Live data from Hacker News

Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

pcmag.com

101–110 of 469 posts

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#101
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The speed of light in a vacuum is roughly 50% higher than the speed of light in fiber.

The area between a starlink receiver on the ground and a satellite isn’t a vacuum

The speed of light in air is 99.97% of that in a vacuum, vs about 2/3 of c through fiber.

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tracking is an issue, but doppler can also be a thing. At orbital speed (actually up to 2x orbital speeds) the doppler effect between two satellites can change the frequency enough to cause interference. Moving a scope to track a moving target is one problem, allowing the algorithms to adapt at the frequency shifts on the fly another.

Indeed Iridium had to deal with the same thing (or I guess, didn’t): “ Cross-seam inter-satellite link hand-offs would have to happen very rapidly and cope with large Doppler shifts; therefore, Iridium supports inter-satellite links only between satellites orbiting in the same direction.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellat...

There were some experiments with communicating over Iridium to small cube-like sats back in the day, but we couldn't make the system on a chip beefy enough to do the Doppler shift calculations on the fly and survive a launch; it was close though. I think its possible to do now.

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#103

I sit in my hot tub at night and see 1-2+ satellites go over every single time I'm out there. Which also makes me wonder how many of the shooting stars I've seen recently are just old starlinks burning up.

How do you spot a satellite? I've never seen one.

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#104

I sit in my hot tub at night and see 1-2+ satellites go over every single time I'm out there. Which also makes me wonder how many of the shooting stars I've seen recently are just old starlinks burning up.

> Which also makes me wonder how many of the shooting stars I've seen recently are just old starlinks burning up.

Probably close to none. The lifetime of the satellites is about 5 years give or take. According to this page [1], a total of 355 satellites have deorbited over the past roughly 5 years. That's an average of about 71 per year or about one every 5 days.

Since planned disposals are done over uninhabited areas (e.g. the pacific ocean), the likelihood of spotting one is very low.

Hope that helps answer your question, even it wasn't necessarily meant seriously :)

    [1] https://starlinkinsider.com/starlink-launch-statistics/

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed Iridium had to deal with the same thing (or I guess, didn’t): “ Cross-seam inter-satellite link hand-offs would have to happen very rapidly and cope with large Doppler shifts; therefore, Iridium supports inter-satellite links only between satellites orbiting in the same direction.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellat...

Don't all satellites orbit in the same direction? Launching retrograde is just throwing away free velocity.

In the context of the full article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellatio...), it's clear they're talking about the polar orbits used by the Iridium constellation, which have "seams" around the Atlantic and the Pacific as the "first" set of satellites passing north-to-south overlap with the "last" set of satellites coming back south-to-north on the other side of their orbits. So of the 6 orbital planes used by the Iridium satellites, each plane covers 1/12th of the globe for each "half" of its over-the-poles orbit. So there are two "seams" where handoff is not supported, one off the eastern seaboard and one roughly over Japan.

There's an animation on linked article that explains this pretty well: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/90/Ir...

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#106
post #103

I sit in my hot tub at night and see 1-2+ satellites go over every single time I'm out there. Which also makes me wonder how many of the shooting stars I've seen recently are just old starlinks burning up.

How do you spot a satellite? I've never seen one.

The Starlink ones look like Santa's sleigh https://i.imgur.com/4S0vbfY.gif

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#107
post #103

I sit in my hot tub at night and see 1-2+ satellites go over every single time I'm out there. Which also makes me wonder how many of the shooting stars I've seen recently are just old starlinks burning up.

How do you spot a satellite? I've never seen one.

Probably out in a rural area far enough away from a major city its easier to see them.

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#108

So which points are getting “faster than fibre” latency because of this? Extra distance up and down, but make up for it on the long-haul. Won’t beat HF radio though.

It's possible for starlink to beat radio, because radio can't always go straight to the target. If I wanted a radio link from NY->Tokyo, what would that path look like?

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#109
post #103

I sit in my hot tub at night and see 1-2+ satellites go over every single time I'm out there. Which also makes me wonder how many of the shooting stars I've seen recently are just old starlinks burning up.

How do you spot a satellite? I've never seen one.

It depends where you live certainly - if you live close to a big city you will probably never see them. But there are places - like New Zealand - where you can see them fairly often. There are some online trackers you can use.

Re: Starlink's laser system is beaming 42 petabytes of data per day

#110
post #103

I sit in my hot tub at night and see 1-2+ satellites go over every single time I'm out there. Which also makes me wonder how many of the shooting stars I've seen recently are just old starlinks burning up.

How do you spot a satellite? I've never seen one.

To me, they look like little white dots moving across the sky. Brightness can change as they move too. It'll start off bright and then as it goes away it eventually disappears entirely. Since I usually sit in the same position in the hot tub, I've come to notice that I usually see one of them cross a pretty specific path from north to south, so I've gotten used to looking in that part of the sky as I'm sitting there. It happens so frequently, I get a little disappointed if I don't see one!

Planes are similar, but tend to have flashing or colored lights and obviously aren't as far away.

I'm in a big city, but close to the ocean so I have a bit less light pollution. The city is also heavy military, so that could be part of the frequency.

Update: if you're near any of the spacex launches, you can watch the rocket too. I'm house sitting in Irvine, CA and saw the Monday launch go right near the house. Amazing to watch the plume from the rocket!

Post reply on HN