What is the big advancement here compared to say Hughes Satellite Internet that is slower then DSL?
Lower latency and much higher data rates.
FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
61–70 of 331 posts
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, you need to get authorisation to launch a payload based on where your company is headquartered.
Does that mean, once you have a satellite in orbit, you can transmit anything into any country?
Most likely you'll need to buy spectrum wherever you plan to do this.
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#63Please tell me that this means Comcast will go out of business. Oh man. The excitement I would feel at watching them go down...
Satellite can be amazing tech. But it's still not going to be the best viable option for high bandwidth connections in medium to large sized cities. As companies like centurylink build GPON and 10GPON based FTTH networks (example: Capitol, Hill, Seattle) it's quite possible to do 900 x 900 Mbps symmetric, though slightly oversubscribed, residential connections.
DOCSIS3.1 over old copper coax cable, with enough RF channel bonding, can also do 300 to 900 Mbps downstream, again slightly oversubscribed. With much less upstream because the RF channels are usually allocated asymmetrically at a ratio of 10:1 or thereabouts.
This is by no means going to hurt Comcast. Comcast (and similar companies like Wave, RCN, Charter, Shaw, etc) are building DOCSIS3.1 and also overbuilding their own networks with fiber. They have the established right of way through major cities, both on pole and underground, and can incrementally build a FTTN/FTTdP architecture with existing copper, and will eventually overbuild everything with singlemode fiber to the customer.
What this will be revolutionary for is small towns, remote/rural areas. In the US as an example the market for ISP last mile connections that is presently served by either WISPs, or in places where no WISP exists, two-way Ku/Ka-band VSAT terminals (HughesNet, ViaSat, etc). The capacity constrains on traditional geostationary consumer grade VSAT services result in terrible things (TDMA oversubscription that pushes latency to 1150ms during peak hours), and things like 20GB/month transfer quotas. That's for a typical $100/month, 24 or 36-month term with the latest generation of Viasat's services.
For polar regions this will be a big deal because they are presently almost entirely dependent on geostationary C and Ku-band satellite capacity.
On ships: Very relevant and has the potential to capture a ton of market from Inmarsat's I-4 and I-5 series satellites and tech, and Iridium's upcoming maritime products. With a sufficient number (thousands!) of polar orbit satellites it can cover mid ocean areas very effectively.
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#64What will the latency be like? My understanding is that these satellites will be in lower orbit, allowing for shorter round-trips... But how much shorter exactly? And how would that translate to real-world latency? Presumably there would be multiple hops involved in traversing the SpaceX network?
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
From one of their early FAQ docs: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/7zqm2c/starlink_f... "What kind of antenna does it use? It will use a flat Phased Array antenna about the size of a pizza box or laptop computer and expected to cost between $100 and $300. You will need line of sight to the open sky, mounted on your roof or anywhere outside. The antenna handles both upload and download and is capable of giga…
So this is for stationary internet only, not for mobile.
Right, but low latency and high bandwidth since the satellites are in low earth orbit. So, a threat to legacy ISP providers. And a boon for rural dwellers.
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#66I wonder if you'll be able to get a device small enough for this to replace satellite telephony. I enjoy backpacking and would like to get a sat-phone for emergencies, but it's kind of cost prohibitive.
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
And long-term contracts. I remember hearing GoGo signed on for an exclusive 10 year contract with airlines who use them, with no plans to upgrade bandwidth during that time.
The Gogo deals require consumer pricing that is revenue positive too. The airlines that chose their own unbranded satellite can subsidize prices if they want. And, of course, Gogo doesn't work over the ocean or other large water bodies, unpopulated areas, etc. Though the gogo antennas are simple and way less capital expenditure, faa certification time, and aircraft downtime for installation.
Gogo works over water on their new(ish) 2ku band installations. Two years ago I flew to Hawaii on one of the first Delta flights outfitted and got some pretty good speeds (and oddly enough it was free because of "limited connectivity").
Also pro-tip, if you have T-mobile you can use Gogo for free. There's a small upgrade fee to make it work the entire duration of the flight. It's intended to be mobile only but I'm sure some people here can figure a way around that ;)
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#68What is China going to do when their citizens have access to the Internet via these Satellites?
The same thing they do today with VPNs: outlaw it, put reasonable restrictions in place, accept that some amount will slip through (or heavily police it and hand out lots of jail time, depending on local situation, political climate etc.)
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#69What is China going to do when their citizens have access to the Internet via these Satellites?
SpaceX will obey local laws and geo-fence the service.
Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Gogo deals require consumer pricing that is revenue positive too. The airlines that chose their own unbranded satellite can subsidize prices if they want. And, of course, Gogo doesn't work over the ocean or other large water bodies, unpopulated areas, etc. Though the gogo antennas are simple and way less capital expenditure, faa certification time, and aircraft downtime for installation.
Gogo works over water on their new(ish) 2ku band installations. Two years ago I flew to Hawaii on one of the first Delta flights outfitted and got some pretty good speeds (and oddly enough it was free because of "limited connectivity"). Also pro-tip, if you have T-mobile you can use Gogo for free. There's a small upgrade fee to make it work the entire duration of the flight. It's intended to be mobile only but I'm su…
Well, yes, but Ku band means all the benefits of the simple antenna are gone.
Do they try to enforce "mobile only" solely with a MAC prefix database?