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

SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 136 posts

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#61

Post by numpad0 »

Valgrim wrote: post #6
new_realist wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the Space Shuttle.

I didn't know the space shuttle reused it's boosters. Apparently the two solid rocket boosters deployed parachutes after separation and were refurbished. Interesting! However the main booster could not be reused...

Well that’s how they got the Challenger disaster.

Reused booster ruptured under improper launch criteria revised for management and public relations reasons.

Would it have been okay if it weren’t for the wrong go? Maybe, but still the potato quality refurbishment of flown boosters could have done it sooner or later.

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#62

Post by Rebelgecko »

jetrink wrote: post #26
SEJeff wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They couldn't make them entirely burn up on re-entry so the FAA blocked them using them until they solve that. It is the risk of them falling on someone.

I'm curious what the level of risk actually is. The earth is struck by many small meteorites every day. We don't know how many, but based on how many are observed, it's probably on the order of 10/day. The last person struck by a meteorite was Ann Hodges in 1954. She was only bruised, since, like most people at any given time, she was protected by a roof. A woman named Lottie Williams was struck by part of a Delta ro…

Somewhere in the FCC filings there's a NASA ODAR report on Starlink. The typical standard used is that the odds of death or injury when something reenters stay below 1 in 10,000. However I wouldn't be surprised if that gets adjusted in the future. Within a few years we will see constellations that are so large that statistically speaking they would be allowed to kill a few people

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#63

Post by numpad0 »

mohaine wrote: post #29
DC-3 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it was actually one of the more strongly limiting factors on the frequency with which space shuttle launches could be conducted because the factory producing them could not turn them out particularly quickly.

Or get foam to reliably attach.

At least the H2 vent access arm can be visually verified retracted :p

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#64

Post by syncsynchalt »

Valgrim wrote: post #6
new_realist wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the Space Shuttle.

I didn't know the space shuttle reused it's boosters. Apparently the two solid rocket boosters deployed parachutes after separation and were refurbished. Interesting! However the main booster could not be reused...

The main booster (all three of them) were attached to the orbiter and were re-used, though not without refurbishment. (Falcon 9 is also refurbished after each launch).

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#65

Post by gpm »

gonehome wrote: post #56

I don't know how Loon [0] (graduated Google X project) can look at this and justify their continued existence. Low earth orbit satellites with global coverage seem like such a better approach than balloons that you have to handle in the air assuming the following is true: - Latency difference between the two is negligible - Satellites are not uniquely affected by weather - Balloons are not better in some other unknow…

Balloons don't cost a million dollars to launch.

Balloons can be concentrated in the areas where they are needed most. The nature of non-geosynchronous orbital planes is you end up having to distribute satellites roughly uniformly around the earth (you get non-uniform effects with latitude but in very limited ways).

Balloons can be brought down and be serviced, satellites are basically throw it up there and replace it when it breaks.

Google already has experience with being an ISP with fiber and fi.

I tend to agree that starlink is winning, but balloons do have some advantages.

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#66

Post by detaro »

numpad0 wrote: post #61
Valgrim wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know the space shuttle reused it's boosters. Apparently the two solid rocket boosters deployed parachutes after separation and were refurbished. Interesting! However the main booster could not be reused...

Well that’s how they got the Challenger disaster. Reused booster ruptured under improper launch criteria revised for management and public relations reasons. Would it have been okay if it weren’t for the wrong go? Maybe, but still the potato quality refurbishment of flown boosters could have done it sooner or later.

Do you have any more details on the booster being refurbished having any impact on Challenger?

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#67

Post by xenospn »

jblake wrote: post #23

I'm so excited for Starlink! As a solo founder I do all of my support, but I like to frequently go off-roading and camping outside of cell service. I have a satellite messenger for critical things, but it still leaves me feeling quite anxious to go on extended trips. If I can toss a starlink dish in a briefcase and get fast affordable internet in the Sierra's, life will be good.

I wanted to move to rural OR/WA a couple of years ago, but couldn't find a single property with high-speed internet. This is (hopefully) a game-changer.

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#68

Post by Reedx »

sontek wrote: post #25

As someone who lives in the mountains of Puerto Rico and has to rely on "unlimited" cell phone coverage that data caps me and satellite internet that also has data caps.... I can't wait until starlink is up and running and we may have an option for high speed, low latency, internet for us who hate cities and love nature :)

Yeah, if it really does deliver ~25ms latency and up to 1GBPS, work from anywhere becomes much more literal. Currently a lot of remote work and things like multiplayer games are limited to areas with reliable broadband.

But if you can get that anywhere... it'll be amazing and have a profound effect.

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#69

Post by TeMPOraL »

syncsynchalt wrote: post #64
Valgrim wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know the space shuttle reused it's boosters. Apparently the two solid rocket boosters deployed parachutes after separation and were refurbished. Interesting! However the main booster could not be reused...

The main booster (all three of them) were attached to the orbiter and were re-used, though not without refurbishment. (Falcon 9 is also refurbished after each launch).

The shuttle had two boosters, not three. It also had an external tank that burned in the atmosphere.

The boosters were technically reusable, but refurbishing them after the corrosive bath they've taken by their landing in the ocean was much more expensive than making new ones from scratch.

You'll note that SpaceX lands their rockets on a barge, instead of landing them on water and fishing them out later - that's because they want to keep the salt water out of the rocket.

Re: SpaceX launches 60 more Starlink satellites

#70

Post by gpm »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #55
ballenf wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought there was discussion of base stations. Couldn't they do 1 per apartment building or block without the density issues?

In any urban area, they'd be super oversubscribed. I haven't been following Starlink super closely lately, but IIRC each satellite is really only capable of supporting 20 users at the full advertised speed. Even though there's a handful of satellites visible from a given location at a given time, it's not enough to support urban (or perhaps even suburban) areas.

Googling this suggests we are seeing 100gbps per satellite... at 100mbps that's enough for 1000 saturated connections per satellite and a decent multiple of that number of users by oversubscribing/multiplexing. It's still not enough bandwidth to compete with city-ISPs in cities.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/duw4o4/starlink_1...

Post reply on HN