Starlink Maritime
starlink.com
Starlink Maritime
1–10 of 530 posts
Re: Starlink Maritime
#2Is anything know about the power consumption of the Starlink antenna? Does the maritime version use less power than the conventional unit?
The fixed-location version of Starlink consumes around 60 to 100 W constantly which is problem if you want to e.g. use solar panels on a sail boat to supply the device.
Re: Starlink Maritime
#3Is anything know about the power consumption of the Starlink antenna? Does the maritime version use less power than the conventional unit? The fixed-location version of Starlink consumes around 60 to 100 W constantly which is problem if you want to e.g. use solar panels on a sail boat to supply the device.
You probably would not run it 24x7 on a boat.
Re: Starlink Maritime
#4"$5,000/mo with a one-time hardware cost of $10,000 for two high performance terminals."
wow! Why cant you just take your normal starlink with you on your boat? Don't people do that with RVs?
Re: Starlink Maritime
#5"$5,000/mo with a one-time hardware cost of $10,000 for two high performance terminals." wow! Why cant you just take your normal starlink with you on your boat? Don't people do that with RVs?
https://www.starlink.com/rv
-- If I had to guess part of the reason would maybe be carrying capacity - a house that doesn't move is predictable - RVs & boats move so the per satellite bandwidth predictability of that class of object is lower - i think meaning the requirements for redundancy are higher - redundancy is expensive? - just a guess --
Re: Starlink Maritime
#6"$5,000/mo with a one-time hardware cost of $10,000 for two high performance terminals." wow! Why cant you just take your normal starlink with you on your boat? Don't people do that with RVs?
Would only work near shore, this must mean they have some capability to go beyond the one hop to a station. Edit: from the coverage map it looks like this is only coastal waters…
Re: Starlink Maritime
#7The maritime coverage map shows coastal coverage around countries with inland coverage right now, i.e. they are bouncing the connection via one of their satellites to a nearby groundstation.
Starting in Q4/2022 they want to cover mid-latitudes around the globe. That might mean that they plan to enable inter-satellite links then? (This is a bit surprising - on one hand, this step extends coverage towards higher and lower latitudes but on the other hand not as much as they already have inland-coverage (cf. Brazil). It also extends longitudinally around all of the globe?).
Coverage above mid-latitudes requires satellites in polar orbits to join the network. (Their non-polar orbits have an inclination of 53° which means that satellites go no further north or south than that (plus a bit whatever their range is)).
https://api.starlink.com/public-files/maritime-coverage-map....
Re: Starlink Maritime
#8"$5,000/mo with a one-time hardware cost of $10,000 for two high performance terminals." wow! Why cant you just take your normal starlink with you on your boat? Don't people do that with RVs?
Would only work near shore, this must mean they have some capability to go beyond the one hop to a station. Edit: from the coverage map it looks like this is only coastal waters…
Interesting. I didn't know that coverage was limited. I assumed satellite == pretty much all of earth.
Re: Starlink Maritime
#9"$5,000/mo with a one-time hardware cost of $10,000 for two high performance terminals." wow! Why cant you just take your normal starlink with you on your boat? Don't people do that with RVs?
"Starlink for RVs is not designed for use while in motion."
Marine starlink needs to compensate for rolling, pitching, and forward motion.
Re: Starlink Maritime
#10Is anything know about the power consumption of the Starlink antenna? Does the maritime version use less power than the conventional unit? The fixed-location version of Starlink consumes around 60 to 100 W constantly which is problem if you want to e.g. use solar panels on a sail boat to supply the device.
If you can afford $5000 a month for internet maybe you're more likely on a Silent 60 (17 kWp solar) than a Catalina 30.