Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OneWeb files for bankruptcy

oneweb.world

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–127 of 127 posts

Re: OneWeb files for bankruptcy

#121

Post by erwinh »

arijun wrote: post #105
erwinh wrote: post #39

So this will be the final OneWeb constellation: https://space-search.io/?search=OneWeb (shamelessly plugging my own website here) Such a shame about OneWeb though, met some of them at a conference in Spain just a month ago, where the elephant in the room was StarLink already.

Really cool website! Makes it much easier to visualize the difference between different types of orbits. One suggestion would be to either disable panning or give a snap to center button. I found it too easy to pan by accident when zooming out and then the rotation could flip the earth out of view

Yeah I heard this from more people! Thanks for the suggestion and alerting me to the issue. I think I'll add a snap to center button soon and some more functionality on this too :)

Re: OneWeb files for bankruptcy

#122

Post by leesalminen »

milankragujevic wrote: post #117
leesalminen wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It worked for our neighborhood. A retired engineer down the road did exactly this- started a private company to provide good wireless P2P internet to our rural, mountainous community. He’s about 7 years in and now serves 70% of our area. It ain’t cheap, but he’s been profitable enough now to be able to buy additional bandwidth from his upstream. We’re about to get 50/25 in the coming months. I offer my services to hi…

Just a quick question, what equipment and at what distance are you using to get 50/25? Initially I had setup a PTP link at 3 km with MikroTik gear and got 10-20 Mbps, varying wildly. I actually subscribed to an Internet connection over DSL in a building where I don't live and got permission to put an antenna and modem there to send Internet to my house. Later I subscribed to an actual Internet company, doubting my ow…

The tower uses a Uniquiti Prism Rocket 5ac Gen2 with a 45 deg sector antenna. The receiver on my roof is a Uniquiti PowerBeam AC Gen 2. They’re about 1.5km away with clear line of sight and minimal interference. I don’t recall the specifics on the back haul on the tower. My signal has been solid as a rock in all weather conditions for several years.

I think the clear line of sight and little radio interference were key to making this work. We don’t have cell or tv signal here. From what I understand the sheriff’s radio coverage is spotty as well.

Re: OneWeb files for bankruptcy

#123

Post by milankragujevic »

leesalminen wrote: post #122
milankragujevic wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a quick question, what equipment and at what distance are you using to get 50/25? Initially I had setup a PTP link at 3 km with MikroTik gear and got 10-20 Mbps, varying wildly. I actually subscribed to an Internet connection over DSL in a building where I don't live and got permission to put an antenna and modem there to send Internet to my house. Later I subscribed to an actual Internet company, doubting my ow…

The tower uses a Uniquiti Prism Rocket 5ac Gen2 with a 45 deg sector antenna. The receiver on my roof is a Uniquiti PowerBeam AC Gen 2. They’re about 1.5km away with clear line of sight and minimal interference. I don’t recall the specifics on the back haul on the tower. My signal has been solid as a rock in all weather conditions for several years. I think the clear line of sight and little radio interference were k…

Ah, I understand. Thank you for the info. The distance and enviromental factors sound good, and with the PBE-5AC-Gen2 it would work wonderfully.

Unfortunately, shocking as it is, most WISPs in developing nations are stuck on 802.11n equipment, especially using MikroTik's CPE and AP hardware.

If I'm ever redoing this link (I probably will, I've torn it down because I lost permission) I'll get Ubiquiti AC Gen 2 PTP gear, the best I can reasonably afford. And some aiming tools.

Re: OneWeb files for bankruptcy

#124

Post by leesalminen »

milankragujevic wrote: post #123
leesalminen wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tower uses a Uniquiti Prism Rocket 5ac Gen2 with a 45 deg sector antenna. The receiver on my roof is a Uniquiti PowerBeam AC Gen 2. They’re about 1.5km away with clear line of sight and minimal interference. I don’t recall the specifics on the back haul on the tower. My signal has been solid as a rock in all weather conditions for several years. I think the clear line of sight and little radio interference were k…

Ah, I understand. Thank you for the info. The distance and enviromental factors sound good, and with the PBE-5AC-Gen2 it would work wonderfully. Unfortunately, shocking as it is, most WISPs in developing nations are stuck on 802.11n equipment, especially using MikroTik's CPE and AP hardware. If I'm ever redoing this link (I probably will, I've torn it down because I lost permission) I'll get Ubiquiti AC Gen 2 PTP gea…

With regards to aiming- I picked up a battery powered PoE injector a while back and it’s been invaluable. This lets me experiment with different mounting places quickly by powering up the radio and connecting to UNMS.

Re: OneWeb files for bankruptcy

#125

Post by ericd »

ghaff wrote: post #110
ericd wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d be careful about comparing current satellite internet with what Starlink is promising. The latency and total throughout differences are huge.

That's why I specifically referred to current satellite. Of course, future satellite could be much better. (Although we'll have to see.)

Right right, I was guessing you were familiar, I was just pointing it out because I think a lot of people reading think about it in the context of HughesNet et al, and I think that leads them to write it off prematurely.

I read a nice overview of the constellations a while back, but I realize now that it's actually pretty outdated (2018, and it talks about optical crosslinks between SpaceX's satellites, which has been punted for now): http://www.mit.edu/~portillo/files/Comparison-LEO-IAC-2018-s...

So I don't know if my comment about throughput is accurate anymore.

Re: OneWeb files for bankruptcy

#126

Post by BenjiWiebe »

ghaff wrote: post #96
tialaramex wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about if the offer was $1000 plus $10 per Mb/s and the maximum is 10Mbps ? You would switch because you've imagined this service is magically cheaper and better, but now I say it'll be expensive and worse are you still enthusiastic? Providing network service is a utility, and so yes razor thin margins are typical and that's too bad. It does make very high capital investment (such as launching huge numbers of sate…

>These projects (whatever Musk says about them when hyping his company) deliver expensive network access to places where it's otherwise not practical to offer service at all. They aren't going head-to-head with Comcast, or even with AOL, they're competing with "Physically take a day's / week's work to the A site where they have network access". Yeah, there are a lot of places in the US--some of which aren't even real…

5G? Around here in central Kansas 4G is spotty, and there's plenty of places that your phone will lose all data connection, and occasionally even lose the connection entirely. Also a max of 10Mbps would sure beat a max of 6Mbps from CenturyLink. Though at $1000 that would probably be too much...

Re: OneWeb files for bankruptcy

#127

Post by reportingsjr »

s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #89
reportingsjr wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will always be the case, unless rural subsidies are increased even more drastically (not really a good thing). Infrastructure in cities is far cheaper than rural areas, so this is kind of a cat and mouse game for rural areas where internet will be x times slower than in cities.

Rural internet is expensive because no PRIVATE company wants to put up a tower or run fiber for a couple dozen people. A satellite covers a much wider area. We'll see how it plays out, but as a person living out here, I'm excited.

Yep! Exactly my point, it is way more expensive (i.e. companies wont do it as the money isn't there) to run high speed hardware. Satellite comms may be cheaper, but the speeds and latency will be quite a bit worse than what you'll find in urban areas.

For reference, people are talking about wanting 25 to 50mbps, while I am getting gigabit for $45/mo (Cincinnati, Ohio). Hence the cat and mouse game.

Post reply on HN