Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Ben on June 22, 2020, 10:39:20 PM
-
I just saw that Starlink is going to start beta testing in North America later this year. If you send them your email and zip code, you can get on their mailing list and if your zip is in a testing area, you have the chance of beta testing.
I went ahead and did it. Even if it's a slim chance, it would be cool to test. They appear to be starting in Northern latitudes first, with possible initial testing in Seattle. I might not be far enough North, but figured what the heck. Also I'm hoping they mean "Seattle latitude" versus Seattle the city. Seems kinda dumb to beta test a technology you're developing for "fast internet anywhere, including for the under-served" in a city that already has mega-bandwidth conventional connections available.
https://www.starlink.com/
-
Yeah I read the story today. I'll sign up to see if I can try it when it gets this far south.
-
I signed up. We will see if being 40 miles north of Seattle counts for anything.
-
Any idea what the specs are?
Brad
-
Any idea what the specs are?
Brad
Gigabit with around a 30 millisecond latency. The latter is key and why I wouldn't touch current sat service now. The 30 millisecond latency is about what I ping now with my fixed wireless, but at only around 15mbps bandwidth. I'll be interested to see Starlink pricing, but if it's under $100/mo it would be worth it for me, as I'm paying $80/mo now. Given, of course, that it's robust. My fixed wireless has only gone out maybe four times in the 1.5 years I've had it, the longest time being maybe an hour.
-
I'm really pulling for Starlink to make it work. But with gigabit fiber, I think I'll pass.
This is from WiFi from my work PC. My workshop desktop that's actually hard-wired over Ethernet gets 900Mbps pretty easily.
(https://www.speedtest.net/result/9650943232.png) (https://www.speedtest.net/result/9650943232)
-
Signed up a couple weeks ago, heard about it on the SpaceX reddit.
I have so much loathing for Cox, that if Starlink is half the speed at 50% more price, I'll still switch. I can still track what junk mail I can attribute to Cox by the way the misspelled name on the mail matches my misspelled name on my Cox bill.
-
Signed up a couple weeks ago, heard about it on the SpaceX reddit.
I have so much loathing for Cox, that if Starlink is half the speed at 50% more price, I'll still switch. I can still track what junk mail I can attribute to Cox by the way the misspelled name on the mail matches my misspelled name on my Cox bill.
If I had to use Comcast, Spectrum, or Cox, I'd pay more for less bandwidth too. Ugh. I get junk mail from Spectrum and people walking up and down the street with clipboards and badges for Spectrum all the time.
And then there's the people that hang out at the intersection of aisles at Walmart in front of the electronics section trying to sign you up asking who you have for internet. Telling them I've got AT&T gigabit fiber usually shuts them up. The bad ones are the actual AT&T guys though, because they're trying to push AT&T DirectTV satellite even though I've got U-Verse through the fiber. They don't give up even when I tell them I'm already an AT&T customer. I suspect that their acquisition of DirectTV isn't working out for them and they're desperate for subscribers to pay for those big expensive satellites that won't be serviceable until SpaceX makes access to GEO as cheap as long distance air freight.
Yeah, I'm going to switch to a service that requires new wiring, a dish on my roof, and that goes out whenever there's a heavy rainfall or snow, or a bird sits on the LNB, and "On Demand" isn't really "On Demand"...
-
If we didn't have everything, including TV, on a Uverse bundle then I'd be on the bandwagon. TV service is fine but the internet service "hangs" all the time. It's not buffering like speed has dropped, it just stops. The connection is still active according to the modem's blinky light, but there is zero traffic. It's like the the hose is still screwed on but someone turned off the valve. 95% of the time it's okay but that other 5% is infuriating. I haven't had the time or patience to see if it's limited to wifi or also includes cabled connections.
I had AT&T fiber at my old place. The all-the-way-inside kind, not fiber to the alley node then copper to the house. Service was terrific. Rock solid and fast, especially for the price ($50/mo for 100Mb up/down). Only problem was having to occasionally reboot the modem. Her place (now Our Place) is served by legacy copper. It's 12 blocks from my old house and the subdivisions adjoin but AT&T doesn't appear to be bringing in fiber to that area, at least not in the near future. From what I can gather they had to install fiber to a minimum number of users for some type of contractual agreement. Once that minimum was met, they stopped. Compared to the fiber service I had, we're paying 50% more for 1/3 the speed. Like I said, if it weren't for the bundle savings, I'd be eyeballing Starlink pretty hard.
Brad
-
We have Xfinity copper to the house for cable TV and Internet. On my home desktop that is connected via Ethernet, I generally get 325 MBps down and 12 MBps up. Depending on the wireless device, similar speeds via WiFi.
-
5-6 meg is a good day here. Running three tv's in the evening can get interesting.
-
5-6 meg is a good day here. Running three tv's in the evening can get interesting.
This is where Starlink pricing will be interesting. When I moved here, all the neighbors were using crappy Frontier DSL because it was like $40/mo. Frontier is gone here now, and most of them seem to have switched to crappy standard satellite for probably $40-$50/mo. The fixed Wireless I use has a 5mbps "basic" package for $55/mo, but I seem to be the only person in my area with fixed wireless. I see it on a couple of other homes as I drive into town, but they are big, fancy homes.
My only explanation is price. Your average rural resident seems happy to have crappy service as long as it's cheap. Or maybe they're not familiar with fixed wireless. Which makes me wonder if they would even know about Starlink when it's available to them. I'd be happy to pay $100/mo for gigabit service, for the same reason I'm paying $80 for my current service instead of $50 for basic standard sat, or even the basic option of my service. But I think I'm an outlier, at least for my rural area.
-
I heard Starlink can give you COVID.
-
Right now I have Spectrum, because it's the best of bad choices. I get 200(ish) MBps down over wifi. It's good enough for what we do in the house but it doesn't excel and man, the company.
I pay $100/month for that too.
If Starlink comes close I'll switch just to give the middle finger to Spectrum.
-
Right now I have Spectrum, because it's the best of bad choices. I get 200(ish) MBps down over wifi. It's good enough for what we do in the house but it doesn't excel and man, the company.
I pay $100/month for that too.
If Starlink comes close I'll switch just to give the middle finger to Spectrum.
Is that with or with out TV
I pay $60, get ~250mb. Internet only, no TV
-
Is that with or with out TV
I pay $60, get ~250mb. Internet only, no TV
Internet only.
$90 is for the plan, 7 is for the modem and extra repeater thing. I just logged on to our account and there's no way to tell what exact plan we have right now, although the ticket for when we installed it 4 years ago say 200 MBps plan, so I assume that's what I am supposed to be getting.
I clicked the button to see what deals there were in my area and it though about it and told me the website was down and I'd have to call customer service if I wanted to check on "upgrades". I'd rather cut my own kidneys out with a spork then call them, so we'll never know.
Musk could legitimately be a Bond villain and supporting SpaceX may noticeably hasten his taking over of the world and subjugating us all into dystopia, but if I didn't have Spectrum, and he throws in a flamethrower I'm OK with it.
-
Forgot to mention, Spectrum
-
I heard Starlink can give you COVID.
Only if you watch Trump videos, vote for Biden and you will be cured.
-
Frontier's slowest. The ISP that's the other half of the company I work for can't reach my house, and cable so far wants to bundle TeeVee, which we don't want. So I signed up with Starlink. We'll see.
-
Here in western Washington, Frontier has been bought out by Ziply Fiber, and they have been running ads about how they are going to pour millions of dollars into the crappy Frontier infrastructure and have rainbows and bunnies for all.
-
Here in western Washington, Frontier has been bought out by Ziply Fiber, and they have been running ads about how they are going to pour millions of dollars into the crappy Frontier infrastructure and have rainbows and bunnies for all.
That's who bought them out in Idaho too. I went to their website for kicks, put in my address, and got, "no service in your area." At least Frontier provided rural residents service, even if it was slow as hell and only worked 50% of the time. In fact I think "rural internet" was Frontier's whole schtick, so it's interesting that Ziply bought them out and then apparently said, "screw rural America."
If they're only offering Internet "in town" in rural areas, what's the point? You can get fast cable even in my rinky dink town, and probably cheaper than Ziply.
I'm only guessing, but I reckon Starlink's infrastructure and design will allow them to provide the same service at the same price to both city and rural locations. They'll probably still be more expensive than a lot of competing urban services, but I'm really hoping they'll be competitively priced out here in the sticks, where Internet costs 5X more than in the city.
-
My parents, who live just north of BFE, Nowhere, USA, are on a dinky little rural phone coop that has existed since crank phones were the up-and-coming thing. Around 2014-15 they got some kind of infrastructure revitalization grant and ran fiber to every home on the service. Since the total number of people on the entire system barely reaches triple digits, their internet service is a thing of envy. Speedtest routinely shows 2-3 ms pings and speeds of 30 Mb synchronous on what is supposed to be a 12 Mb subscription. Bandwidth is ridiculous overkill. Over Christmas we had a bunch of family in and ran an impromptu test by having everyone log on to their streaming service at the same time. IIRC, we had 16 devices running Netflix, Prime Video, or Youtube. Some were running all three contiguously. No problems at all. If the Speedtest stats were any indication, we were using the merest fraction of available capacity. SWMBO and and can only dream of having something like that here in "the city".
Brad
-
Since the total number of people on the entire system barely reaches triple digits, their internet service is a thing of envy. Speedtest routinely shows 2-3 ms pings and speeds of 30 Mb synchronous on what is supposed to be a 12 Mb subscription. Bandwidth is ridiculous overkill.
Kinda like my fixed wireless service. They bill themselves as a rural solution (though they actually get customers in cities like Boise and Nampa). They have to this point been underutilized. My $80/mo connection is supposed to top out at 10mbps, but up until 4-5 months ago, I routinely got 18-20mbps, because the tower I point to, shared by Idaho and Oregon, was being used way below capacity.
In the last few months I've noticed I'm closer to 14-15mbps, so I'm guessing with Frontier going Tango Uniform and probably just word of mouth expansion of their business, my tower is getting hit more. If this keeps up, I'm almost going to be irritated when I start getting the top speed I actually pay for. :laugh:
My last connection in CA was fixed wireless, and I was paying around 25% more for half the bandwidth (5mbps and I averaged 3-4mbps). This is just me talking about what I want, but to me it would be fair to pay $50/mo for like 50mbps. Which is why I'd gladly pay $100/mo for 100mbps with Starlink (assuming they're going to do some kind of tiered pricing). Though I'd probably pay $100/mo for 50mbps as well. I remember what a joy it was to go from 5mbps to 10 (or 20)mbps. I'd be absolutely giddy with 50mbps. Which is kind of a sad state of affairs considering the speeds some of you guys get. :laugh:
-
I signed up. We will see if being 40 miles north of Seattle counts for anything.
Me to. And I'm another 30-40 miles north of you. Actually used 2 emails to sign up.
-
This is where Starlink pricing will be interesting. When I moved here, all the neighbors were using crappy Frontier DSL because it was like $40/mo. Frontier is gone here now, and most of them seem to have switched to crappy standard satellite for probably $40-$50/mo. The fixed Wireless I use has a 5mbps "basic" package for $55/mo, but I seem to be the only person in my area with fixed wireless. I see it on a couple of other homes as I drive into town, but they are big, fancy homes.
My only explanation is price. Your average rural resident seems happy to have crappy service as long as it's cheap. Or maybe they're not familiar with fixed wireless. Which makes me wonder if they would even know about Starlink when it's available to them. I'd be happy to pay $100/mo for gigabit service, for the same reason I'm paying $80 for my current service instead of $50 for basic standard sat, or even the basic option of my service. But I think I'm an outlier, at least for my rural area.
Frontier (or whoever they became) is currently the best we can get. When I do a speedtest (granted over WiFi) I usually get something in the 300 KB range with latencies over 500ms. If I hardwired into the router I might get 1MB and 100ms.
-
Frontier (or whoever they became) is currently the best we can get. When I do a speedtest (granted over WiFi) I usually get something in the 300 KB range with latencies over 500ms. If I hardwired into the router I might get 1MB and 100ms.
One of the reasons I'm routing for Starlink to succeed is situations like yours. Even if 80 miles from Seattle, that should be "close enough" that some fixed wireless company would want to invest in towers and infrastructure. There are just a ton of "rural" locations that seem to be out of whatever formula ISPs use to decide where to offer service.
Also data through cell providers. I have in the past looked into maybe just using data through Verizon Wireless, but it would end up costing me like $400/mo for the amount of data I use, which isn't even a really large amount.
-
Check again, Ben. Many, maybe even most, cell providers have unlimited data plans now that are pretty cheap.
My wife and I have two phones with T Mobile. Each gets unlimited calls, text, and data, including international for $100/month for both.
-
Check again, Ben. Many, maybe even most, cell providers have unlimited data plans now that are pretty cheap.
My wife and I have two phones with T Mobile. Each gets unlimited calls, text, and data, including international for $100/month for both.
I may be mistaken, but I think that's only if all the data passes through your phone. Every time I've looked for a home device / hotspot plan, the charges have been outrageous. Example - I just now looked at Verizon. A 40GB home plan is $150/mo with a $10/gig overage charge.
-
I may be mistaken, but I think that's only if all the data passes through your phone. Every time I've looked for a home device / hotspot plan, the charges have been outrageous. Example - I just now looked at Verizon. A 40GB home plan is $150/mo with a $10/gig overage charge.
I've got a Sprint (I know) unlimited plan which costs about $100/mo for two lines. It comes with 50GB per line of hotspot.
-
I've got a Sprint (I know) unlimited plan which costs about $100/mo for two lines. It comes with 50GB per line of hotspot.
But (Boomer here) that's using the phone itself as the hotspot, right? Not a dedicated hotspot or 4G modem or whatever? My issue with a phone as a hotspot and main gateway to the webz is that the phone then always has to be in the vicinity of your devices. So if I take off on vacation and want to check the house cameras or adjust the thermostat or whatever, I can't because I took my hotspot with me.
I have like 5gb of hotspot data included with my phone, but I only use it if my fixed wireless blips for any reason, or when I'm traveling, in lieu of the unsafe hotel (or McDonalds or whoever's) wireless.
If I were to use a 4G hotspot, I would want it dedicated to the house, and that's what I look at when I say it's too rich for my blood. Especially for the little data you get. When I first started using my phone as a hotspot when traveling, I recall one time watching like three episodes of The Office on Netflix and then getting the 75% warning on my phone, which then meant I was rationing my internet for the rest of the week and I still had to buy a gig or two of data to get through the week.
-
Don't most of those "unlimited" data plans throttle your connection after so many GB?
-
But (Boomer here) that's using the phone itself as the hotspot, right? Not a dedicated hotspot or 4G modem or whatever? My issue with a phone as a hotspot and main gateway to the webz is that the phone then always has to be in the vicinity of your devices. So if I take off on vacation and want to check the house cameras or adjust the thermostat or whatever, I can't because I took my hotspot with me.
You're correct.
-
Don't most of those "unlimited" data plans throttle your connection after so many GB?
Depends on your plan and carrier.
I'm on Sprint, no throttling except on hot spot usage (can't remember the number) but they do have plans where even that is removed.
-
Orbital inclination of 51°. Guess the polar regions gotsta wait for the third cloud.
-
Some updated info on Starlink and user equipment.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/07/details-on-spacex-starlink-beta-emerge-along-with-photos-of-user-terminals/?comments=1
I guess they are rapidly moving forward and seem to be looking for higher resolution data on people who signed up for the emails. I got an email the other day asking for address info vs just the zip code.
-
Me too.
-
Me three
-
Me too.
I'm actually curious if they are asking for high rez data on everyone who signed up, or if they have parsed out zip codes above a certain latitude. I would then expect population density to be next.
I guess if people like AZRedhawk or Dogmush say they got an address request too, then they're likely still in the "broad scope" stage.
EDIT: Dogmush posted while I was typing. That answers that. Or it's just Musk and SPECTRE collecting data on everyone. :laugh:
-
My notice was stuck in spam.
-
Me three
Moi quatro
-
According to the Ars Technica article, the system is capable of providing service "between 44 and 52 degrees north latitude." That's pretty far north. I live in southern WI and I'd still have to drive a couple of hours north to get in that range.
-
Another address request here.
-
According to the Ars Technica article, the system is capable of providing service "between 44 and 52 degrees north latitude." That's pretty far north. I live in southern WI and I'd still have to drive a couple of hours north to get in that range.
Yes, that was a bit disappointing. I'm at 43.5N.
-
Some updated info on Starlink and user equipment.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/07/details-on-spacex-starlink-beta-emerge-along-with-photos-of-user-terminals/?comments=1
I guess they are rapidly moving forward and seem to be looking for higher resolution data on people who signed up for the emails. I got an email the other day asking for address info vs just the zip code.
ditto
-
Yes, that was a bit disappointing. I'm at 43.5N.
I'm at 43.1N
-
48.53N here. And rural.
-
It appears some leaked numbers are coming through from initial beta testing. Makes me say, "meh".
Obviously these are leaked, and the full service isn't yet deployed, so numbers may not be really accurate and can definitely change for the better. However right now, the numbers are equivalent to what I can get with fixed wireless, so price would be one of the more important factors for me. As well as stability. My current fixed wireless is solid.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/08/spacex-starlink-beta-tests-show-speeds-up-to-60mbps-latency-as-low-as-31ms/
-
I'd pony up for those speeds.
-
One of the reasons I'm routing for Starlink to succeed is situations like yours. Even if 80 miles from Seattle, that should be "close enough" that some fixed wireless company would want to invest in towers and infrastructure. There are just a ton of "rural" locations that seem to be out of whatever formula ISPs use to decide where to offer service.
I'm late, but I just noticed this. I'm not "rural." I'm right in the heart of the Washington-Boston megalopolis, and my house is less than ten miles from a real (albeit small] city. My Internet from when I first got Internet was DSL service from AT&T. A few years ago, AT&T sold their landline telephone and Internet service to Frontier Communications. Frontier made all sorts of promises to the state regulatory agency about improving the Internet infrastructure, yada yada, and the deal was approved. And then, of course, Frontier did nothing to upgrade the infrastructure. In fact, they apparently also did nothing to even maintain it, because speeds kept getting slower, and outages became more frequent. My typical specs with Frontier DSL (I just looked up a log from 2018) we 40 ms ping, 2.62 Mbps download, and 0.66 Mbps upload.
By mid-2018 the service was so degraded that the Internet connection would randomly drop about once every fifteen minutes. That's not an exaggeration. Three to five times every hour, no matter what time of day, it would just disconnect, then come back maybe five or ten minutes later. Their tech support couldn't help. When they sent a field technician, he said the problem was the SLIK at the end of the road, where all the lines to my neighborhood split off. He said that piece of equipment was an AT&T relic, that it was obsolete before AT&T sold out to Frontier, and that as far as he knew Frontier had no plans to replace or upgrade it.
So, as much as I loathe and despise the cable company that serves my town, I jumped to cable Internet in late 2018. I'm paying for "up to" 200 Mbps dpwnload speeds but, of course, I never see that. Typically, I'm getting on the order of 18 to 20 Ms ping, 80 to 90 Mbps download, and 30 to 35 Mbps upload. Not great, but significantly better than the DSL, even without the dropouts. I can watch most YouTube videos without having to wait for buffering every few minutes, and load speeds for most web pages is good enough that there's no perceptible lag.
But ... the cable company is a sleazy operation, and I truly wish there were another option available.
-
Check again, Ben. Many, maybe even most, cell providers have unlimited data plans now that are pretty cheap.
???
A few years ago Verizon had an unlimited data plan. They dropped it, and I don't think they've brought it back.
-
I'm actually curious if they are asking for high rez data on everyone who signed up, or if they have parsed out zip codes above a certain latitude. I would then expect population density to be next.
I guess if people like AZRedhawk or Dogmush say they got an address request too, then they're likely still in the "broad scope" stage.
EDIT: Dogmush posted while I was typing. That answers that. Or it's just Musk and SPECTRE collecting data on everyone. :laugh:
No e-mail here. I signed up when we first discussed it.
I'm at 41.38 degrees N.
-
The cost and preliminary speeds are out. SpaceX is at least being honest regarding what people should expect in the early stages.
$100/mo plus $500 for the sat kit.
50-150MBPS
20-40ms latency
I'm paying $80 for 10MBPS now (averaging 15MBPS) so twenty more ducats for 50MBPS or higher would be a no-brainer for me, given latency improves to the low end of their given range and they can show minimal downtime. The equipment cost is a little high, but not ridiculous.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/27/spacex-starlink-service-priced-at-99-a-month-public-beta-test-begins.html
-
These stories make me feel bad/guilty for having gigabit fiber.
-
These stories make me feel bad/guilty for having gigabit fiber.
Not me =D
-
I just ran a test at Speedtest.net. This is what you get with Dish satellite......
Ping 602
Download Mbps 3.31
Upload Mbps 5.06 :'( :mad: :'(
-
Thought I'd signed up before, just tried again to see what would happen. I must not have, 'cause the Starlink system didn't recognize my address. Ended up using the plus code & city - it seemed to go through this time.
But I'm too far south if they're working above 42*N.
-
The cost and preliminary speeds are out. SpaceX is at least being honest regarding what people should expect in the early stages.
$100/mo plus $500 for the sat kit.
50-150MBPS
20-40ms latency
I'm paying $80 for 10MBPS now (averaging 15MBPS) so twenty more ducats for 50MBPS or higher would be a no-brainer for me, given latency improves to the low end of their given range and they can show minimal downtime. The equipment cost is a little high, but not ridiculous.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/27/spacex-starlink-service-priced-at-99-a-month-public-beta-test-begins.html
That is pretty good speed. Lots of people out in rural areas (or just not in big cities) paying as much per month for a lot less speed. I am paying about the same for 50 MBPS.
-
I would have been content with the price and performance if fiber optic hadn't been available at the new place.
But I'm all about paying less for more.
-
I have just now received an email saying that Starlink service is available at my residential address:
Starlink is now available in limited supply in your service area!
During beta users can expect to see data speeds vary from 50Mb/s to 150Mb/s and latency from 20ms to 40ms in most locations over the next several months as we enhance the Starlink system. There will also be brief periods of no connectivity at all.
As we launch more satellites, install more ground stations and improve our networking software, data speed, latency and uptime will improve dramatically. For latency, we expect to achieve 16ms to 19ms by summer 2021.
To check availability for your location, visit Starlink.com and re-enter your email and service address. If available, you will be immediately redirected to the Starlink order page.
Availability is limited so orders must be completed within 15 minutes of landing on the order page. If you are not able to order at this time, the Starlink team will continue to send updates as more capacity becomes available.
-
Nothing for me yet. Even at 50mbs, it's way faster than I have now at $20 more per month. The sat kit is still a bit pricey, but I think it is worth it.
I was already looking at going to the next tier for my fixed wireless, but that would lock me into a year contract. Think I'll stay at the tier I am now and maybe by Summer I'll have Starlink access in these parts.
-
I just checked.
Thank you for your request!
You will be notified via email when service becomes available in your area.
-
I just checked.
Thank you for your request!
You will be notified via email when service becomes available in your area.
Same here.
Damn.
I am curious as to their definition of ".... brief periods of no connectivity".
-
I am curious as to their definition of ".... brief periods of no connectivity".
It's still in beta, so that's to be expected. Heck even my fixed wireless goes down for short periods once in a while. One of the things ya gotta suck up in rural living I guess. :laugh:
-
Occasional loss of connectivity is something I live with, daily. I don't live in the sticks per se*, but the only internet connection available here is satellite. Get a bit of cloud cover and you're back to reading a paper book. Same thing with TV.
My question was/is how long is "brief"? If you're taking the long view, "brief" can be days.
*It's only 15 miles to the nearest big city of ~3k, about 30 miles to ~20k.
-
Same here.
Damn.
I am curious as to their definition of ".... brief periods of no connectivity".
Empty patches of the satellite constellation that are still to be filled or a dud satellite happened and let its spot open. They've had a couple duds out of the hundreds launched so far. That sorta thing.
-
This is cool... Worth checking out.
And I'm amazed at how much coverage they've already gotten. I think any legacy company would have taken decades to get even this far.
https://orbitalindex.com/feature/starlink-coverage/
-
Can I connect to it from a plane?
-
Can I connect to it from a plane?
Right now? No. Starlink does not work directly with cellphones or laptops etc. There's an external dish you need.
You probably could get Starlink working on an aircraft, but you'd need an aerodynamic RF transparent radome on the outside that would allow the starlink antenna to swivel and point at the satellite as both you and the satellite move. Starlink service needs an antenna that looks like this. It's powered and it moves to track satellites across the sky...
https://youtu.be/cU2y-QmQfXY
So in theory, yes, but in practice, not without some major design and engineering to get it implemented. There's also going to be programming and firmware needed, since I presume the Starlink system and it's tracking is currently optimized to work from a fixed ground position.
And I'm no engineer, so I don't know what the orbital specs of the satellites current commercial aircraft with in-flight internet service use, so the radome covering the Starlink antenna might need to be taller/bigger to give it enough vertical deflection which then could cause problems mounting it on the airframe. I don't know if the internet satellites that currently service aircraft are geostationary or what. If they are, that simplifies things for the current setups in use since obviously it's position in the sky won't change, and they can use an antenna that's optimized for only horizontal rotation, and the antenna is set to cover the sky in an angle covering for the height of the satellite based on it's elevation in the latitudes the airliner is expected to operate at.
Starlink uses many more satellites that are constantly moving across the sky. Which means the antenna needs to be a lot more active to track them.
From watching teardown videos, I do know that the Starlink antenna is a phased array. So maybe it's possible to cut up the array and make it into little tilting tiles, so the array only needs to spin on the horizontal axis and the individual tilting elements can track the satellite in the vertical azimuth above the horizon. And that would allow for a smaller/flatter radome. But again, Starlink would need to cooperate with such an endeavor on their end too.
I would hazard a guess that Starlink will address the boat, RV, and aircraft Internet markets in some way sooner or later. However we'll have to wait for them to release products and antennas optimized for it.
-
Something like this would be nice to have for a Starlink connection:
Winegard RT2035T Roadtrip T4 In-Motion RV Satellite Antenna https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01DZ8JLC6?tag=campersmarts-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1
-
I just got my Starlink email. Reading the email, it seems i should expect some downtime if I get it now. On the other hand, if there is a six month queue, they'll probably have a lot more bugs worked out by then, so I might go ahead and get in line now.
Starlink is now available for order to a limited number of users in your coverage area. Placing your order now will hold your place in line for future service. Orders will be fulfilled on a first-come, first-served basis.
During beta, users can expect to see data speeds vary from 50Mb/s to 150Mb/s and latency from 20ms to 40ms in most locations over the next several months as we enhance the Starlink system. There will also be brief periods of no connectivity at all.
As we launch more satellites, install more ground stations and improve our networking software, data speed, latency and uptime will improve dramatically.
The Starlink team will provide periodic updates on availability as we launch more satellites and expand our coverage area. Depending on your location, some orders may take 6 months or more to fulfill.
-
I got mine yesterday too. I recently got fiber so it's no longer an issue but sent it along to some friends.
-
I got the email yesterday. Didn’t sign on.
Looks like $95 now to hold a spot, $495 for hardware when available, and $99 per month after.
-
Yeah, I’ll be waiting for them to get enough satellites up there, and enough bugs worked out to be reliable. Then I’ll sign up.
-
I got the email yesterday. Didn’t sign on.
Looks like $95 now to hold a spot, $495 for hardware when available, and $99 per month after.
Is the 95 ducats refundable, or you lose it if you get out of line?
-
Refundable, supposedly. That said I know people reported a lot of difficulty in getting refunds from Tesla when they changed their mind on a Model 3 or whatever. Maybe SpaceX will be better for that.
-
I received an e-mail from Starlink yesterday or the day before. Don't know why they bothered -- I immediately went to their site to check availability, and it's still not available where I live.
-
I got my email today. They are expecting to ship to FL "mid to late" 2021. I went ahead and signed up and gave them the deposit. It would be cool to have, and I really want to tell Frontier and Spectrum to pound sand.
-
I got the email this morning. I have to look up our current contract before signing with Starlink.
-
$499 set up cost and $99 a month for the same speeds I have now isn't a benefit for me. I can see how it would be a benefit in low population-density areas where options are limited though.
-
$499 set up cost and $99 a month for the same speeds I have now isn't a benefit for me. I can see how it would be a benefit in low population-density areas where options are limited though.
I read the article on my phone yesterday, and can't find it now, but it included some Musk statements. He said they are actually going fairly high resolution on where they send these invites out. They are targeting addresses outside city centers, and he also said while they will have global coverage, it will be limited availability in local regions. In other words it sounded like they, at least at this time, won't make it available to urban addresses. He said he wanted to make sure Starlink gave underserved areas the first priority. He also said he expected to see 300mbps most everywhere by the end of the year.
-
Map of where Starlink is currently being used:
https://www.tomsguide.com/news/starlink-coverage-map-revealed-heres-where-people-are-using-the-service
WA has really bought into it. The only part of Southern Idaho that has is where I live. Though I only just got my sign up email, so either some other people got way ahead of me in line, or I wonder if the numbers include those who have signed up but haven't received the equipment yet?
Oh, also, they mentioned this:
While it doesn't stand to make too much of a difference for urban and suburban areas, Starlink could be a huge boon for rural communities. It's currently in beta with no data cap.
Maybe it's just inaccurate writing, but that worries me. A data cap would completely change my view of Starlink. It would not be for me.
-
Tesmanian.com
@Tesmanian_com
Starlink Is Key To Funding SpaceX’s Starship Fleet To Colonize Mars
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·
13h
Replying to
@Tesmanian_com
Yes