SpaceX Internet Satellite Network: Starlink

[mongo]

Australia's Telstra will use Starlink to provide phobe service to temote locations and resale Starlink broadband (meaning installation and support).
h/t Sawyer Merritt
Telstra partners with Starlink for rural broadband AND voice services

Note, the article seems to not be aware of the new Ridgeline mount kit.

 

[ecarfan]

Australia's Telstra will use Starlink to provide phobe service to temote locations and resale Starlink broadband (meaning installation and support).
h/t Sawyer Merritt
Telstra partners with Starlink for rural broadband AND voice services

Note, the article seems to not be aware of the new Ridgeline mount kit.

Just read a Reuters report about that. Why wouldn’t remote rural Australians simply get their net access directly from Starlink and bypass Telestra? With net access they can make inexpensive voice calls as well. What value does Telestra provide?

 

[mongo]

Just read a Reuters report about that. Why wouldn’t remote rural Australians simply get their net access directly from Starlink and bypass Telestra? With net access they can make inexpensive voice calls as well. What value does Telestra provide?

Installation and support, plus I think their setup acts like a normal phone line. So it's an option for people who are not technical or just want what acts like a land line.
Like cable modem based phone service.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Installation and support, plus I think their setup acts like a normal phone line. So it's an option for people who are not technical or just want what acts like a land line.
Like cable modem based phone service.

And many people don't want to pay a $600 up front fee. Telstra will probably rent them out the dish.

 

[Grendal]

It was announced on todays Starlink launch that there are more than 1.5 million Starlink customers.

 

[Cosmacelf]

It was announced on todays Starlink launch that there are more than 1.5 million Starlink customers.

Napkin math, about $1.5B yearly revenue.

 

[Surfer of Life]

It was announced on todays Starlink launch that there are more than 1.5 million Starlink customers.

And for good reason!

Though partially occluded by trees, and despite zero customer service/ communication from Starlink, my basic Starlink model is providing me the fastest WiFi I could ever hope for, largely thanks to help here from @mongo , @ecarfan , respected knowing elder @winfield100 , and @Mike1080i , (listed in no particular order, but highly appreciated, all).

It might not have been necessary, but I think deleting the Starlink APP, restarting Starlink by toggling the power off and on ~12 times, then reinstalling Starlink might have helped, (though likely just the exercise my feeble mind needed to find my way through the set up part of the APP) as well as figuring out to click out of Setup and into the main mobile APP menu.

 

[dhanson865]

Starlink wifi at north and south pole

https://twitter.com/x/status/1679932696401682432

 

[dhanson865]

Kenya live now.

Georgia is listed as Q2 2023 so should be very soon. Took me longer than I'd like to admit to find it on the map again so I made a reminder screenshot.

 

[ecarfan]

Starlink wifi at north and south pole

I knew that Starlink was available in Antarctica (though it is currently maxed out there, you have to get on the waitlist) but hadn’t heard about coverage at the North Pole. The Starlink map doesn’t show coverage there, unsurprisingly. But the Starlink Maritime page states coverage is “global” so I assume if you can get to the North Pole in a ship you will have a connection.

This all kind of blows my mind; seems like it was only a few years ago when Starlink first started selling service in a very limited number of countries.

 

[mongo]

I knew that Starlink was available in Antarctica (though it is currently maxed out there, you have to get on the waitlist) but hadn’t heard about coverage at the North Pole. The Starlink map doesn’t show coverage there, unsurprisingly. But the Starlink Maritime page states coverage is “global” so I assume if you can get to the North Pole in a ship you will have a connection.

This all kind of blows my mind; seems like it was only a few years ago when Starlink first started selling service in a very limited number of countries.

Due to orbital mechanics, if one pole has coverage the other does also (assuming the ground link/ laser path exists)

 

[dhanson865]

Due to orbital mechanics, if one pole has coverage the other does also (assuming the ground link/ laser path exists)

and with intersatellite laser links, even places that don't have ground support have coverage now (though slower than places that do have ground coverage)

 

[mongo]

and with intersatellite laser links, even places that don't have ground support have coverage now (though slower than places that do have ground coverage)

Slower how? Aren't the lasers higher bandwidth than the ground links?

 

[Cosmacelf]

Slower how? Aren't the lasers higher bandwidth than the ground links?

I suspect he meant latency, but even then, not sure that statement is correct.

and with intersatellite laser links, even places that don't have ground support have coverage now (though slower than places that do have ground coverage)

I’m not sure you are correct about the slower part. ISL links are faster than terrestrial fiber, by a lot. Not only is the path likely to be much straighter, but light travels much faster in a vacuum. Also Starlink data packets follow a very complex route internally on their network, so it isn’t easy to know speed. You’d have to do an actual Speedtest comparison, which is impossible since Starlink either has local downlink terminals nearby or it doesn’t. At any rate, speed tests from the arctic look pretty good(see below).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1680529542635454466

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

and with intersatellite laser links, even places that don't have ground support have coverage now (though slower than places that do have ground coverage)

Some places, if they're covered by newer satellites. I'll consider it more universal when St Helena, Ascension Island and, most importantly, Tristan da Cunha has it. I believe that Pitcairn has it already.

 

[dhanson865]

Slower how? Aren't the lasers higher bandwidth than the ground links?

They have longer latency to a ground station and if that ground station/cell is busy they could be deprioritized and get lower bandwidth than they would in an empty cell in the great plains of the US as a comparison (or a blank cell on the US / Canadian border where service is ideal).

In general Starlink prioritizes local dishes in a cell over remote dishes passing into a cell. Think of Residential vs Roam vs Mobility. You can end up with slower service based on the plan you are using.

You also have the issue of less than 24/7 coverage and packets could be lost/delayed as the dish is waiting for a satellite lock.

Am I saying it will always be slower, No. You might get bursts of high speed traffic. I'm just saying don't pop up in the artic and expect the same service you'd get on the US / Canadian border.

 

[dhanson865]

I suspect he meant latency, but even then, not sure that statement is correct.


I’m not sure you are correct about the slower part. ISL links are faster than terrestrial fiber, by a lot. Not only is the path likely to be much straighter, but light travels much faster in a vacuum. Also Starlink data packets follow a very complex route internally on their network, so it isn’t easy to know speed. You’d have to do an actual Speedtest comparison, which is impossible since Starlink either has local downlink terminals nearby or it doesn’t. At any rate, speed tests from the arctic look pretty good(see below).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1680529542635454466

Thanks you proved my point for me, last I checked 163 is slower than 414.

 

[mongo]

Thanks you proved my point for me, last I checked 163 is slower than 414.

View attachment 957724


View attachment 957725

They are faster than my terrestrial residential 118<163

They have longer latency to a ground station and if that ground station/cell is busy they could be deprioritized and get lower bandwidth than they would in an empty cell in the great plains of the US as a comparison (or a blank cell on the US / Canadian border where service is ideal).

So what you are saying is a congested ground link gives lower data rates than an underused one and routing data over a longer distance is slower?

 

[mongo]

300ish cruise ships

https://twitter.com/x/status/1681690744313241600

 

[mongo]

New Dishy and Router configuration potentially showing up soon.
RJ-45 connectors to Dishy, 2 LAN ports, and external power brick.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1684511281049473024