Live data from Hacker News

Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

satellitemap.space

21–30 of 241 posts

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#21

There's a bunch of Starlink coverage maps like this; the most useful one (IMHO) is Mike Puchol's at https://starlink.sx/ The nice thing about that Mike's is you can see exactly where you are in relation to nearby satellites and base stations. And get a pretty good guess as to where your packets are going to go. It is all guesswork - SpaceX only shares what they are required to by the FCC. But it's been pretty accurat…

The big problem with this one appears to be that it doesn’t load.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#24
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit

I thought the same, but they're actually below geostationary orbit. They have 12 hour orbits. Also, they don't orbit the equator, which is required for a geostationary orbit. See my comment above with more details.

wow that is cool! Thank you for that clarification looks like geostationary used for stuff like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-Zenith_Satellite_System

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#25

I’m curious about how can they ensure connectivity for a particular area. Is it just that they place a bunch of satellites in orbits and hope that they have enough density? Or is there a method to the madness? I am assuming a single satellite covers very small area, in this case a single hexagonal area

The satellites are in constant high speed motion, this is not like geostationary at all. Coverage is a factor of simultaneous density of satellites over an area at my given moment in time, beam forming, and trunk link to earth station capacity.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#26
post #3

As impressive as the number of Starlink satellites is, the service has become unusable for me in Southern California, particularly for video calls. I’ve been told that the bottleneck is land stations, not satellites. Either way, I’ve had to cancel my Starlink service both at home and work.

It's not really a service meant for SoCal, but I'm sure they see it as a valuable stress test.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#28

I’m curious about how can they ensure connectivity for a particular area. Is it just that they place a bunch of satellites in orbits and hope that they have enough density? Or is there a method to the madness? I am assuming a single satellite covers very small area, in this case a single hexagonal area

The orbits are designed to maximize coverage; it's clearer if you look at the orbital parameters instead of a globe, where you can see that satellites are evenly spaced: https://imgur.com/a/aReh0EQ The details are complicated, but each satellite can see quite a large area and any given spot on the ground is within range of 3-4 satellites.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#29
post #23

> $120/mo for service and $599 for hardware Noope. no thank you. https://www.starlink.com/

This service is not for you if that is your reaction. Until recently I lived in a location where there is literally no other option capable of supporting Teams calls. Before Starlink I rented a second house in a "nearby" (49 minutes each way) town to use as an office. Comparatively, Starlink is a phenomenal deal.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#30

Can someone tell how to interpret this global coverage map? The legend and the help sections are not very helpful.

the one thing i think I figure out, is that you right click and set a home, and that will give you real time triangulation as to how many satellites your signal is bouncing off as they move in orbit at any given time.

The more satellites linked to your home base, the better your latency and/or bandwidth. So with this you can see your location's service quality ahead of time.

Post reply on HN