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

SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

teslanorth.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#41

Post by onesociety2022 »

noncoml wrote: post #31
Ninjinka wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if 100Mb Comcast was available in my area I would trade it in a heartbeat Um...duh. Starlink isn't meant to replace your internet where typical options are available. It's meant to give something where there was nothing, or replace much worse satellite internet options.

That’s my experience, yes. I wonder if there are enough such people to make Starlink profitable.

You’d be shocked how many areas outside major metro areas don’t have any broadband options. When we were buying a home recently, we had to carefully search Comcast and Wave’s websites to make sure the home had broadband service. Lots of homes only had satellite internet.

If you add RVs, boats, and planes, there’s an even bigger potential market for Starlink.

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#43

Post by mlindner »

noncoml wrote: post #28

My experience with Starlink is that it kind of works(I get 50-100Mb bandwidth) but I have multiple(as in 10s) sub-second interruptions every hour. Dishy view is completely unobstructed. And weather is clear most of the time in California. As much as I hate Comcast, if 100Mb Comcast was available in my area I would trade it in a heartbeat.

> As much as I hate Comcast, if 100Mb Comcast was available in my area I would trade it in a heartbeat.

And that's expected. Elon Musk has publicly stated before that Starlink has no plans for competing with Comcast.

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#44

Post by godelski »

margalabargala wrote: post #27
busymom0 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the reasoning for FCC's original decision? Why would they try to stop it?

The original decision was this: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we get permitted for stationary satellite dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The new decision: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we also get permitted for moving dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The FCC didn't try to stop anything, they just weren't asked about moving dishes the first time.

I'm still curious about the legal situation here. Why is it banned by default? I mean other wireless communications are totally fine to use while in motion (HAM, cell service, wifi, CB, GPS, Satellite telephones, etc). Why does the FCC explicitly have to approve this kind of thing? I imagine it is more than bureaucracy?

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#46

Post by db48x »

noncoml wrote: post #40
chrisco255 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get these 0.5s and 0.7s drops as well (maybe 10-20 per hour), in Texas. To be honest, I don't even notice the sub-second drops.

I only notice them during ssh sessions or voip/zoom calls. They don’t affect web browsing or streaming movies

Try using MOSH; that will eliminate the problem for your shell sessions.

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#47

Post by lgats »

godelski wrote: post #44
margalabargala wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original decision was this: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we get permitted for stationary satellite dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The new decision: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we also get permitted for moving dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The FCC didn't try to stop anything, they just weren't asked about moving dishes the first time.

I'm still curious about the legal situation here. Why is it banned by default? I mean other wireless communications are totally fine to use while in motion (HAM, cell service, wifi, CB, GPS, Satellite telephones, etc). Why does the FCC explicitly have to approve this kind of thing? I imagine it is more than bureaucracy?

I don’t think it’s banned by default, but the rules surrounding mobile and fixed differ slightly. Perhaps getting limited regulatory approval for a fixed network would face less regulatory hoops and thus be approved faster.

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#48

Post by majke »

(a) is it the same phased array antenna as dishy v2?

(b) is power usage improved? at 90 Watts dishy v2 is not perfect for an RV.

(c) dishy v2 has pretty slow startup time. It might be less than perfect if that thing required 10 minutes of unobstructed view to bootstrap.

I have mixed experiences with dishyv2 tech. I've had situations when it was flawless with half-obstructed view. I've had moments when it had hiccups without any obstructions.

Anyway, very interesting. Obviously this is a big deal for many applications.

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#49

Post by treelovinhippie »

The majority of RV/vanlifers do not need internet in motion, they just want a regular static 12V dish that can be mounted fixed and flush to the roof/racks like any solar panel.

$2500 for such a dish is the wrong target market. The only customer that needs internet in motion are things like boats, planes, trains and buses.

Re: SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

#50

Post by HWR_14 »

godelski wrote: post #44
margalabargala wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original decision was this: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we get permitted for stationary satellite dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The new decision: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we also get permitted for moving dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The FCC didn't try to stop anything, they just weren't asked about moving dishes the first time.

I'm still curious about the legal situation here. Why is it banned by default? I mean other wireless communications are totally fine to use while in motion (HAM, cell service, wifi, CB, GPS, Satellite telephones, etc). Why does the FCC explicitly have to approve this kind of thing? I imagine it is more than bureaucracy?

> Why is it banned by default?

AFAIK all FCC rules on frequency allocation (which is what SpaceX needed) are usually geo-locked. It's a lot easier to commit to fixed transmitters early on with the idea that any specific problems can be dealt with than getting permission to move them around at will.

Also, during this time the FCC has been redoing the rules on the bands they use to try to allow companies this kind of use. So in 2021 they asked for ideas, and SpaceX suggested mobile uplinks as a permissible use. Then, hearings and feedback from a lot of companies occurred.

Post reply on HN