SpaceX Internet Satellite Network: Starlink

[mongo]

When I first setup Starlink I left the Starlink router and AP on, but didn't use either and fed the WAN port on my Ubiquiti DM-Pro and onward from there to many APs etc. I had my Ubiquiti SSID broadcasting, as well as the Starlink SSID. It all worked fine, although theoretically there was a potential problem with running an additional router (Starlink) upstream of the main one. With the Starlink app I could connect to the Starlink SSID and have full functionality of the Starlink App to run direct Starlink speed tests and some other things I'm forgetting.

When I upgraded to the Business dish with a new Starlink router/AP box, I disabled the router/AP part because of the theoretical problem of having two routers. I used to do this with other ISPs: disable the router part of the cable/fiber modem because I used my own router. I could still 192.168.what.ever into the modem.

Starlink now serves the WAN port on my Ubiquiti DM-Pro just fine, but now the Starlink app on my phone can't connect "direct" to the Dishy and Starlink Router box -- it has to go through my local network. So it won't give me the Starlink Speed test It says "Connect directly to your Starlink network to run a Starlink speed test." But since I disconnected the STarlink router, that also turns off the STarlink SSID so there is no way to connect "directly" to the Starlink router. It still gives Statistics and Obstructions map, but the "network."

And the 192.168.100.1 is a good idea but it doesn't work -- just dead no response and doesn't get me into the Starlink Modem/dormant router.

By the way, I recommend Ubiquiti stuff as it gives you good cool info like below, as well as the main thing: feeding a bunch of coordinated APs over a large house, and now load balancing if you have an additional ISP.

View attachment 978982

View attachment 978987

View attachment 978988

Ah, I'm pretty sure the speed test is performed by the router, with it in bridge mode it may not be able to run it.

100.1 was for residential Dishy, but it sounds like you can get to it through the app?

 

[bhzmark]

sounds like you can get to it through the app?

Not directly. I can run the Starlink App when connected to any internet, and most functionality works, but since my phone running the Starlink app isn't on the Starlink SSID some functionality on the STarlink App doesn't work: the direct speed test and whatever is under the greyed out "Network" menu.

 

[scaesare]

I suspect that's by design, for at least the speedtest Starlink provides... they run it directly, as the intent is to report what the Starlink's service provides, and they have no control over what impact any down-stream equipment may have.

I don't know what any other grayed out "Network" items are, but there may be similar considerations for those. Or they get turned off as part of disabling the "router A/P part".

 

[mongo]

Not directly. I can run the Starlink App when connected to any internet, and most functionality works, but since my phone running the Starlink app isn't on the Starlink SSID some functionality on the STarlink App doesn't work: the direct speed test and whatever is under the greyed out "Network" menu.

Right, you are getting to Dishy through the app. The router has its network functions disabled due to bridge mode. All the app network functions were served from the router.
The router is so disabled that you can only exit bypass mode via factory reset.
Do you have a Gen 3 router?

What is Bypass mode?
Bypass Mode is used to override the Starlink Router and use your own third party router, directly with Starlink.

Standard(Rectangular) Starlink with Gen 2 router: Bypass mode will completely disable the built-in Starlink WiFi router functionality. An Ethernet Adapter is required to use this feature. Factory reset the Starlink WiFi router to disable bypass mode.

High Performance and Flat High Performance Starlink with Gen 2 router: Your Starlink kit includes a cable option to connect the power supply to an external RJ45 port, as an option to connect a 3rd party router or mesh system. If you use your own router or mesh system it will require removing the included Starlink router and using the 3rd party equipment exclusively.

Standard(Circular) Starlink with Gen 1 router: Enabling bypass mode through the Starlink App is not supported. The included Starlink router can be removed and replaced with 3rd party equipment.

Gen 3 Router: Bypass mode is supported on the Starlink Gen3 Router. Manually factory reset the Starlink Gen 3 router to disable bypass mode.

 

[ecarfan]

SpaceX's Starlink Adds Enough Capacity to Lift Waitlist for US​

SpaceX has completely removed the waitlist for Starlink in the US, meaning any interested customer can subscribe for access to the satellite internet system without delay.

The company credits the achievement to improved capacity provided by the newest Starlink satellites. "Deployment of our second generation Starlink satellites, which have 4x more capacitythan the first gen, enable us to connect even more people no matter where they live," Starlink tweeted. "Starlink is now available across the United States.”

 

[dhanson865]

SpaceX's Starlink Adds Enough Capacity to Lift Waitlist for US​

yeah, not just the US, Every active cell on the planet is open now.

 

[dhanson865]

and a snip of the Download speed map now.

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1709244563150242288

 

[Cosmacelf]

Turns out Starlink is the culprit behind many UFO sightings from pilots…

 

[JB47394]

Turns out Starlink is the culprit behind many UFO sightings from pilots…

I found a page at Statistica.com that says in 1996 20% of people believed that UFOs are alien in nature, and that in 2022 34% believed. That would explain why we have more attention from Congress. Once it's a majority, we'll end up with a permanent House Committee on Unexplained Aerial Phenomena.

I'm in the 0% chance camp. I'll sit up and take notice when there's a smoking gun. Until then, carry on and stop killing each other.

 

[Grendal]

I found a page at Statistica.com that says in 1996 20% of people believed that UFOs are alien in nature, and that in 2022 34% believed. That would explain why we have more attention from Congress. Once it's a majority, we'll end up with a permanent House Committee on Unexplained Aerial Phenomena.

I'm in the 0% chance camp. I'll sit up and take notice when there's a smoking gun. Until then, carry on and stop killing each other.

Hmm. Maybe because there are a hundred TV shows about UFOs programming people to believe in them.

 

[Grendal]

SpaceX providing Starlink services to DoD under ‘unique terms and conditions’

SpaceX providing Starlink services to DoD under ‘unique terms and conditions’

spacenews.com

 

[dhanson865]

Zambia went live. Interesting it shows on the availability map but not on the download speed map.

 

[JB47394]

Hmm. Maybe because there are a hundred TV shows about UFOs programming people to believe in them.

Maybe, but we've had those TV shows for decades. I point the finger at social media. Social media is more personal and interactive than a TV show, and I think people develop a sense of trust with social media that makes it particularly impactful. So a former Air Force sergeant or Navy radar operator tweets about stuff that he saw and people think "Well, that's a military source, so I believe it. They have amazing technology. And it's just a normal guy, so why would he lie? He's one of us." It contrasts strongly with the idea that the more traditional media is controlled by The Man and His Agendas. Social media is also accessible to everyone, especially those who don't know what a Starlink satellite looks like from the ground.

It can't help that we have casual access to drones. It used to be pie plates, frisbees and balloons. Now it's drones.

 

[ecarfan]

The chain of reasoning that many people employ when it comes to stuff in the sky that they don’t understand is “It’s something unidentified so must be aliens.”

Right.

 

[scaesare]

Maybe, but we've had those TV shows for decades. I point the finger at social media. Social media is more personal and interactive than a TV show, and I think people develop a sense of trust with social media that makes it particularly impactful. So a former Air Force sergeant or Navy radar operator tweets about stuff that he saw and people think "Well, that's a military source, so I believe it. They have amazing technology. And it's just a normal guy, so why would he lie? He's one of us." It contrasts strongly with the idea that the more traditional media is controlled by The Man and His Agendas. Social media is also accessible to everyone, especially those who don't know what a Starlink satellite looks like from the ground.

It can't help that we have casual access to drones. It used to be pie plates, frisbees and balloons. Now it's drones.

Indeed. The fact that any nutjob has a platform to reach millions seems to have really fed the conspiracy theorists on lots of fronts...

Anyway, back to hunting down chemtrails...

 

[Grendal]

The sky is falling!

SpaceX slams FAA report on falling space debris danger

SpaceX called on the Federal Aviation Administration to correct a report to Congress warning that, by 2035, falling debris from U.S.-licensed constellations in low Earth orbit could injure or kill someone every two years if they deploy as planned.

spacenews.com

 

[ecarfan]

Sounds like that report made some basic errors:

By 2035, if the expected large constellation growth is realized and debris from Starlink satellites survive reentry

And as we know, SpaceX says that Starlink sats are designed to be “fully demisable”; nothing survives re-entry.

 

[Cosmacelf]

The sky is falling!

SpaceX slams FAA report on falling space debris danger

SpaceX called on the Federal Aviation Administration to correct a report to Congress warning that, by 2035, falling debris from U.S.-licensed constellations in low Earth orbit could injure or kill someone every two years if they deploy as planned.

spacenews.com

The death of competency marches on. Sounds like that report, which was done by a consultant, was fobbed off onto a junior employee who had no desire to do a proper job. How can you analyze possible SpaceX debris without contacting SpaceX and getting their data?

 

[scaesare]

Good grief, the report states initially (emphasis mine):

In the report, the regulator said 28,000 hazardous fragments from de-orbiting satellites and the rockets that launch them could be surviving reentry each year by 2035 — particularly if SpaceX’s rapid Starlink expansion plans remain on track.

SpaceX has launched 5,000 Starlink satellites since 2019, has permission from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission to grow the constellation to 12,000, and is seeking international approvals to eventually expand to 40,000 Starlinks in orbit. According to the FAA report, Starlink represents more than 85% of the expected risk to people on the ground and aviation from falling debris in the timeframe.

And then later says:

However, the FAA conceded any “rise in reentry risk is minimal over the current risk” if SpaceX is correct in reporting zero surviving Starlink debris to date, and that their components are fragile enough to burn up entirely in the atmosphere.

According to satellite tracker and astrophysicist Jonathan McDowell, 358 Starlink satellites have de-orbited. There have been no reports of their debris reaching the ground.

“To be clear, SpaceX’s satellites are designed and built to fully demise during atmospheric reentry during disposal at end of life, and they do so [emphasis in original],” Goldstein wrote in the letter.

“Extensive engineering analysis and real-world operational experience verify this basic fact.”

The FAA based its conclusions on a claim that the space industry has not met the 90% success rate for post-mission disposal, he added, whereas he said SpaceX’s post-mission disposal success rate is greater than 99%.

Goldstein also said the analysis improperly leveraged a 23-year-old NASA study that found roughly one piece of debris survives reentry for every 100 kilograms on Iridium Communications satellites — a much smaller LEO constellation.

“The analysis is inapplicable to SpaceX satellites because — among other things — Iridium satellites were not even built to be fully demisable,” he said, and are “not similar in material, construction, design, orbit and operation from SpaceX or any other modern satellite in LEO.”

Umm.. inconsistent much?