. And then there is the question of maneuvering from the transfer orbit to the working orbit.Forgetting about all that stuff about in orbit assembly of satellites, my opinion is that a constellation of 9 planes is probably going to require 9 launches from the ground. Launches of only 3 satellites on one rocket are only economically viable if the satellites are large, unless there are other passengers who want to go to your initial orbit. Is GlobalFi launching large payloads?I am trying to get away from the hand waving and instead look at the Real World issues of covering the planet with 27 satellites.
Quote from: Danderman on 05/23/2019 11:45 amQuote from: ZChris13 on 05/23/2019 04:43 amQuote from: Danderman on 05/23/2019 04:13 amA bit of hand waving there.How exactly would a GlobalFi spacecraft “phase” from one plane to the next?Earth has an equatorial bulge that cause plane changes over time at different rates for different altitudesExactly.So, how to move GlobalFi satellites from one plane to another? What’s the initial orbital altitude, what’s the transfer orbit altitude? How long to move from one plane to another via precession?The difference between planes is 40 degrees. Unless the difference in altitude between the working orbit and the transfer orbit is hundreds of kilometers, using precession to change the plane by 90 degrees may take much more than a year. And then there is the question of maneuvering from the transfer orbit to the working orbit.Forgetting about all that stuff about in orbit assembly of satellites, my opinion is that a constellation of 9 planes is probably going to require 9 launches from the ground. Launches of only 3 satellites on one rocket are only economically viable if the satellites are large, unless there are other passengers who want to go to your initial orbit. Is GlobalFi launching large payloads?I am trying to get away from the hand waving and instead look at the Real World issues of covering the planet with 27 satellites.I feel like somehow I've turned into a GlobalFi salesman, when this is supposed to be a Ubiquitilink thread...The thesis that only large sats are economically viable for launch as the primary customer as a multi-sat launch without ridealongs is increasingly being upended by visible progress in hardware and existence proofs, so I don't agree with that statement. The time spent phasing will be non trivial for an all-up launch unless some kind of trick is used.TUI was likely baselining their Hydros thruster for GlobalFi, which is a small electric thruster using water propellant as a plasma thruster. This would give a fair amount of agility to the sats by that alone to cover orbit raising from the initial build orbit, but also opens up opportunities for refueling. Starlink sats for the first commercial version are stated to be 227 Kg. Iridium NEXT are 860 Kg, and OneWeb are 150 Kg, Telesat's prototype sat was 70 kg. With Electron/Photon, you are looking at around 150 Kg for raw payload attached to Photon. I have not seen open literature on the expected mass of GlobalFi sats.TUI says their OrbWeaver demo, which would be similar to GlobalFi sats being built by Spiderfab, would be 320kg, not including the aluminum ESPA ring which it would consume to manufacture the reflector antenna. It's not entirely clear what the mass breakdown is for actual satellite versus Spiderfab, especially in comparison to OrbWeaver which intends to build only a single sat, as well as other components which could be replaced by services from the Photon bus. The stated mass suggests that the OrbWeaver iteration at least would be unsuitable for Electron, and the existence proof of Telesat's prototype would suggest that making a 45 kg sat (which might allow a 3 sat launch with Spiderfab on Photon) would be somewhat difficult. That could force the number of launches on Electron up to 27 if you can effectively only fit something OneWeb class in mass for a single sat due to component mass (thus effectively emulating OrbWeaver at half it's mass), and you would be looking at something near 4.1 metric tons for an all up launch.I haven't seen any open literature on the mass of Ubiquitilink sats yet, so can't really say anything constructive about mass/design.
My point is that generating an hourly service with a few dozen satellites is non-trivial.So.... regardless of the specific satellite company, regardless of the payload mass, regardless of the launcher type, and not using Star Trek technology, what is the launch architecture to create an hourly service?
Quote from: Danderman on 05/24/2019 08:24 pmMy point is that generating an hourly service with a few dozen satellites is non-trivial.So.... regardless of the specific satellite company, regardless of the payload mass, regardless of the launcher type, and not using Star Trek technology, what is the launch architecture to create an hourly service?Iridium has constant coverage with 5 1/2 dozen satellites. That makes hourly coverage with half as many satellites sound very reasonable.
Virginia-based UbiquitiLink says it has raised another $5.2 million in seed funding for a network that aims to provide satellite connectivity for standard mobile devices....Miller said more than 20 mobile operators have already signed testing agreements. Cellular One in Arizona, Telefonica’s MoviStar service in Argentina and Vodafone Hutchison in Australia are among the publicly disclosed partners, he said....An upgraded version of the payload is due for launch later this month, with testing scheduled to begin next month. If all the tests go well (and if the company attracts additional funding), UbiquitiLink could start launching operational satellites and go commercial by the end of 2020 or in early 2021, Miller said.
Quote from: gongora on 05/25/2019 12:02 amQuote from: Danderman on 05/24/2019 08:24 pmMy point is that generating an hourly service with a few dozen satellites is non-trivial.So.... regardless of the specific satellite company, regardless of the payload mass, regardless of the launcher type, and not using Star Trek technology, what is the launch architecture to create an hourly service?Iridium has constant coverage with 5 1/2 dozen satellites. That makes hourly coverage with half as many satellites sound very reasonable.Not exactly.Iridium is not a good example, nor is Globalstar. Filling a plane of Iridium or Globalstar would require a launch on Falcon 9 or similar launcher. That’s a lot of money. On the other hand, to provide hourly coverage with a company employing small seats is much more difficult, since a plane may be filled with just 1 - 3 satellites, and that is probably not economically feasible - there just aren’t many launchers available to put 300 kg in orbit.
The company has changed its name to Lynk Global, or "Lynk".
Quote from: Danderman on 09/19/2019 03:01 pmThe company has changed its name to Lynk Global, or "Lynk".I've been waiting for this ever since I first saw the name, it's hardly unique in the networking/communication space.
Can Lynk handle more than just texting? While all the media material talks about "connecting" to cell phones, I haven't seen anything about actual voice service. Doing data/text is still impressive, but it's probably not what most people think of when you say your cell phone will get service from a satellite.
Even a limited txt messaging capability would be useful. Better than carry dedicated satellite phone and cheaper if only paying buy txt. Would ideal for hiking in remote places, or as alternative to global roaming. This would allow them to start small and expand as demand grows till they can provide voice coverage.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/20/2020 07:40 amEven a limited txt messaging capability would be useful. Better than carry dedicated satellite phone and cheaper if only paying buy txt. Would ideal for hiking in remote places, or as alternative to global roaming. This would allow them to start small and expand as demand grows till they can provide voice coverage.That was the pitch of Orbcomm and Geostar.When went Ch11 like every other LEO/MEO constellation comm sat service provider. People have been trying this stuff since the mid 90's (the first 2 Orbcomm satellites launched on OSC Pegasus in 1995). 25 years of watching the economics of those fleets seems to taught very few people very few lessons.
The one lesson Lynk has learned is custom terminals are like a dead albatross around a constellation's neck, thus the effort in getting relatively unmodified smartphones to work with it. You do not want to put up barriers to people trying to throw money at you.
Quote from: Asteroza on 03/26/2020 10:18 pmThe one lesson Lynk has learned is custom terminals are like a dead albatross around a constellation's neck, thus the effort in getting relatively unmodified smartphones to work with it. You do not want to put up barriers to people trying to throw money at you.The classic in this regard was the inability of iridium terminals to not work indoors. .What has changed is the ability to set up picocell base stations and therefor (in principal) shift the issue to a small wireless unit that can interface to unmodified cell phones. Not sure how Lynk will actually proceed but it's an option that didn't exist in the 90's.
Every failed LEO constellation required the customer to buy some custom equipment.
Quote from: Danderman on 03/29/2020 03:45 amEvery failed LEO constellation required the customer to buy some custom equipment.Quite true. The (possible) attraction of the picocell is that it lets multiple uses share the specialist equipment and continue to use their personal mobiles. Wheather that's enough to justify using Lynk Globals system (or starlink, or anyone else's) system only time will tell. Keep in mind cell phone reception is radically more developed now than in the mid 90's. Sat phones to talk to geo comm sats have shown to be workable.One market that's substantial but difficult to serve is the US. Lots of folk with poor broadband provided by cable companies with a virtual monopoly on the service who have actively tried to stifle competition by resident owned broadband suppliers and a very cooper"cooperative" chairman of the FCC in Pai.
Recent podcast by founder of Lynk Global.https://www.thespaceshow.com/show/14-aug-2020/broadcast-3557-charles-millerCurrently have few satellites in operation.
Lynk announced May 25 that it filed the FCC application using the commission’s streamlined licensing process for smallsats established in 2019. The company hopes that approach will allow it to begin commercial services with a first group of satellites within a year.That streamlined approach does set limits on the size, orbital altitude, and lifetime of the satellites. It also covers constellations of no more than 10 satellites.
Lynk ultimately envisions operating as many as 5,000 satellites in low Earth orbit, communicating with mobile phones without the need for special antennas or other equipment. The company has tested the technology enabling this on several hosted payloads and smallsats, operating under experimental licenses. Earlier this year company officials said they wanted to begin commercial operations in 2022 using a small fraction of that full constellation.
Last month, Lynk claimed a first: two-way satellite-to-smartphone connectivity. The breakthrough was not the connection, but that Lynk satellites communicated with ordinary, unmodified phones. Phones were talking to satellites without any special satellite receiver.Lynk is raising a new round of funding, negotiating contracts with mobile carriers, and preparing for Gen-1 satellite production, CEO Charles Miller tells Payload. You can find the full interview below.
Lynk Global had its first commercial satellite, Lynk Tower 1, on the Sherpa as the company begins to roll out its satellite telephony services.
Lynk Global satellites have connected with thousands of unmodified smartphones, tablets, internet-of-things devices and vehicles, the Fall Church, Virginia, startup announced Feb. 8.The mobile devices required “zero modifications,” Lynk CEO Charles Miller told SpaceNews. “In fact, these devices did not know they were even participating in our test.”Lynk was testing the ability of its fifth satellite to connect with the company’s own smartphones, when thousands of other devices that lacked terrestrial network service detected the Lynk signal and “automatically requested a connection,” Miller said by email. “Our satellite then connected them.”
Lynk is a huge deal. Honestly, the idea is just as big or maybe even bigger than Starlink’s idea. (Execution is maybe another story.)It’s a trillion dollar market. And by working with unmodified cellphones, there’s no terminal supply chain issues to slow development and limit revenue. It’s purely just satellite capacity and regulatory permission.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 02/10/2022 01:52 pmLynk is a huge deal. Honestly, the idea is just as big or maybe even bigger than Starlink’s idea. (Execution is maybe another story.)It’s a trillion dollar market. And by working with unmodified cellphones, there’s no terminal supply chain issues to slow development and limit revenue. It’s purely just satellite capacity and regulatory permission.I'm somewhat in agreement, but will emphasize that these connections are very low bandwidth. Lynk themselves specify that they'd have serious trouble handling even voice calls with their early setup - no problem, they want to start small and work their way up. The problem is that scaling up to higher bandwidth is fundamentally limited by mobile antenna size. To achieve a good enough SNR for high-bandwidth operations requires either more power or higher gain, which in turn means larger or more numerous satellites, until eventually you're at AST/SpaceMobile levels, which are (IMO) unsustainable.Low-bandwidth communications are still great. You can still serve a lot of customers, and make a lot of money, by operating such a network. That's exactly what IoT satellite operators have been doing for decades - the difference is that Lynk is building an IoT constellation that uses existing terminals and protocols (even if it takes significant work to fit into specifications that weren't designed for them). That's a large market, but I would characterize it as closer to existing IoT operators than new high-bandwidth operators - and indeed, "We’re not competing with Elon."So while I'm confident Lynk has a path to success, and an important role to play in global communications, I wouldn't exactly say that they've opened up a brand-new "trillion dollar market", though I can see why there's reason for optimism.
Bump. What is the CURRENT capability of Lynk Global? Can it be used to get text messages from out of places like Ukraine (or Russia)?
Even spotty coverage is useful for getting messages in and out. Virtually everyone has a cellphone.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/04/2022 01:35 pmEven spotty coverage is useful for getting messages in and out. Virtually everyone has a cellphone.Getting the SIM cards there might be problematic (wonder if you could do an eSIM though...)
Quote from: Asteroza on 03/04/2022 10:00 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/04/2022 01:35 pmEven spotty coverage is useful for getting messages in and out. Virtually everyone has a cellphone.Getting the SIM cards there might be problematic (wonder if you could do an eSIM though...)Lynk does not require specialized SIM cards for customers.
Quote from: Danderman on 03/14/2022 02:16 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 03/04/2022 10:00 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/04/2022 01:35 pmEven spotty coverage is useful for getting messages in and out. Virtually everyone has a cellphone.Getting the SIM cards there might be problematic (wonder if you could do an eSIM though...)Lynk does not require specialized SIM cards for customers.special no, but unless you are doing remote provisioning somehow like an eSIM, they'll need provisioned/activated cards
Is there a thread yet for this company, AST, which doing basically the same thing?https://twitter.com/AST_SpaceMobile/status/1481987297469997057?s=20&t=0tegY_9jh1iEePfLRiUEBA
Quote from: Asteroza on 03/14/2022 09:29 pmQuote from: Danderman on 03/14/2022 02:16 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 03/04/2022 10:00 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/04/2022 01:35 pmEven spotty coverage is useful for getting messages in and out. Virtually everyone has a cellphone.Getting the SIM cards there might be problematic (wonder if you could do an eSIM though...)Lynk does not require specialized SIM cards for customers.special no, but unless you are doing remote provisioning somehow like an eSIM, they'll need provisioned/activated cardsA GSM device can still make emergency calls without a SIM present (and on any available network), so clearly there is not a hard technical requirement for presence of a provisioned SIM for basic connectivity (including voice and SMS). That sort of free-for-all setup is not viable for normal service, but for the current emergency situation it's not a concern unless you wish to preserve its use for specific users (e.g. emergency services, military) rather than for general population emergency access - though some sort of whitelisting/blacklisting could be viable based purely on IMEI.
Quote from: edzieba on 03/15/2022 10:36 amQuote from: Asteroza on 03/14/2022 09:29 pmQuote from: Danderman on 03/14/2022 02:16 pmQuote from: Asteroza on 03/04/2022 10:00 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/04/2022 01:35 pmEven spotty coverage is useful for getting messages in and out. Virtually everyone has a cellphone.Getting the SIM cards there might be problematic (wonder if you could do an eSIM though...)Lynk does not require specialized SIM cards for customers.special no, but unless you are doing remote provisioning somehow like an eSIM, they'll need provisioned/activated cardsA GSM device can still make emergency calls without a SIM present (and on any available network), so clearly there is not a hard technical requirement for presence of a provisioned SIM for basic connectivity (including voice and SMS). That sort of free-for-all setup is not viable for normal service, but for the current emergency situation it's not a concern unless you wish to preserve its use for specific users (e.g. emergency services, military) rather than for general population emergency access - though some sort of whitelisting/blacklisting could be viable based purely on IMEI.Lynk operates in partnership with mobile phone operators, so that Lynn’s customers are also the customers of mobile phone operators. Since a cellular user must have a SIM card to be a customer of a mobile phone operator, this discussion about users without SIM cards doesn’t make sense in this topic.If anyone is all excited about accessing the market for phone users who took out their SIM cards, they can start a new topic.
Lynk Global said it is still waiting for Spaceflight to rebook a flight for the second commercial satellite in its cellphone-compatible broadband network, four months after the launch services provider’s space tug was kicked off a SpaceX mission.<snip>Lynk Global announced July 5 that it had secured funding from Virginia Venture Partners, the equity investment arm of Virginia’s non-profit Virginia Innovation Partnership Corporation (VIPC), to accelerate its initial commercial services launch in late 2022.Miller said Lynk Global secured $1 million in funding — the first time VIPC has decided to invest up to its maximum funding cap in a single transaction — which will be used to build and integrate its third and fourth commercial satellites.
@LynkTheWorld wins @mercedesbenz "car2space" Challenge ! Lynk will soon connect hundreds of millions of cars everywhere on Earth using ‘cell towers in space’ -https://lynk.world/lynk-wins-mercedes-benz-car2space-challenge
.@LynkTheWorld: @SpaceX-@TMobile, @apple-@Globalstar, @AST_SpaceMobile imminent launch, @Huawei's ambitions: It's all good for us. Now we need our @FCC license. https://bit.ly/3RHq9SD
I'm confused by the claim that this is "world's first-ever commercial license for a satellite-direct-to-standard-mobile-phone service", I thought both Lynk and AST Spacemobile has already have approval from other (unspecified) countries for providing this service in those countries?
This initial license is for 10 satellites serving customers outside of the United States using certain UHF frequencies (617-960MHz) to connect with the cellular devices (TT&C and gateway connections are in other frequencies).
However, Lynk has not yet secured landing rights in any country where it plans to provide services.The Virginia-based startup currently has licenses that enable it to test its planned services in 18 countries, including the United States, Lynk CEO Charles Miller told SpaceNews.
Lynk Global said Sept. 28 it will test the ability to send a 5G signal from a satellite launching in December to standard mobile devices, after getting funding for the demonstration from an undisclosed partner.The experimental 5G payload will be onboard its second commercial satellite, which SpaceX is slated to fly on a Falcon 9 rocket as part of its Transporter 6 rideshare mission.Two other Lynk satellites are also due to fly on this mission to give the Virginia-based startup four commercial satellites in low Earth orbit.Lynk’s initial satellites are designed to provide connectivity for its mobile network operator (MNO) partners’ customers over 2G to 4G.
Thrilled to be testing in #Australia with our partner @Optus. As one of Australia's largest telecoms companies, they've now experienced @LynkTheWorld's forthcoming #ubiquitious connectivity across the country's vast landmass via Lynk's LEO satellites: https://optus.com.au/connected/leaders-insights/leo-satellite-to-mobile-technology
Lynk Global is close to completing a ground station in Hawaii as part of plans to connect its growing constellation of small satellites to standard smartphones this spring.The Ka-band ground station is needed to route cellular signals Lynk’s satellites pick up from low Earth orbit (LEO) back to a mobile operator partner’s terrestrial network. It is the first of dozens of ground stations the venture plans to deploy worldwide to reduce latency and improve the resiliency of its network, which would enable telcos to keep customers connected outside cellular coverage.
Miller: "If you can't get the cost of the satellite down, when you're mass producing, to well under $1 million then you're in trouble.""Lynk marginal cost per satellite we have in orbit today is under $200,000"
https://globalnews.ca/news/10169670/rogers-satellite-mobile-phone-call/amp/Rogers hails successful satellite-to-mobile phone call, plans for Canada-wide rollout
Rogers says it plans to launch satellite-to-mobile phone service in 2024, beginning with SMS texting and mass notifications and expanding to voice and data.
A blank-check company set up by former New York Yankees all-star Alex Rodriguez is planning to merge with satellite communications provider Lynk Global Inc., according to people with knowledge of the matter.Slam Corp., a special purpose acquisition company, signed a letter of intent to merge with Lynk, with the combined company expected to list on the Nasdaq stock exchange, according to the people, asking not to be identified as the deal hasn’t been made public. The company is expected to be valued at no less than $800 million upon the closing of the transaction, according to people.
TAMPA, Fla. — Former professional baseball player Alex Rodriguez’s shell company got more time from investors to merge with Lynk Global, but has to give $176 million back to those opting to redeem shares rather than a potential stake in the direct-to-smartphone satellite operator.Slam Corp, a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) that raised $575 million by listing shares on Nasdaq in February 2021 to search for an investment opportunity, now has less than $99 million in its trust account following a separate batch of shareholder redemptions earlier this year.The high redemption rate is a blow for Lynk’s hopes to use the funds to grow its constellation — currently enabling intermittent texting and other low-bandwidth services to unmodified phones outside cellular networks in three countries — although extra financing could come from other sources as merger talks continue.
Lynk has not disclosed how much funding it hopes to raise from merging with Slam, although the companies have said they are working on a deal that would value the combined group at $800 million.The operator currently has three one-meter-squared satellites in low Earth orbit, and plans to deploy two more early next year via SpaceX’s next Falcon 9 rideshare mission.Ultimately, Lynk envisages a constellation of 5,000 satellites to provide continuous connectivity services worldwide through partnerships with terrestrial cellular operators.
Apple has a agreement with Globalstar for this...and MDA, Rocket Lab, are building the satellites...
It's possible that the satellite smartphone industry could evolve into 3 or 4 really big players who gobble up the current entrants. It's hard to see AST and Lynk remaining as standalone entrants 5 years from now, but rather we may see a Google satellite smartphone entrant, maybe other similar giants in the field.But, I don't claim to have any special insight into the top level machinations, so everything is a surprise to me.
I wonder if buying shares of SLAM now is the same as investing in LYNK - assuming the deal goes through.I don't know much about SPACs, so its not clear to me what would happen to SLAM's $10 a share price if the deal goes through.
There are GEO based smartphone to satellite providers emerging now, using existing GEO birds. No idea about the technology, I can't imagine that any transmit on traditional smartphone frequencies, so they must use frequencies that some cellphones can access, but telephone companies don't use. This requires the satellite operator to have a license for that frequency in any target market. Maybe its the satellite to ground station downlink frequency.
Quote from: Danderman on 02/19/2024 07:27 pmThere are GEO based smartphone to satellite providers emerging now, using existing GEO birds. No idea about the technology, I can't imagine that any transmit on traditional smartphone frequencies, so they must use frequencies that some cellphones can access, but telephone companies don't use. This requires the satellite operator to have a license for that frequency in any target market. Maybe its the satellite to ground station downlink frequency.Reference, please? 5G and other smartphone protocols are a whole lot more complicated than just a frequency specification, and the physics of sending enough energy from a smartphone to a GEO satellite is hard to imagine.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 02/19/2024 07:35 pmQuote from: Danderman on 02/19/2024 07:27 pmThere are GEO based smartphone to satellite providers emerging now, using existing GEO birds. No idea about the technology, I can't imagine that any transmit on traditional smartphone frequencies, so they must use frequencies that some cellphones can access, but telephone companies don't use. This requires the satellite operator to have a license for that frequency in any target market. Maybe its the satellite to ground station downlink frequency.Reference, please? 5G and other smartphone protocols are a whole lot more complicated than just a frequency specification, and the physics of sending enough energy from a smartphone to a GEO satellite is hard to imagine.https://www.skylo.tech/
Quote from: Danderman on 02/20/2024 09:34 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 02/19/2024 07:35 pmQuote from: Danderman on 02/19/2024 07:27 pmThere are GEO based smartphone to satellite providers emerging now, using existing GEO birds. No idea about the technology, I can't imagine that any transmit on traditional smartphone frequencies, so they must use frequencies that some cellphones can access, but telephone companies don't use. This requires the satellite operator to have a license for that frequency in any target market. Maybe its the satellite to ground station downlink frequency.Reference, please? 5G and other smartphone protocols are a whole lot more complicated than just a frequency specification, and the physics of sending enough energy from a smartphone to a GEO satellite is hard to imagine.https://www.skylo.tech/Thanks. The systems they already support are very low data rate and are specialized hardware, not smartphones. 3GPP to smartphones is "coming soon" and will require a firmware upgrade for the phone. Not sure how that will work, but it is highly unlikely to change the frequencies, and there should be no need to do so anyway. I will wait until they actually offer the product.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 02/20/2024 02:44 pmQuote from: Danderman on 02/20/2024 09:34 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 02/19/2024 07:35 pmQuote from: Danderman on 02/19/2024 07:27 pmThere are GEO based smartphone to satellite providers emerging now, using existing GEO birds. No idea about the technology, I can't imagine that any transmit on traditional smartphone frequencies, so they must use frequencies that some cellphones can access, but telephone companies don't use. This requires the satellite operator to have a license for that frequency in any target market. Maybe its the satellite to ground station downlink frequency.Reference, please? 5G and other smartphone protocols are a whole lot more complicated than just a frequency specification, and the physics of sending enough energy from a smartphone to a GEO satellite is hard to imagine.https://www.skylo.tech/Thanks. The systems they already support are very low data rate and are specialized hardware, not smartphones. 3GPP to smartphones is "coming soon" and will require a firmware upgrade for the phone. Not sure how that will work, but it is highly unlikely to change the frequencies, and there should be no need to do so anyway. I will wait until they actually offer the product.If a GEO comsat could transmit in a frequency licensed by a cellular company for use by smartphones outside of cellular coverage, its very likely that the transmissions would interfere with terrestrial cell tower signal. That's a major no-no.I would guess that the GEO comsat would service cellphones via frequences outside licensed cellular bands, maybe L band.
But maybe enough for SOS and message?
Quote from: Tywin on 02/23/2024 12:16 pmBut maybe enough for SOS and message?While messaging in emergency is great option, there still no substitute for EPIRB. Push button and it will transmit your location continuously for few hours or days while being very rugged and waterproof.Worry is lot people will treat remote ph coverage as substitute for a EPIRB when their activity really does justify carrying an EPIRB.