SpaceX Internet Satellite Network: Starlink

[JPP]

Yes, and all that implies a pretty highly monthly subscription fee. I suspect people will be disappointed when they see how expensive it will be. As Elon has emphasized he wants Starlink to be the first Internet satellite company to not go bankrupt.

I will be interested to see the final monthly cost and data plan. FWIW I am in NoCA in the SF Bay Area in the middle of a Tier 3 Fire Zone. I have been through PSPS, and we have more recently been under a blanket of smoke from the fires just 20-30 miles north of us. When our power goes out, even though I have Powerwalls, I lose Internet in about 1-2 hours (Comcast needs power at their neighborhood amplifiers and switches). My cell service is bad, so I use VoIP (WiFi calling). During the last 5 day PSPS I was without communication/connectivity. So this year I subscribed to HughesNet satellite internet. You get a large dish on your roof, and a modem. Speeds are about 20-30 megs down and 3-5 Megs up, with horrible latency. I get bare bones internet and a bad voice call. All of this for $70/month with a 10 Gb data cap. So if StarLink is anything close, with a smaller dish and lower latency, I'm on it.

 

[mongo]

Quite a few relevant Tweets today from Elon. At first read, I thought this one said "service centers".

"Average latency will improve as more satellites launch (directly above you more frequently) & more ground stations are deployed. As we’re able to put more ground stations on roofs of server centers, legacy Internet latency will be zero."

Also mentioned laser links for Earth to Mars communications. Seems favorable regarding links between LEO sats.

 

[ecarfan]

Elon tweeted: ....legacy Internet latency will be zero.

I don’t understand what the word “legacy” means in that context.

 

[mongo]

I don’t understand what the word “legacy” means in that context.

I think it means there will be no latency due to legacy terrestrial network backbones. User to sat(s) to server farm.

 

[doghousePVD]

I will be interested to see the final monthly cost and data plan. FWIW I am in NoCA in the SF Bay Area in the middle of a Tier 3 Fire Zone. I have been through PSPS, and we have more recently been under a blanket of smoke from the fires just 20-30 miles north of us. When our power goes out, even though I have Powerwalls, I lose Internet in about 1-2 hours (Comcast needs power at their neighborhood amplifiers and switches). My cell service is bad, so I use VoIP (WiFi calling). During the last 5 day PSPS I was without communication/connectivity. So this year I subscribed to HughesNet satellite internet. You get a large dish on your roof, and a modem. Speeds are about 20-30 megs down and 3-5 Megs up, with horrible latency. I get bare bones internet and a bad voice call. All of this for $70/month with a 10 Gb data cap. So if StarLink is anything close, with a smaller dish and lower latency, I'm on it.

Population (or user) density is the key limiting factor for Starlink. The present constellation (almost 1000 birds) supports single digit users per square mile around 44˚ to 53˚ latitude. With 10,000 satellites, double digit users per square mile. Even with all the 47,000 birds in orbit, only a triple digit number of users per square mile will be available.

The beam coverages are not square one mile plots but much larger, dynamically-focused ellipses, and the density of satellites visible in a specific area varies with latitude and orbit spacing, so these user densities are not exact numbers. The USA population is nearly 100 people per square mile, greatly concentrated in cities and suburbs. Starlink will be most useful in places with no or poor internet (over 50% of the US land mass), not a direct competitor to anyone with cable or fiber service.

If you have Comcast, your local population density is probably too high for Starlink.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Population (or user) density is the key limiting factor for Starlink. The present constellation (almost 1000 birds) supports single digit users per square mile around 44˚ to 53˚ latitude. With 10,000 satellites, double digit users per square mile. Even with all the 47,000 birds in orbit, only a triple digit number of users per square mile will be available.

The beam coverages are not square one mile plots but much larger, dynamically-focused ellipses, and the density of satellites visible in a specific area varies with latitude and orbit spacing, so these user densities are not exact numbers. The USA population is nearly 100 people per square mile, greatly concentrated in cities and suburbs. Starlink will be most useful in places with no or poor internet (over 50% of the US land mass), not a direct competitor to anyone with cable or fiber service.

If you have Comcast, your local population density is probably too high for Starlink.

My municipality is relatively densely populated for Maine.
But I have good friends in towns with population densities of 45 and 55/sqmi.

It's not that denser places can't be served at all, it's that availability would be very limited. But Starlink would always want to max out use in each region. I could imagine targeting emergency services in cities.

PS Tristan da Cunha has a population density of 3.6/sqmi.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Remember than not everyone will sign up. A household family of five only needs one link. And then there the usual market penetration. Also possible that SpaceX could have differential pricing? Costs more for urbanized areas than it does for rural.

 

[bxr140]

The beam coverages are not square one mile plots but much larger

Do we have any [public] idea of the median per-beam ground coverage?

...single digit users per square mile....double digit users per square mile...

Yeah--you can only cram a certain amount through a single beam, and that gets divided by the number of users. More users, less service per user.

Obviously Starlink beams will be significantly smaller and service magnitudes higher, but as a very old school data point Iridium Next sats have something like 40-50 beams across a 4k-5k diameter area. That maths to hundreds of sq km per beam, while still of course managing the fundamental physics of user density limiting per-user service. That was also before the days of beam hopping (certainly Iridium can shift power across beams), but its a helpful mental exercise to visualize the quantum leap in NGSO service that Starlink will provide.

Its the same story at GEO too: for funsies compare the size and quantity of the Viasat-1 beams with the Viasat 3 beams.

It's not that denser places can't be served at all, it's that availability would be very limited.

Yep. Fundamentally the upper limit is the same number of users as any other beam/location, but of course there's way more people playing the lottery in a population dense area. Its also fair to assume that most of that available service would go to high value commercial users looking for low latency on long hauls rather than residential users that have high speed alternatives.

 

[ecarfan]

AT&T kills DSL, leaves tens of millions of homes without fiber Internet

Quote: “Across the predominantly rural counties in AT&T's national footprint, only 5 percent of households (217,284 out of 4,442,675) have access to fiber," the report said. In urban areas, the situation is better but not problem-free. "Seventy percent of households in urban counties still lack access to fiber from AT&T because the company has made fiber available to only 14.7 million households out of 48.4 million total households in these counties," the report said.”
————————————————————————————

Opportunity for Starlink.

 

[bxr140]

I certainly won't go out of my way to rush to the defense of a telecom, but this one's a nothing burger. Nobody is losing their existing T service. T is just not taking on more DSL customers. Oh, and news flash, they're engaging in [predictably] shady fiber laying strategies.

I also don't know that there's much additional opportunity for Starlink here, as this news doesn't materially change the potential customer base for Starlink. I guess if one assumes this means T is conceding customers then yeah this news potentially makes racking up users easier for Starlink.

Alternatively, if one assumes this means T plans to focus resources away from an obsolete connectivity solution (DSL) to something more competitive (or at least, less antiquated), then we're back to where we started. Or at least where I started, which is that terrestrial telecoms aren't going to sit back and give up customers without a fight. (Which would mean that for some, if not many here, this news indicates things will be more difficult for Starlink.)

 

[bxr140]

Hard to say how much upside this actually has for SpaceX/Starlink, but they're building 4 sats for SDA to feel out Tranche 0 (along with Harris), ostensibly with some winner or winners getting a larger contract at some point down the road. As noted in the article, this is for the Tracking Layer, which of course functions obviously, harmoniously, and completely unambiguously with the Transport Layer sats (the recent feeler award to Lockeed and York).

SpaceX, L3Harris win Space Development Agency contracts to build missile-warning satellites - SpaceNews

 

[Mo City]

Hard to say how much upside this actually has for SpaceX/Starlink, but they're building 4 sats for SDA to feel out Tranche 0 (along with Harris), ostensibly with some winner or winners getting a larger contract at some point down the road. As noted in the article, this is for the Tracking Layer, which of course functions obviously, harmoniously, and completely unambiguously with the Transport Layer sats (the recent feeler award to Lockeed and York).

SpaceX, L3Harris win Space Development Agency contracts to build missile-warning satellites - SpaceNews

I have believed for a while the DOD, NRO, etc will be the primary revenue generator for Starlink.

In fact, once the DOD fully buys in and trusts Starlink's potential, don't be surprised if it goes "all-in" and commands so much of SL's resources that commercial satellite deployment is significantly slowed down. Look for the FCC to grant SL additional time beyond the 2024 and 2027 deadlines.

 

[hmcgregoraz]

I certainly won't go out of my way to rush to the defense of a telecom, but this one's a nothing burger. Nobody is losing their existing T service. T is just not taking on more DSL customers. Oh, and news flash, they're engaging in [predictably] shady fiber laying strategies.

I also don't know that there's much additional opportunity for Starlink here, as this news doesn't materially change the potential customer base for Starlink. I guess if one assumes this means T is conceding customers then yeah this news potentially makes racking up users easier for Starlink.

Alternatively, if one assumes this means T plans to focus resources away from an obsolete connectivity solution (DSL) to something more competitive (or at least, less antiquated), then we're back to where we started. Or at least where I started, which is that terrestrial telecoms aren't going to sit back and give up customers without a fight. (Which would mean that for some, if not many here, this news indicates things will be more difficult for Starlink.)

I think this more has to do with AT&T trying to increase their "average" broadband speed of their customers.

They could have said that they will not invest in more legacy DSL ports, but will sell service on an as available basis, and instead they said that they will support existing customers but not take on any new customers.

This is the older legacy ADSL and ADSL2, not DSL based on VDSL, VDSL2 or G.FAST, which AT&T brands as "Fiber" based. Of course ADSL tended to use Fiber for backhaul too.........

These are service maximum speeds, not necessarily what the customer copper would permit....

ADSL = 12/1.3 service
ADSL2 = 12/3.5 service
ADSL2+ = 24/3.3 service

AT&T probably had a bonded dual line ADSL2+ with a max of 48/5 range for service.

I think everyone agrees that even 3.3Mbit is insufficient for multiple video meeting sessions on a single connection.

VDSL is not much better, but still better, it maxes at 55/3.... But VDSL2 maxes at 200/100 service, and VDSL2VPlus maxes at 300/100, and G.FAST can even hit upwards of gigabit donwload, with a short enough line (100meters).

I think it is a bit short sighted for AT&T to stop offering where they have ports available, but I don't see any reason why they should invest in additional ports on the legacy ADSL network.

-Harry

 

[Cosmacelf]

I have believed for a while the DOD, NRO, etc will be the primary revenue generator for Starlink.

In fact, once the DOD fully buys in and trusts Starlink's potential, don't be surprised if it goes "all-in" and commands so much of SL's resources that commercial satellite deployment is significantly slowed down. Look for the FCC to grant SL additional time beyond the 2024 and 2027 deadlines.

SpaceX can walk and chew gum at the same time. These four sats are not Starlink sats. They have some shared components, but this is a separate development effort. Also DOD has its own military grade encrypted satellite communication network. Of course, SpaceX can bid and win future contracts for that and other ones. I suspect the SpaceX defense division will be a pretty big part of SpaceX in five years.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Yet another Starlink private beta. This time to a remote Indian reservation, again in Washington state. Again, very happy users. The video is interesting, even if you have to listen to politicians taking credit for, what, making a phone call? And Inslee wearing a mask in his own house is just .

At any rate, SpaceX is killing it with regard to getting huge PR wins before they even roll out a beta. If the FCC doesn’t award them significant rural broadband grants, they will make themselves look like fools.

SpaceX Starlink aids Native American tribe: "It catapulted us into the 21st century"

 

[Cosmacelf]

Some interesting background on real world congested Starlink latency and battles with the FCC and Viasat. In their private betas they are seeing 50% of customers with 30ms or less latency, and 95% with 42ms or less.

 

[EVCollies]

Some interesting background on real world congested Starlink latency and battles with the FCC and Viasat. In their private betas they are seeing 50% of customers with 30ms or less latency, and 95% with 42ms or less.

Also interesting to hear the improvements being made in the system.

 

[bxr140]

As expected, it looks like Hughes is going to try to leverage a hybrid solution leveraging OneWeb sats in LEO:
Hughes views OneWeb stake as key to FCC broadband subsidies - SpaceNews

And as expected, SpaceX qualifies for RDOF:
SpaceX, Hughes and Viasat qualify to bid for $20.4 billion in FCC rural broadband subsidies - SpaceNews

 

[Cosmacelf]

Nice to hear. Don't know if this means it'll happen soon, or if it's just another Elon "possibility at some time in the far future" thing.

But there was early testing on military airplanes IIRC, so this could happen sooner than later.

 

[bxr140]

The ground track of a LEO satellite is 7.0 km/s or more, phased arrays form beams in the ms timeframe, and Starlink beamwidths are probably in the single km each, maybe 3-5km diameter? (Not really sure) So...just to "keep up" with your house as you stream your Netflix or whatever there's going to be plenty of beams going on, and that's just from one satellite.

Compare the above figures to the ground track of an aircraft which is maybe 0.25km/s and it quickly becomes clear that relative speed of anything that might want Starlink connectivity is indeed inconsequential.