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

Starlink Aviation

starlink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 526 posts

Re: Starlink Aviation

#211

Post by mlindner »

Edit: When this post was written, the majority of the popular posts were unrelated complaints and general criticisms of Musk and/or his companies. Most of them now appear to have no been deleted/flagged/significantly downvoted.

----------------------------------------------------------

What a thread, full of people complaining about unrelated things rather than what the actual link talks about.

I think it'll be interesting as this rolls out to more airline customers even though this specific product is more aimed at corporate jets and similiar aircraft.

From the FAQ:

Which aircraft types are supported for Starlink Aviation?

Supplemental type certificate (STCs) are in development for the following aircraft: ERJ-135, ERJ-145, G650, G550, Falcon 2000, G450, Challenger 300, Challenger 350, Global Express, Global 5000, Global 6000, and Global 7500. The Starlink engineering team will update this list as development begins on additional aircraft.

Re: Starlink Aviation

#212

Post by shaklee3 »

mlindner wrote: post #206
shaklee3 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Planes spend a lot of time in areas that aren't populate no, planes spend most of their time in populated areas. specifically near major airports, and the WiFi needs to work on the ground as well.

> no, planes spend most of their time in populated areas. specifically near major airports, and the WiFi needs to work on the ground as well. Except most of a passenger's time in an aircraft isn't spent sitting on the ground (if it is, something's gone wrong) and they can use cell phones and wifi hotspots in such locations anyway. Further, major airports aren't _populated_. People don't live there and airports are la…

I'm not going to argue about this. go look up flight aware data. when a given airline has a dozen or so planes in the same beam because of a hub, it creates massive congestion. people use the internet whether they're on the ground or not. it certainly uses up a giant portion of a starlink cell if they were ever to land an airline.

Re: Starlink Aviation

#213

Post by modeless »

wmf wrote: post #140
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this extortion? I thought StarLink is a business, not a charity. As I understand it, Musk is asking for someone to pay for the Ukraine service… although I admit I may not know the whole story.

Starlink Premium service is $500/month but SpaceX is asking $4,500/month in Ukraine. There may be some justification for this but it looks like a bait-and-switch.

Starlink Premium is still for fixed service, not mobile. Even Starlink RV is not for use while in motion. Starlink's mobile offerings are Starlink Maritime for $5k/mo and Starlink Aviation for $12-25k/mo. $4500/mo seems totally justifiable given the military use. By the normal standards of military contracting, it's a veritable bargain. SpaceX is continuously defending against Russian hackers now that Ukraine is relying on them so heavily, and also developing methods to resist jamming. Probably a significant fraction of all people working on Starlink are dealing with this stuff in one way or another.

Re: Starlink Aviation

#215

Post by petesergeant »

vl wrote: post #129
petesergeant wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is already theoretically an issue. I'm going to link to Alaska Air's FAQ[0] simply because it's the most available online who note that streaming services are OK, but they don't "allow guests to make voice or video calls". I imagine the latency would make it a poor experience _too_, but the point is that airlines know you don't want people making calls next to you. [0] https://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-in…

Is it the same Alaska Air which just 20 years ago tried to sell in-flight voice calls on their in-plane phones for few bucks a minute, as any other airline did? Remember handsets in the backrest of the seat in front of you with the credit card slot on the side?

Probably. Allowing people to stay connected on a plane is likely important, but now that "connected" can be "able to send WhatsApp messages" then the need for a phone is much reduced.

Re: Starlink Aviation

#216

Post by diebeforei485 »

shaklee3 wrote: post #203
diebeforei485 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is for general aviation, not airlines.

same thing applies since they share the same airports. they'll give these planes higher priority because of the cost, but it's not enough to make an entire business from. they need the residential service to be profitable.

No, not always. Elon Musk flies into KHHR and KBRO regularly for SpaceX and these airports don't have much commercial service if any.

Re: Starlink Aviation

#217

Post by ultrarunner »

seabrookmx wrote: post #77
bawolff wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why netflix doesn't just put a server on the plane for that usecase. Hard drives are cheap.

And heavy.

If they can fly the dude who stole my armrest last time for $500 they can fly a lot of hard drives for $25k/mo

Re: Starlink Aviation

#218

Post by mlindner »

amacalac wrote: post #2

Low latency for Video Calls? Sure, great on private charter jets where it’s you or a couple of people who know each other. Also, generally in favour of the march of technology, so I love this. Do Not Ever want on a flight where I’m sitting beside some random ass stranger who will chat or video chat to whoever at the top of their voice while I’m trying to relax.

> Sure, great on private charter jets where it’s you or a couple of people who know each other.

Well that's the target for this service. They don't even support larger commercial jets yet.

Which aircraft types are supported for Starlink Aviation?

Supplemental type certificate (STCs) are in development for the following aircraft: ERJ-135, ERJ-145, G650, G550, Falcon 2000, G450, Challenger 300, Challenger 350, Global Express, Global 5000, Global 6000, and Global 7500. The Starlink engineering team will update this list as development begins on additional aircraft.

Re: Starlink Aviation

#219

Post by mlindner »

impulser_ wrote: post #69
brianwawok wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the time a plane is over farm fields or water. Highest demand for normal starlink is in cities. Not gonna be flying over NYC w this. Kind of a good fit I would think in terms of utilization.

Why would the highest demand for Starlink be in cities? Who in their right mind would pay for Starlink over fiber? The same cost, but a lot better connection lol.

> Why would the highest demand for Starlink be in cities?

Because even if there's very few people who don't have good service (for example some kind of technical issue where fiber can't be routed to a specific building) you quickly reach the capacity for the service. Plus the odd person who wants it for a backup.

Re: Starlink Aviation

#220

Post by Thlom »

abc_lisper wrote: post #46
thrillgore wrote: post #43

Quoted post unavailable.

Well, who else is giving it for free?

Telecoms sans frontiers is operating within Ukraine and neighboring countries providing Internet access and telephone services to civilians. SpaceX shouldn’t have been allowed to insert themselves in the conflict. They should use existing structures if they want to provide humanitarian telecom and if they wanted to provide their offerings to the military they should go through normal channels. Just throwing their offering into the conflict with unclear strings attached inevitably led to drama.

Operating like a normal company might give less PR, but probably wouldn’t have ended with Elon parroting Russian talking points …

Post reply on HN