Live data from Hacker News

Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

arstechnica.com

181–190 of 607 posts

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#181
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do the satellites in the photo have the new shades on them? I'd be interested to know how much the situation has improved with the improved anti-reflection.

Do they plan to retrofit the coating on the +500 deployed? Are there regulations that prevent future constellations from Amazon or Facebook, or any other giant, to implement albedo reduction on their constellations?

Those won't be up forever. They're all in a decaying orbit. They will get replaced in about 5 years.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#182
post #173

"...that said, we’ll make sure Starlink has no material effect on discoveries in astronomy. We care a great deal about science." Elon Musk A long exposure of Comet NEOWISE by Photographer Daniel Lopez: https://imgur.com/a/rDI1Onn N.B. The white streaks are Starlink constellation passthrough trajectories Starlink currently has 597 orbiting satellites they plan for more than 12k to be deployed. Amazon just got an appro…

Do the satellites in the photo have the new shades on them? I'd be interested to know how much the situation has improved with the improved anti-reflection.

The visor satellites are supposed to be invisible to the naked eye. They're still orbit raising, so we don't have results yet.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#183
post #45

Starlink internet is not meant to replace hard line internet. There is no getting around the physics of cable being so much cheaper/easier. Even terrestrial cell towers are more efficient and cheaper than satellites. This is 100% meant to supplement existing infrastructure not to replace it. You will almost always get cheaper and faster internet (for both you and the company providing internet) over a cable to your h…

The problem is you're basing your argument solely on the physical act of running cable/wires everywhere. When you look at the cost of just hiring a crew to dig the ground or string wire on a pole you are correct. It's significantly cheaper and more reliable.

However, add in the human factor, government. The mess of rules, regulations, and right-of-way make it considerably more expensive to run wires everywhere.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#184

Is anyone concerned about the effect this has on the night sky and astronomical observation? https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/starlink-sa...

Nope, we destroyed the earth already. Why should we worry about the sky?

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#185
post #173

"...that said, we’ll make sure Starlink has no material effect on discoveries in astronomy. We care a great deal about science." Elon Musk A long exposure of Comet NEOWISE by Photographer Daniel Lopez: https://imgur.com/a/rDI1Onn N.B. The white streaks are Starlink constellation passthrough trajectories Starlink currently has 597 orbiting satellites they plan for more than 12k to be deployed. Amazon just got an appro…

Do the satellites in the photo have the new shades on them? I'd be interested to know how much the situation has improved with the improved anti-reflection.

A non-reflective coating on the satellites will not stop them from blocking the light from astronomical objects.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#186
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do the satellites in the photo have the new shades on them? I'd be interested to know how much the situation has improved with the improved anti-reflection.

Do they plan to retrofit the coating on the +500 deployed? Are there regulations that prevent future constellations from Amazon or Facebook, or any other giant, to implement albedo reduction on their constellations?

As has been stated many, many times, the satellites are in very low orbit and naturally degrade over time to burn up in the atmosphere. The ones in the first batches that do not have a shade will only be up for a few years (5 at most).

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#187

"...that said, we’ll make sure Starlink has no material effect on discoveries in astronomy. We care a great deal about science." Elon Musk A long exposure of Comet NEOWISE by Photographer Daniel Lopez: https://imgur.com/a/rDI1Onn N.B. The white streaks are Starlink constellation passthrough trajectories Starlink currently has 597 orbiting satellites they plan for more than 12k to be deployed. Amazon just got an appro…

This image was pretty thoroughly panned as being either ignorant or malicious - there’s as much light coming off planes in the sky, yet astronomers don’t complain about that. That’s not to say the satellite aren’t irritating, but astronomers have mitigation mechanisms.

SpaceX doing well is also a net good thing, because it’s getting cheaper to put the telescopes in orbit, which is where we really want them to be. Earth’s surface has light pollution from cities, planes and drones; is dark enough for astronomy only a fraction of the time; and has constant occlusion from birds and bees.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#188
post #45

Starlink internet is not meant to replace hard line internet. There is no getting around the physics of cable being so much cheaper/easier. Even terrestrial cell towers are more efficient and cheaper than satellites. This is 100% meant to supplement existing infrastructure not to replace it. You will almost always get cheaper and faster internet (for both you and the company providing internet) over a cable to your h…

> "You will almost always get cheaper and faster internet (for both you and the company providing internet) over a cable to your house." Not true for me, and I live 10 minutes walk from the financial centre of a major world city. Because there's no fibre installed to my building, unlimited ~300 Mbps 5G wireless internet is both cheaper and faster than any available fixed alternative. Even if fibre was available, the…

>If you can't get that, then maybe a cell tower is better, if that doesn't work, then a land based beaming internet may be better, after that I'd look to space based internet.

It is cheaper for a company, to run fiber to your house than to build a cell tower that handles ALL the people within that region given a certain density of houses.

It doesn't mean it's cheaper for your building to do it.

In the context of space vs ground infrastructure. Ground (including cell tower) is much cheaper. And they'll add 5G to the financial centers of the world before they add it to Wyoming.

The reason companies don't "advertise" hostpots as an alternative to fiber/cable is bandwidth. It works great if you read HN, but if everyone did it, they'd start running more fiber, or cost of cell data would go way up.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink can't handle that many people, so it's a moot point that there are a theoretical 41 million potential customers. You can build out landlines far more easily than you can launch satellites; you just need the cable/fiber and some guys to dig a trench. The reason it hasn't happened is because it's not worth the financial investment without government subsidies (and this is why the federal government provides so…

> You can build out landlines far more easily than you can launch satellites; Each satellite costs SpaceX about $250K to build and $500K to launch and services thousands of customers. That same $750K might buy you a mile or so of trenching and cable. Many rural customers need multiple miles each.

That same $750K might buy you a mile or so of trenching and cable.

If you want to make this about the economics...

All studies on this topic report that it costs less than $250k/mile in metro areas, which cost more due to the need to get permits, plan around utility lines and existing infrastructure, dig into asphalt/sidewalk, and then repair the damage.

In a rural area where you can just dig into dirt and not repair anything, $750k should get you all of a town and then some, and I'm assuming we're talking about one scattered out across tens of miles. You're primarily paying for labor, and it's possible for a small team to dig dozens of miles of utility trenches in a day with common construction equipment. Once you lay the cable, your expenses are essentially fully booked.

A single Starlink satellite, assuming maximum satellite bandwidth and minimal user bandwidth would service at most 2500 customers. At $750k/launch, assuming a useful life of 4 years (per Musk's Techcrunch interview from April 2020) and maximum customers, Spacelink would need to charge at least $6.25/month to each customer not accounting for operational or marketing costs just to break even. You would need to at least double the price to cover ongoing operational costs. Plus, Spacelink would need to pay other ISPs for interconnection agreements, which is another 1x cost there. Add in the costs of paying off R&D and other capitalized costs, and you're looking at a minimum of 5x the putative minimum price of $6.25/month, or roughly $30/month.

Or in other words, Starlink would be charging no less than its current satellite and landline competitors already charge today.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#190
post #45

Starlink internet is not meant to replace hard line internet. There is no getting around the physics of cable being so much cheaper/easier. Even terrestrial cell towers are more efficient and cheaper than satellites. This is 100% meant to supplement existing infrastructure not to replace it. You will almost always get cheaper and faster internet (for both you and the company providing internet) over a cable to your h…

The problem is you're basing your argument solely on the physical act of running cable/wires everywhere. When you look at the cost of just hiring a crew to dig the ground or string wire on a pole you are correct. It's significantly cheaper and more reliable. However, add in the human factor, government. The mess of rules, regulations, and right-of-way make it considerably more expensive to run wires everywhere.

The cost of hiring a crew to dig up the ground runs to hundreds of dollars per foot. At $1MM for a satellite that can serve thousands of people is a lot cheaper.
Post reply on HN