Starlink ISP

[guncrasher]

lol, I live in the city about 15 million around us.  in my street have two choices dsl which is crappy or cable internet which is expensive.  my street is no joking the only street in the city that cannot get fiber optic for whatever reason.  1 block, one stupid block doesnt have fiber optic.  a third option would nice. if it becomes reality.


semp

[Vulcan]

A couple of points. 

1.  There are million of Farmers and Ranchers and their families living in very rural parts of America that don't access to broadband internet.  Now days that's like living without indoor plumbing.  Yes you can do it, but it would be nice to provide the service to those that want it.

2. Broadband internet is about more than great porn.  Many rural families have home-schooled kids and broadband gives them access to so many more learning resources like tele-classes with large school classrooms allowing realtime interaction with remote instructors.  Also tele-medicine is becoming more and more accepted and allows specialists to consult with patients living in remote areas.  Broadband access opens up more employment opportunities for people living in rural areas for remote work and to not be left behind by the digital economy.

I have said it before, I think this tech is going to be a big let down.

You are not talking to geo-stationary satellites, you've got lots of small satellites whizzing around. So you will have to do handoffs, and at a high frequency. You going to have to figure out your downlink performance (what band and power is it going to be on).

And latency IS going to be an issue, despite what Musk is promising the physics just don't add up (for a start how are they going to have a solid terrestrial link if they're no longer geo-stationary).

Be prepared for tears when the hype-curtain is pulled back

[CptTrips]

I have said it before, I think this tech is going to be a big let down.

Could be.  It's not like Elon hasn't talked a bunch of baloney before.   

In the US, we should start to be able to get a reasonable picture of how well it will work by end of next year. 

We shall see, what we shall see.

[Spikes]

Not quite sure why you're grumping out..... maybe your blood sugar is low? Did I say something to offend you, personally? 

Pluses and minuses to everything.  If you view high speed internet AND living off in the wild as important, well, then this is up your alley. That seems pretty inconsistent, but you're entitled to your opinion.  I don't understand why you think others should be affected by your choices, though.  I know someone who has decades of research in deep sky astronomy, whose work will be severely affected.  But, I guess that doesn't matter. 

No. It baffles me that people could possibly get upset at the possibility of allowing everyone in the world high speed internet and even possibly be a reasonable competitor to price gouging cable companies. If you like the stars and dark skies so much perhaps you should not have moved to Boston.

Having lived with dial up and DSL, high speed cable is a godsend and we lived in a place where the cable company would not run cable 1/4 mile up the road to service about 4-5 willing to pay new customers.

The plus side to me is millions of people who otherwise could not get high speed internet due to their location, now can. Minus is your friend can't take pictures of the sky anymore.

[saggs]

I'd be very interested in Starlink internet.  I signed up on the website a while ago but have not been contacted yet.

I live in a location where my only option is AT&T 4G for internet, I am rural enough that I cannot get cable or DSL here, and because of the hillside I live on, and the latitude I live at (66°N) radio and current satellites are not an option either.

The 4G works OK, but I pay $60+ a month and am limited to 50GB a month or I get hit with CRAZY high overage charges.(like I got hit with a surprise $240 bill one month)  Which stinks if I ever want to download a game or movies or anything.

If Starlink really can deliver reliable unlimited satellite internet to extreme latitudes for less then $100 a month I'm sold.


As a nature lover, I also appreciate the concerns about light pollution, but I hope it will not be as bad as some fear.  I mean there are already tens of thousands of satellites, and yes, I notice them fly over often, but I they don't ruin the stargazing experience for me.

[Ramesis]

Yeah, how dare someone try to make new technological advancements!

+1

[Ramesis]

It has recently occurred to me that the more and faster net connections there are... the more
likely it is that our enemies can hack us... 
 

[MORAY37]

As a nature lover, I also appreciate the concerns about light pollution, but I hope it will not be as bad as some fear.  I mean there are already tens of thousands of satellites, and yes, I notice them fly over often, but I they don't ruin the stargazing experience for me.

As of today, there are 2,666 man-made satellites in earth orbit.  That includes the 422 Starlink already in orbit.  (There is a considerably higher number of "space junk" in deteriorating orbits)

Starlink has a planned orbital disposition of 12,000 satellites currently, with the company saying it may take 42,000 units in orbit to "give everybody" high speed internet.

This is a Starlink constellation of 19 units passing over a 3m telescope, that is conducting research.  Specifically, this scope is one of the more important ones that look for near-earth asteroids that we don't know about yet. The streaks  that move across the field of view are the Starlink units.

[Shuffler]

That is eye opening.

[Meatwad]

I am seeing more of this on spaceweather.com. They said even the ones with the non-reflective coating still reflect just as bad. If they get their way and 12-42K of those are in orbit, ground based astronomy will no longer be effective. Wait until a small 100 meter asteroid hits the surface that went undetected due to the starlink interference. Then you will start getting the point across. And there have been plenty of those that went undetected until it was right on us

[Shuffler]

Also more like one of those will be hit by one and more pieces coming down.

[saggs]

As of today, there are 2,666 man-made satellites in earth orbit.  That includes the 422 Starlink already in orbit.  (There is a considerably higher number of "space junk" in deteriorating orbits)

Hmmm... I wonder what criteria or stats were used to come up with that 2,666 number, seems way off by any metric to me.

From ESA:

"The latest figures related to space debris, provided by ESA's Space Debris Office at ESOC, Darmstadt, Germany.
Information correct as of February 2020

Number of rocket launches since the start of the space age in 1957:
About 5560 (excluding failures)

Number of satellites these rocket launches have placed into Earth orbit:
About 9600

Number of these still in space:
About 5500

Number of these still functioning:
About 2300

Number of debris objects regularly tracked by Space Surveillance Networks and maintained in their catalogue:
About 22 300

Estimated number of break-ups, explosions, collisions, or anomalous events resulting in fragmentation:
More than 500

Total mass of all space objects in Earth orbit:
More than 8800 tonnes

Number of debris objects estimated by statistical models to be in orbit:
34 000 objects >10 cm
900 000 objects from greater than 1 cm to 10 cm"

https://www.esa.int/Safety_Security/Space_Debris/Space_debris_by_the_numbers

[MORAY37]

Hmmm... I wonder what criteria or stats were used to come up with that 2,666 number, seems way off by any metric to me.

From ESA:

"The latest figures related to space debris, provided by ESA's Space Debris Office at ESOC, Darmstadt, Germany.
Information correct as of February 2020

Number of rocket launches since the start of the space age in 1957:
About 5560 (excluding failures)

Number of satellites these rocket launches have placed into Earth orbit:
About 9600

Number of these still in space:
About 5500

Number of these still functioning:
About 2300

Number of debris objects regularly tracked by Space Surveillance Networks and maintained in their catalogue:
About 22 300

Estimated number of break-ups, explosions, collisions, or anomalous events resulting in fragmentation:
More than 500

Total mass of all space objects in Earth orbit:
More than 8800 tonnes

Number of debris objects estimated by statistical models to be in orbit:
34 000 objects >10 cm
900 000 objects from greater than 1 cm to 10 cm"

https://www.esa.int/Safety_Security/Space_Debris/Space_debris_by_the_numbers

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/satellite-database

Satellite quick facts

Includes launches through 3/31/2020

    Total number of operating satellites: 2,666
        United States: 1,327
        Russia: 169
        China: 363
        Other: 807
    LEO: 1,918
    MEO: 135
    Elliptical: 59
    GEO: 554
    Total number of US satellites: 1,327
        Civil: 30
        Commercial: 935
        Government: 170
        Military: 192

[Meatwad]

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/satellite-database

Satellite quick facts

Includes launches through 3/31/2020

    Total number of operating satellites: 2,666
        United States: 1,327
        Russia: 169
        China: 363
        Other: 807
    LEO: 1,918
    MEO: 135
    Elliptical: 59
    GEO: 554
    Total number of US satellites: 1,327
        Civil: 30
        Commercial: 935
        Government: 170
        Military: 192

That does not include the number of decommissioned satellites, space junk, debris that is in space. Anything that can reflect a light will pollute an observation

[Vulcan]

Starlink has a planned orbital disposition of 12,000 satellites currently, with the company saying it may take 42,000 units in orbit to "give everybody" high speed internet.

I wouldn't stress, I doubt Starlink is going to survive.