If this actually happens, what kind of performance can we expect to see out of it (speed, latency, stability, etc)?

where do you live? Is satellite the only option there?

Current Satellite internet uses a handful of satellites in geosynchronous orbit (about 35,000 km up), which is why the latency is so bad; Starlink plans on thousands of satellites at much lower altitude (~1200 km) so the latency & bandwidth should be drastically better. At the very least it should have no trouble competing with the lower tier DSL & cable internet around the world.

Attached: Starlink-test-satellites-SpaceX.jpg (2543x1526, 391K)

>spotted the jelly NEET
please dazzle us with your no doubt long list of technological accomplishments.

Supposedly ~20-30ms latency @ Gigabit (and range of speed for variety of prices)

Satellties are supposed to last 5 years or so.

Central ontario in the boonies and yes.

Theres maybe 5 houses on my road which is 9km long. Its not at all economical to lay down cable.

Isn't it dangerous to make the orbit that low? Like, isn't that still in the atmosphere?

The satellite you connect to is 35 thousand km up; Starlink plans to have its satellites at 1200 km, or 1/29th the height. 700/29 = ping times as low as 24 ms, though with transit times from Starlink's ground stations to the server you want to talk to 50 to 60 ms would be more plausible.

Attached: genious.jpg (700x933, 765K)

The ISS is only 400km up.

ISS is sitting around 400 km above Earth.

1000 km above earth is fine.

>Is there any chance at all it could be a competitor to cable?
no. it's to expensive, maintenance is horrible, latency is terrible, then there's the ongoing space-trash issue. satellite broadband is bs and will never get anywhere.

beam radio would be a way cheaper alternative, much more reliable, with far less latency, basically no maintenance costs, etc

We already have this it's called IRIDIUM.

Mods should jsut ban whoever posts about "current satellite internet"
Those are clearly posted by complete dumbfucks.

How come Iridium 's CEO sucks Elon's cock so much if he plans to steamroll into his market?

Round trip time to geosync orbit is 280ms(42,164,000). Their backbones are garbage.

Starlink is 8 ms(1,200km)

That's without overhead from switches/backbones. I don't doubt for a moment they can have ~20-30 ms.

I'm worried about the capacity of these things and how stable they will be since it's a wireless link.

As someone who will likely be moving to a rural area within the next couple of years where my only internet options will be 4G cellular, satellite, or dial-up, I will cheer anyone on who is trying to expand reliable high speed internet options to areas that are extremely limited in choices as of now.

no LTE options?
here in Italy a farmer built a DIY LTE antenna plugged into an LTE modem, and forwarded traffic to its home router with an optic fiber.
shit was insane, and worked pretty gud

A lot of carriers won't allow tethering, or will be highly bandwidth limited.

I got about 500ms on eurosat, 24/3 mbit. $50 a month. Use it as a backup if fiber gets nuked.

What I don't get about the latency issue is whether its round trip or just to the satellite.

People have been quoting 30-40ms, but if that's just up to the sat, then its minimum 60ms round trip.

Also what happens if you're trying to reach something on the other side of the world? How does it bounce the signal between the satellites? how much latency does it add?

it doesn't satellite around the world. it bounces a few hundred ms from your house to a satellite, then a similar amount of time from the satellite to a base station, which is then connected to fibre backhaul

dove? c'è un articolo?

Well shit, and here I was hoping that somehow it could eliminate intercontinental lag.

Why would anything nice ever happen.

If streaming and games software can really sort out prioritizing, with applications back ending requests to a router that intelligently chooses from multiple connections, the value will be additive and real. This seems technically feasible and marketable (even now ADSL has wireless fallback). High latency isn't a problem for a lot of things. Something should happen here simply because of the commercial case.

>how stable they will be since it's a wireless link
That's my only worry about it. Wireless connections can go to shit just from cloud coverage/thunder storms, but maybe the satellites being in lower orbit will help out with that.
I live in a relatively rural area where we're stuck with 3mb download and I doubt the local ISPs will ever upgrade it, so starlink is my only hope besides moving.

>be elon musk
>need some quick boost to the share price
>make up some ridiculous futuristic plan
>submits plan to gubmint
>gubmint 'approves' plan for insane ridiculous plan
>share values go up

That sounds cool at first until you realize you'd just be screaming at people that don't understand you and the whole thing is just a fucking shit show.

But I want to connect to America.

They do speak English there, right?

Not for much longer if certain groups have their say.

LTE would be $100 for 6gb

>Is there any chance at all it could be a competitor to cable?
Nope, 'cuz latency.

I hate retards who can't even read the thread before posting fucking braindead shit

fibreoptics do pretty well intercontinental to be honest. I'm not sure what it's like across the Atlantic but for example across the Pacific:

From Adelaide, Australia I can roundtrip ping LA in 174ms.
If the traceroute is to be believed that goes Adelaide->Melbourne->Sydney->Hong Kong->LA. This is 20500km or 85ms at the speed of light for a 136ms return trip. Also consider than the first hop to my CMTS is already 13ms of that...

I know for a fact other Australian ISPs go directly from Sydney to San Jose which would mean even lower latency than that skipping out on HK.

There would need to be some serious physics breakthroughs to improve fibre as a medium for latency, all we can really do is work on minimising it on the routers and switching equipment in between.

>or 68ms at the speed of light for a 136ms return trip
typo, the 85 was from when i was originally calculating it going through singapore as well which I assumed and then confirmed was untrue

No, you don't have to have a local uplink. Most satellite internet is two way, and the main issue is congestion and latency.

These SpaceX satellites are not in geostationary orbit, therefore there will be no drastic increase in latency.

>net neutrality

Musk has said that internet that you can't game on is useless so it's pretty much guaranteed to be around 50-80 ms

still perfectly acceptable for gaming desu

imagine how much shit china, usa, india will put into space in the next 10-20+ years?

Its gonna happen user

i for one hope we get the fuck off this rock before we turn into IRL Kessler Syndrome and end up like Planetes

Well all I can hope for is an undersea cable linking direct to America, at the moment all traffic routes through Yurop, adding the latency there (~170ms on a good day) to the latency from Yurop to America.

Will we reach a point where every country is linked with each other? Considering the explosion of bandwidth usage I can't understand why this hasn't happened already.

Who is the target market for this?

People that live in the middle of Alaska or climate scientists that are living on the poles?

PlanetES called it.

i never finished it i got like 2 episodes in, gotta find it on one my old hdd's

Such a shame these fucktards have the future staring them in the face and they do nothing

Latency wise prob around 60-100ms which is typical for sat.. for the rest prob good enough

The atmosphere is actually surprisingly very thin relatively speaking(about 12 km from sea level I think?), but desu we are well above that with the satellite.

Way better than dial up.

>20ms 100/100

>Comcast and AT&T: But our poles have an infinite reach into space. You need to get a permission for every time a satellite goes over our pole
They're gonna try to pull something, that's for sure.

Attached: 1463225782971.jpg (422x600, 60K)

>They're gonna try to pull something, that's for sure.

Maybe they'll actually make their prices more competitive. Their operational costs will be much less than the muskman's satellite network operational costs will be so they should easily be able to undercut his prices if they want to keep customers from switching.

Why aren't they putting the internet satellites 400km or below?

you pay 50 a month for something you will neved need, wow

Hopefully they fix their fucked up constellation design.

SpaceX is not a publicly traded company.

people buy tesla hoping it crosses

>satelite
be prepared to have 500ms delay

Most likely to cover more area with fewer satellites.

Conjecture: the ISS has to do a monthly burn to stay in orbit. (It's a small burn, but still.) The SpaceX satellites will presumably have to do this less often and using less fuel.

Or maybe it's just a coverage thing. Put the satellites higher up and each one will have a larger area it can get direct line-of-sight with. (I'm not sure this effect is large enough to matter, though.

This is Ontario, we are fucking cucked beyond anything else, we're not allowed to do most cool things like this.

>Implying this will be the only thing the satellites end up doing

+500 km is considered to be where orbits start to get the most stable. Lower than that and you get some better protection from radiation like the ISS gets, but the drag eventually slows you down. That's how the Mir and more recently the Chinese station deorbited; they just stopped making burns to keep them there.
That said, the inner van allen belt starts at 1000 km up to 6000, so I find it really weird that these satellites would orbit at that altitude.

Shouldn't it technically be legal for a private individual to shoot his personal satellite in whatever orbit he likes?
>Implying the launch site is on international waters

Yes, the altitude is to account for three things: line of sight and perigee/RAAN maintenance all measured against a figure of merit of quality of internet service. The LOS issue is straight forward and you already covered it. When it comes to perigee and RAAN (right ascension of the ascending node), there are several factors that come into play. Mainly, drag, J2 (Earth's oblateness) and SRP (solar radiation pressure). In LEO (low earth orbit), drag and J2 are dominant. The J2 effect is a result of the Earth's spheroid shape, i.e. it's equatorial bulge. This inconsistent gravity field can cause a nodal precession (omega in the figure) for higher inclination orbits which can be a hindrance depending on their constellation configuration. Additionally, J2 can cause issues with attitude, if the effective "down" direction keeps changing, and a specific attitude is required, it will have to be counteracted by control moment gyros or reaction wheels, which adds to the launch budget.
All in all, the altitude that they chose is an optimization problem of all of the perturbations, their countermeasures and the launch budget, with the goal of maximizing quality of service and reducing price.

isn't space governed by maritime law or something

Any satellite that does radio communication with people on US soil is going to need FCC approval to run those radios; likewise Ol' Musky will need to get approval from other countries' FCC equivalents to sell services there.

>coverage in places not covered before
>revenue stream for spacex
other than that there is no reason for wanting this other than living in northern Canada or being a degenerate cuck not having a landline at home

What if we all just stop, think and tell these organizations to fuck off because they only try to hinder the inevitable progress?

Attached: 1509338032062.png (657x400, 23K)

I agree that regulations should be minimal, but radio spectrum is a scarce, non private resource. No regulations on radio transmission would lead to Comcast & Co just jamming competition like this.

Regulations should be, definitely. But regulating Planetary Internet made out of 4425 sattelites on """your""" chunk of land while everyone else around you uses it is a joke, a sign of despotism and should be treated so.

>what kind of performance can we expect to see out of it

None at all becuse the whole PLA is going to be used to jam that thing. Free internet for China will never happen.

If it's going to be using RF communications on """my""" chunk of land then it needs to comply with """my""" government's RF regulations. Makes perfect sense.

>If this actually happens, what kind of performance can we expect to see out of it (speed, latency, stability, etc)?
They're launching into LEO, not GEO which means up to 30ms ping and gigabit service.
>Is there any chance at all it could be a competitor to cable?
It'll buttfuck cable.

>Free internet for China will never happen.
>Believing everyone lives in china

FAAAAAAAAAAAG

This. It's to give internet to third world shitholes. It's just like Schmuckerberg's plan to launch a bunch of drones that are basically flying wireless access points with solar panels so they can stay airborne for a long time, then right before they have to land, a second wave takes to the sky and your connection gets handed off to them, and by the time they need to come down the first wave is ready to go back up, and so on. Honestly for shitty places like middle of nowhere Africa, this isn't a bad idea if it were more than just a blatant tax write-off that Facebook will launch, make it work for a few months to prove they tried, then let it crash and burn literally and figuratively because fuck Africa. That is, IF the project hasn't already been cancelled as being too costly as a write-off. I haven't kept up with it honestly

There are huge, huge swaths of the US by area that are stuck on 5/1 DSL or worse. Even if this is 25/3 (aka the FCC minimum for broadband) it's a massive improvement for those people and doesn't require spending millions on rolling wires out to residences and businesses.

It's good we're creating magnetic fields

Attached: 1521132983973.jpg (600x600, 72K)

Won't work. Property law defines trespass over someone's property at least currently at up to about 80ft above their property for things like helicopters/cranes etc.. It used to be at common law that it was defined as being "to the heavens" but courts thought that unreasonable, especially after the advent of things like planes/sattelites etc.

Satellites are inherently shit if you expect any kind of good speed. It's not rocket science to realize this.

Most of the internet is still routed through undersea cables because it's far more reliable and fast.

You will always run into limit bandwidth over air, where as you can always run more cable.

These are ultra low orbit birds, without constant stationkeeping they will lose altitude and burn up.
No such thing as kesseler at these low altitudes.

Attached: 22936.jpg (184x184, 7K)

>starts raining
>Internet dies

Hello landlines.

Fucking always happens.

higher altitudes its already happening youtube.com/watch?v=VmDKQz39xh8&t=592s

At least we got to see his wife's tits

There's many conflicting claims over the moon.

>i for one hope we get the fuck off this rock before we turn into IRL Kessler Syndrome and end up like Planetes

Yeah me too user.. hey, maybe we'll get to be space trash collectors. Not so bad, would be working in space, far from most humans. Planetes is so good btw

>
>i never finished it i got like 2 episodes in, gotta find it on one my old hdd's

Read the mango user, the animu is much much different and less good imo.

cheers user, wondered why i couldnt get into it
problem is you'd have to wait 10-30+ years for the lower levels of the atmosphere to clear before you could even get up there to clear stuff

Right now things like 1mm paint chips are like bullets

If you think that your imaginary regulations are more important than humanity progress, you well deserve to be lynched.