Starlink direct to cell (was SpaceX & T-mobile event 25 Aug 2022)

[M.E.T.]

Another strategic impact would be to significantly undermine the business case for AST Spacemobile type services before it even gets off the ground.

Think about it for a moment.

These rural areas are sparsely populated, and most visitors would be going there once or twice a year on vacation. For home internet at your remote cabin or ranch and for long term mobile internet in e.g. an RV - Starlink will be the service of choice for people in these areas.

That leaves only the need to have emergency contact capability in dead zone areas while travelling / hiking etc. Which the Starlink-T-mobile alliance will provide for free.

So with those two needs covered, who will still need a costly higher bandwidth phone capability from AST for the limited number of times you need to stream a video call while in a dead zone?

In my view, once the emergency contact need is covered, most of the AST Spacemobile business case disappears.

[DanClemmensen]

Another strategic impact would be to significantly undermine the business case for AST Spacemobile type services before it even gets off the ground.

Think about it for a moment.

These rural areas are sparsely populated, and most visitors would be going there once or twice a year on vacation. For home internet at your remote cabin or ranch - and for long term mobile internet in e.g. an RV - Starlink will be the service of choice for people in these areas.

That leaves only the need to have emergency contact capability in dead zone areas while travelling / hiking etc. Which the Starlink-T-mobile alliance will provide for free.

So with those two needs covered, who will still need a costly higher bandwidth phone capability from AST for the limited number of times you need to stream a video call while in a dead zone?

In my view, once the emergency contact need is covered, most of the AST Spacemobile business case disappears.

I speculate that a big user of this service will be cars that use LTE for connectivity, such as Teslas.

[Danderman]

If one shell can support the cell service then having a different shell be made up of mini-sats may not matter.  They said the initial Gen2 deployment would be three of the shells.

In all cases, delay of Starship is, by definition is going to delay cellular service.

[M.E.T.]

If one shell can support the cell service then having a different shell be made up of mini-sats may not matter.  They said the initial Gen2 deployment would be three of the shells.

In all cases, delay of Starship is, by definition is going to delay cellular service.

I don’t think that is a controversial take. Starship is central to SpaceX’s vision, on every front.

[Danderman]

If one shell can support the cell service then having a different shell be made up of mini-sats may not matter.  They said the initial Gen2 deployment would be three of the shells.

In all cases, delay of Starship is, by definition is going to delay cellular service.

I don’t think that is a controversial take. Starship is central to SpaceX’s vision, on every front.

I am well aware of the importance of Starship, not just to Starlink, but to NASA exploration.

My opinion is that introduction into operational service will be long and painful. If there is an early launch failure, you won’t believe the doom, gloom, and wrenching of garments here.

If you want a historical analog to Starship, the Russian N1 program would be instructive. Of course, Elon knows about it, and will avoid their mistakes. But, there is one common issue between N1 and Starship, turbulence among 30+ engines at the base of the rocket. The Soviets had no way of understanding the interaction among 30 engines, but we still don’t have a theory of turbulence, so the Starlink launches will be instructive.

I would be happy to be wrong about Starship. I would rather live in a world where Starship is flying regularly.

[Danderman]

More on Starlink shells and T-Mobile:

Starlink actually uses a 1,500+ shell at 550 km to provide coverage between 52 degrees North and South. This is the meat and potatoes shell. Any mini V2 sat launched into this shell will be a dead loss for T-Mobile.

The other shells are to provide better coverage, but they are complementary to the principal shell. For example, the shell at 70 degrees gives better coverage north and south of 52 degrees. T-Mobile doesn’t need that coverage, except for Alaska, but I am not sure of their service area in Alaska.

T-Mobile requires a shell that provides full coverage south of 52 degrees North, as a minimum.

Note: some posters here seem to believe that the various shells are fully redundant, that each shell provides global coverage. This is not correct.

[DanClemmensen]

If one shell can support the cell service then having a different shell be made up of mini-sats may not matter.  They said the initial Gen2 deployment would be three of the shells.

In all cases, delay of Starship is, by definition is going to delay cellular service.

I don’t think that is a controversial take. Starship is central to SpaceX’s vision, on every front.

I am well aware of the importance of Starship, not just to Starlink, but to NASA exploration.

My opinion is that introduction into operational service will be long and painful. If there is an early launch failure, you won’t believe the doom, gloom, and wrenching of garments here.

If you want a historical analog to Starship, the Russian N1 program would be instructive. Of course, Elon knows about it, and will avoid their mistakes. But, there is one common issue between N1 and Starship, turbulence among 30+ engines at the base of the rocket. The Soviets had no way of understanding the interaction among 30 engines, but we still don’t have a theory of turbulence, so the Starlink launches will be instructive.

I would be happy to be wrong about Starship. I would rather live in a world where Starship is flying regularly.

Yep, 33 Raptors are surely fundamentally different than 27 Merlins on an FH..... How?

They will probably have an unknown unknown of some sort, but not that one.

[Danderman]

The configuration of Starship engines is very different than FH.

Like the SRBs on Shuttle and Titan III, side by side mounting is very different than a tight cluster.

You should look at the base of Starship and N1, a striking similarity.

[su27k]

We're getting OT, but there's nothing fundamentally wrong with N1, design wise it should work, it's just the project is underfunded and they skipped out on a lot of ground testing. Even so, they got pretty close to successful first stage flight before cancellation.

It's a pity that the Russians abandoned it, because a successful N1 flight would dispel a lot of unfounded fear about engine clustering, this could radically change the course of space launch. If you dig deep at why SpaceX is successful, engine clustering is on the top of the list of reasons, it affects many aspect of the LV and engine design.

[Eric Hedman]

More on Starlink shells and T-Mobile:

Starlink actually uses a 1,500+ shell at 550 km to provide coverage between 52 degrees North and South. This is the meat and potatoes shell. Any mini V2 sat launched into this shell will be a dead loss for T-Mobile.

The other shells are to provide better coverage, but they are complementary to the principal shell. For example, the shell at 70 degrees gives better coverage north and south of 52 degrees. T-Mobile doesn’t need that coverage, except for Alaska, but I am not sure of their service area in Alaska.

T-Mobile requires a shell that provides full coverage south of 52 degrees North, as a minimum.

Note: some posters here seem to believe that the various shells are fully redundant, that each shell provides global coverage. This is not correct.

Here is T-Mobile's coverage map for Alaska.  It is pretty sparse:

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-1ba0dd46876bd384d1e6aa8a02c4986f

[MP99]

More on Starlink shells and T-Mobile:

Starlink actually uses a 1,500+ shell at 550 km to provide coverage between 52 degrees North and South. This is the meat and potatoes shell. Any mini V2 sat launched into this shell will be a dead loss for T-Mobile.

The other shells are to provide better coverage, but they are complementary to the principal shell. For example, the shell at 70 degrees gives better coverage north and south of 52 degrees. T-Mobile doesn’t need that coverage, except for Alaska, but I am not sure of their service area in Alaska.

T-Mobile requires a shell that provides full coverage south of 52 degrees North, as a minimum.

Note: some posters here seem to believe that the various shells are fully redundant, that each shell provides global coverage. This is not correct.

Shell consists of multiple individual strings in an orbit (RAAN?). Having a senior moment and can't think of the right name.

Are two sats in the same orbit always / often visible at the same time?

Wondering if v2lite sats could be launched into temporary orbits, then rearrange to alternate lite and full sats eventually?

Question: my assumption is that the VLEO constellation will boost signal strength, just due to being closer to the user. Does it matter much which altitude the initial sats are launched? If it does, the lite sats could go into the least effective slots for mobile service.

[MP99]

Question: do we know if the service will be using 4g or 5g signalling?

I'm guessing 4g, both because it's more robust as a signal, and I believe that 5g relies in beam forming, and that would seem to require a massive firmware upgrade to the phones.

Maybe even 3g???

[Danderman]

More on Starlink shells and T-Mobile:

Starlink actually uses a 1,500+ shell at 550 km to provide coverage between 52 degrees North and South. This is the meat and potatoes shell. Any mini V2 sat launched into this shell will be a dead loss for T-Mobile.

The other shells are to provide better coverage, but they are complementary to the principal shell. For example, the shell at 70 degrees gives better coverage north and south of 52 degrees. T-Mobile doesn’t need that coverage, except for Alaska, but I am not sure of their service area in Alaska.

T-Mobile requires a shell that provides full coverage south of 52 degrees North, as a minimum.

Note: some posters here seem to believe that the various shells are fully redundant, that each shell provides global coverage. This is not correct.

Shell consists of multiple individual strings in an orbit (RAAN?). Having a senior moment and can't think of the right name.

Are two sats in the same orbit always / often visible at the same time?

Wondering if v2lite sats could be launched into temporary orbits, then rearrange to alternate lite and full sats eventually?

Question: my assumption is that the VLEO constellation will boost signal strength, just due to being closer to the user. Does it matter much which altitude the initial sats are launched? If it does, the lite sats could go into the least effective slots for mobile service.

You are looking for the word “plane”.

I am not sure how to answer your questions.  V2 constellations look to be a the same altitudes as V1, with 3 different altitude regimes. But, this could change.

Since the V2 mini sats don’t support handhelds, their orbital altitude is irrelevant to this topic.

Let me speculate a bit here:

Shell #1 is going to ~550 km at 52 degrees. This is the shell where the sats that support handhelds must be launched as well (if you don’t understand why, I will explain).

Let’s say that Starship is late, so SpaceX starts up Shell #1 with mini sats on F9. The longer Starship is delayed, 2 things happen: T-Mobile has no product, and the more mini sats that must be replaced when Starship is in service. Or SpaceX has to start launching full V2 sats on some other launcher.

There is one constant here: for a fully usable handheld constellation, there must be at least one visible satellite in the user’s field of view at all times. The minimum elevation of that satellite is a function of antenna design, and that determines the required number of satellites in the shell. Having other complimentary shells may help a bit in enhancing service.

[Danderman]

As one of the founders of Lynk, I welcome SpaceX entering this market. First, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. More to the point, this profoundly validates Lynk’s vision and market assessment.

The market indeed is large, plenty for multiple providers.

[spacenut]

The western world is not the only place T Mobile and Starlink will or can operate.  T Mobile has already passed AT&T as the second largest provider in America behind Verizon.  Their goal is to pass Verizon, so by teaming up with SpaceX's Starlink, they can expand in the rural areas.  There are a lot more rural areas in the US and Canada than people think.  Cable for internet is basically only in cities and towns.  There are even dead zones near me for Verizon and I live in southeastern US. 

I think this is a great idea combining the two. 

[Mandella]

The western world is not the only place T Mobile and Starlink will or can operate.  T Mobile has already passed AT&T as the second largest provider in America behind Verizon.  Their goal is to pass Verizon, so by teaming up with SpaceX's Starlink, they can expand in the rural areas.  There are a lot more rural areas in the US and Canada than people think.  Cable for internet is basically only in cities and towns.  There are even dead zones near me for Verizon and I live in southeastern US. 

I think this is a great idea combining the two.

I'm in one of those dead zones. I can barely get 3G Verizon even with a local booster. I had written off T-Mobile years ago as one of those services that only works in the city anyway -- I had no idea they were making a big push to expand rural.

So next week I intend to borrow a T-Mobile phone and check out the service out here with it. If it works better (and it can hardly work worse than Verizon) then I'm switching.

Sorry for the offtopic, but I wouldn't even be aware that T-Mobile might be an option now here in the sticks if not for the announcement of the Starlink venture.

[spacenut]

We pay about $175 a month for two Android cell phones with Verizon on a month to month basis.  We have open phones so we may go to a T-Mobile store and change chips and get a better deal.  We are in town and have AT&T fiber optic service for internet.  However, we may get a mobile Starlink service so we can travel and have internet.  We are retired. 

I think this will help both companies maybe to get some money from the government to help with rural internet service, since SpaceX was recently turned down. 

[su27k]

Did Elon Musk just upstage Tim Cook's big iPhone 14 surprise?

The world's richest human being – Elon Musk, worth an estimated $265 billion – yesterday said he plans to start launching new satellites next year that can connect directly to existing mobile phones on Earth.

Separately, the world's most valuable company – Apple, with a market cap of $2.7 trillion – is widely expected to introduce a new iPhone next month that can directly connect to satellites.

And the fortunes of some of the world's biggest wireless network operators have become caught up in this gamesmanship.

[sanman]

So Musk speaks to the fact that Starlink v2 has to pick up the tiny signal from a cellphone, while also compensating for Doppler effect. He says Starlink v2 will have the most advanced Phased Array antennae in the world:



Is this the new Killer App for Starship?

Would other cell service providers be able to obtain equal arrangements with Starlink? Or would T-Mobile be first among equals? If multiple cell service providers are able to get such agreements with SpaceX, then how do they compete with each other? Would they each be assigned to mutually exclusive geographic zones? How do you do that with a satellite-based service?

What's the timeline for this T-Mobile service to arrive?

What's to prevent SpaceX / Starlink from just creating another spinoff and selling their own phone service directly off their own satellite network?

(Also, LabPadre @ 10:10) 

[JayWee]

...
Is this the new Killer App for Starship?
...

Starlink V2 itself already is.