21 ms·
SpaceX FCC Application for over 4000 Internet Satellites
- deegles 10y agoWould a hand-held size device be able to connect to these satellites? I'm imagining a mass-manufactured device like a Peek[0] that could be distributed in countries with heavy censorship... [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peek_(mobile_Internet_device) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peek_(mobile_Internet_device)
- wanderingjew 10y agoThe receivers/Earth stations will be phased array antennas; basically an antenna 'grid'. They won't fit in your pocket, but they will fit on top of your car. Keep in mind, this system is designed to give the Internet to everyone. The antennas will be small enough to conceal. Since the signals go up instead of across a border, censorship is not an issue.
- viraptor 10y ago> Since the signals go up instead of across a border, censorship is not an issue. That's very short-sighted. The connection terminates somewhere, so the whole path is either (you)-(satellite)-(local ground station)-(ISP in your country) or (you)-(satellite)-(another satellite)-(remote ground station)-(ISP in another country) Censorship then can happen at: - the satellite (unlikely, they probably just want to forward packets with minimal power/time use) - ground stations (great firewall of china style) - ISP (standard, existing filtering) - any nation that wants to just shut down the access rather than censor it (wide band, high power noise, send straight to the satellites to kill all communication) Also, the use of the equipment should be pretty easy to detect if you can afford a few plane trips (maybe even just vans), so nations that don't like the idea can just knock on your door and have a chat about it with you.
- schiffern 10y ago>They won't fit in your pocket, but they will fit on top of your car. I think I can glimpse what Musk long-term vision is for "connected cars..." Satellite is pretty much perfect. One provider works globally (vs dozens of mobile proviers), coverage is near 100% everywhere, and mass broadcast signals (like firmware updates and SDC neural connectomes) can be cached locally on the satellite, conserving uplink bandwidth.
- indolering 10y agoJamming of satellite signals in the middle east has gotten pretty bad. You have to lease spectrum and the country from which you are leasing it has control of that spectrum. Furthermore, nation-state censorship only has to make reaching censored services more difficult for the average person. They specifically throttle home internet connections but leave businesses alone.
- shaklee3 10y agoYou need to get landing rights in all countries you plan to operate your frequency bands in. They cannot simply start transmitting down to any country without previous authorization.
- thescriptkiddie 10y agoUnless that particular country possesses anti-satellite weaponry, I think you absolutely can. Iran hasn't had much success censoring satellite communications on their soil. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3706645/Iran-destroys-100-000-satellite-dishes-stop-citizens-watching-morally-damaging-television-corrupts-Islamic-values.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3706645/Iran-destroy... https://www.engadget.com/2016/04/22/toosheh-iran-internet-censorship/ https://www.engadget.com/2016/04/22/toosheh-iran-internet-ce... http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/afp/2016/07/iran-television-culture-satellite-censorship.html http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/afp/2016/07/iran-television-...
- walrus01 10y agoThere are a great many countries where you can get thrown in prison for possession an "unlicensed" Iridium phone, though. Or any other form of two way satellite communications tech. It needs to be cheap enough and ubiquitous enough that hundreds of thousands or millions of people are using it, so that authorities in even a draconian state cannot effectively police or ban it. Rubber hose cryptography principles.
- shaklee3 10y agoYou can't for the most part. Satellites cannot control the signal to the point where it exactly shapes to a country, so if you're able to register it in an adjacent country there's no way to know. Especially with broadcast TV where it's one way. It's illegal to do that, but that's another issue. It's also the reason why you don't see third parties giving access into China.
- nraynaud 10y agoyeah sure, you can shit on a country's regulations, the response ranges from harmless to starting an open war, with a a few steps like seeking the company's funders extradition, seeking redress in international arbitrage, blocus etc.
- will_hughes 10y agoThe last time this system was discussed they mentioned needing a pizza-sized dish.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- walrus01 10y agoI will be really surprised if, due to the laws of physics and the gain required to achieve reasonably dense modulation/code rates, the antenna is smaller than 18 inches... Maybe like the size of an extra-large pizza box, phased array aimed upwards.
- mikeyouse 10y agoThe discussion on r/spacex: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/5d9724/spacex_has_filed_for_their_massive_constellation/ https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/5d9724/spacex_has_f... Interesting note from the Organization section where it shows that Elon's trust owns 54% of outstanding SpaceX shares and over 70% of the voting shares.
- toomuchtodo 10y agoInteresting for sure, but not unexpected. You would not entrust your life's work to your shareholders without having overwhelming control.
- kctess5 10y agoUnless I'm mistaken, many founders do give up control to their share holders.
- BWStearns 10y agoFor many founders their company being their "life's work" is closer to a delusion, or being generous, a conceit.
- bkanber 10y agoYes, but Elon himself has put $100M into the company, and most of that early. Musk is also popular of the "space travel is scary and there will be accidents; if we put it in the hands of the shareholders it'll get shut down" argument and that's certainly a part of his negotiating position.
- nraynaud 10y agoyes, but only when forced to do so, Musk hasn't yet had to do that. It's a one time trick when you have a funding crisis.
- int_handler 10y agoDoes SpaceX have any concerns about the Kessler Syndrome [0] or any plans to mitigate it? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
- walrus01 10y agoThings in very low earth orbit will re-enter on their own, if left unattended, from atmospheric drag.... At orbits of 450-600 km or less the lifetime of any satellite is very much finite. Satellites in much higher (like the MEO O3b satellites) will not re-enter due to atmosphere drag even on a 500+ year time scale.
- mikeyouse 10y agoOf course they do, it's a well-known problem for the satellite industry. From the technical addendum: > Each satellite in the SpaceX System is designed for a useful lifetime of five to seven years. SpaceX intends to dispose of satellites through atmospheric reentry at end of life. As suggested by the Commission,50 SpaceX intends to comply with Section 4.6 and 4.7 of NASA Technical Standard 8719.14A with respect to this reentry process. In particular, SpaceX anticipates that its satellites will reenter the Earth’s atmosphere within approximately one year after completion of their mission – much sooner than the international standard of 25 years. After the mission is complete, the spacecraft (regardless of operational altitude) will be moved to a 1,075 km circular orbit in its operational inclination, then gradually lower perigee until the propellant is exhausted, achieving a perigee of at most 300 km. After all propellant is consumed, the spacecraft will be reoriented to maximize the vehicle’s total cross-sectional area, a configuration also stable in the direction of aerodynamic drag. Finally, the spacecraft will begin to passivate itself by de-spinning reaction wheels and drawing batteries down to a safe level and powering down. Over the following months, the denser atmosphere will gradually lower the satellite’s perigee until its eventual atmospheric demise. http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1158350 http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1...
- int_handler 10y agoInteresting. Thanks!
- boznz 10y agoCurrently paying US$60 a month for land based internet in NZ and a friend pays $160 for the crappy satellite equivelent. Several million subscribers would not be unfeasable and provide a pretty massive income stream
- jazoom 10y agoAdd another 8 million or so from Australia
- nbarbettini 10y agoLots of folks outside the cities in America too. I've heard estimates between 10-30 million.
- zymhan 10y agoSo after blowing up Facebook's Internet-providing satellite, they're going after their own constellation. I do wonder how this will affect potential customers who would launch communications satellites on SpaceX, but are worried about handing over something proprietary to a competitor.
- foota 10y agoI imagine this would be a pretty low concern because that would probably violate all sorts of contracts.
- JshWright 10y agoFacebook didn't own the satellite, they were simply planning to lease a few of the transponders.
- zymhan 10y agoThis is true, but I wanted my comment to be short and pithy :P
- arijun 10y agoI don't know how concerned these companies are about industrial espionage. I would definitely buy that they were wary of funding a competitor.
- kylecordes 10y agoThey have conclusively demonstrated that relying on a small number of satellites in the small number of launches concentrates too much risk. Unfortunately the demonstrated this accidentally blowing up a satellite. In the long run though, success at scale with a system like this relies on the typically guaranteed losses. A certain percentage of rockets will fail, a certain percentage of satellites will fail, a robust system will be designed to accommodate this. (Of course, and this is probably the topic of a totally different thread, the tolerance for this must change dramatically when there are people in there.)
- 10y ago
- paulsutter 10y agoI wonder if a distributed model would work for telephone service in Southeast Asia (which still has lots of 2G in rural areas), if individuals could offer hotspots / base stations with uplinks to these satellites. Edit: change Uber-like to distributed. Side comment, lots of Uber drivers buy cars. Uber even helps finance cars.
- Terribledactyl 10y agoI don't see the connection to Uber's model, unless you mean Franchise, but I doubt people already have the satellite-wifi transponder like drivers already had cars.
- obi1kenobi 10y agofcc.gov seems unresponsive, here's a Google webcache link to the HTML application: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3lStj71lnE0J:licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do%3Fattachment_key%3D1158354+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3lStj71...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- smegel 10y agoMaybe they should start with a reliable launch system.
- pjscott 10y agoIf they'll be launching thousands of satellites, I expect the marginal cost of replacing one launch to be lower than what most satellite makers could manage. And then, reliability has a cost of its own. Have you calculated the optimum?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- BWStearns 10y agoSo from the Reddit discussion it seems like 200 launches is about a fair guess for the total deployment of this system. It seems like a perfect way to derisk the notion of reusable launch systems while providing a native-to-SpaceX revenue stream (orbital internet provision). Assuming that they can achieve the success rates they've been aiming for, demonstrating lowered risk and cost through their own deployments will provide about the best advertisement you could possibly imagine. Waiting for organic outside demand to fill the launch roster to the same point would take time that Musk clearly does not want to waste. It seems to be a Keynesian approach to the slightly Chicken/Egg problem of commercial space.
- wmf 10y agoIsn't the launch roster way beyond full already? http://www.spacex.com/missions http://www.spacex.com/missions
- BWStearns 10y agoI don't mean that it's full from a financial perspective, but full in an argument-ending "this is the way of the future" sense. Edit: There are ≈80 missions listed on the link there, 200 launches for their own missions would provide ample opportunity to derisk their customers by reusing launch vehicles beyond their currently marketable mileage and proving their safety (I can imagine that one would want some pretty steep discounts for a rocket that's been used 5 times given current success rates).
- BurningFrog 10y agoAlso im-proving the safety by getting tons of experience on what works and what breaks, while only risking some of your own hardware.
- BWStearns 10y agoI definitely agree with you on this point. More launches means less failures per n launches.
- LAMike 10y agoComing soon: Elon Prime Pay 40k a year and get unlimited SpaceX Internet, a Tesla w/ free charging, and a complimentary flight/weekend stay at Solar City Space Hotel. Who's in?
- pplante 10y agoHeck that's quite a deal on an MS or MX 100D lease.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- kctess5 10y agoAnd of course after that, Prime Plus which includes a lease on solar panels and home batteries.
- solipsism 10y agoIs there some kind of music service?
- daeken 10y agoHonestly, I don't think I'd blink an eye at signing up for that. Space hotel trip alone is worth that! In fact, that makes me seriously think about the ITS for earth orbit activities. Add a nice big docking port to connect it to a space station, and you've got yourself a relatively cheap reusable vehicle to fly a whole mess of people into LEO.
- the_duke 10y agoVirgin Galactic is charging 250k for their "some minutes in weightlessness" ride...
- sqeaky 10y agoClearly thats a a stepping onto something better... isn't it. I mean the planes in the beginning could charge high rates for just flying someone in a circle, but today planes need to be fast, reliable, on time all while being cheap enough that most Americans can afford them.
- jbpetersen 10y agoAny idea what amount of bandwidth they'll have put together?
- sidcool 10y agoMy guess is nothing less than 1 Giga bit per second.
- schiffern 10y agoMy bet is that the "pizza box" phased array rooftop antenna will evolve into a complete base-station. We know it has a multi-element RF front-end feeding in to massively parallel software defined radio (SDR). Likely available in PoE or wireless variants (solar+batteries+wifi; imagine the MIMO with 100 antenna elements!). SDR is quite interesting because it can track moving satellites, and do simultaneous multipath reconstruction of multiple terrestrial broadcast signals -- digital tlevision, FM/AM/satellite radio, shortwave, etc. No antenna pointing needed, as it's all done in software. After demodulating the carrier the video and audio content is streamed on a local web page available to computers/phones/tablets on the LAN. Existing TVs can be supported via an HDMI or analog (VGA/composite/3.5mm) stick w an RF remote. Optional (or one-time software unlock?) on-board storage for multimedia time-shifting and distributed CDN caching (reducing bandwidth and latency by keeping commonly served duplicate files like js libraries locally). Having a local server also lets them do fun things in the future like transparent LZMA compression, optional ad/telemetry/malware blocking, data pre-caching, smart shared HTTP caching, etc. The inclusion of on-board storage allows data to be sloshed around to best utilize the terrestrial spectrum (broadcast content) and satellite spectrum (multicast content). It's much like Tesla batteries allow energy to be sloshed around to best utilize distributed solar and the utility grid. With proper RF front-end design, support for the diversity of global broadcast standards can added through OTA software updates via satellite. This simplifies hardware into a single "world" model with regional software variants. Easy install, especially with the wireless version (mount on pole, erect, securely fasten, done). Broadcast signal reach and convenience (any device or TV) that beats the pants off of any OTA antenna out there. Convenient access to terrestrial broadcast content w time-shifting takes some of the load from streaming services, so it's a strategic move and not just a "gee wiz" feature they got cheap because of SDR. At $200-300 for the equipment and $50/mo for internet, with a good multimedia time shifting UI, SpaceX would cream every rural data provider out there. Anyway, just the idle dreams of an internet user living in a rural satellite "data desert"...
- walrus01 10y agoI've worked with phased array flat panel antennas used for geostationary Ku and Ka band two way satellite access. Phased array flat panel antennas cannot be purely software steered sufficiently to track a low earth orbit satellite from horizon to horizon. It's not good enough to just put a flat panel phased array facing straight up, you won't have enough gain aimed in the direction where the satellite actually is at any given moment. Assuming a CPE device that measures 1.5'x1.5' to 2'x2' in size, it will still need a motorized azimuth and elevation stepper motor system (or equivalent) to track a LEO satellite. If you're trying to do multi-Mbps data to/from a satellite in bands >10GHz (and probably >18GHz), the path loss through the atmosphere and RF parameters mean that you want as much gain as possible... This is why the most economical solutions for high capacity two way satellite through geostationary transponder capacity involve 1.8 to 3.0 meter size dish antennas. Gain is important. Gain and enough signal over noise ratio that you can do higher order QAMs and not spend half your bitrate on FEC. You could, I suppose, if the antenna system was cheap enough and large enough build a non moving, cone or pyramid shaped antenna covered in phase array segments that could maintain a high bandwidth connection in the >10GHz bands to a moving LEO satellite. But it would be pretty large. edit: for those who are curious and want to see an example of a parabolic (steered) use for moving satellite comms: https://www.google.com/search?q=melco+antenna+mitsubishi&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b https://www.google.com/search?q=melco+antenna+mitsubishi&ie=... http://proceedings.kaconf.org/papers/2015/bsw_4.pdf http://proceedings.kaconf.org/papers/2015/bsw_4.pdf there is also an israeli company which is a competitor to mitsubishi in this space. and a few others. if you watch the weekly FCC filings for new satellite equipment licenses, there's a lot of MELCO antennas flying around on top of mid and large sized jet aircraft.
- beachstartup 10y agoprotip: buy rural real estate in good locations before this goes live.
- itissid 10y agoThe PSLV launched 20 satellites in one shot and that vehicle is 15M $ per launch. The double digit million cost of SpaceX's reusable rocket isn't much cheaper than that. Does someone know what orbit these are being launched into and how heavy they are?
- greglindahl 10y agoYou can find launch capacities on Wikipedia. PSLV has a smaller payload and smaller price than F9. For these satellites, you can find a description of their orbit and a guess at their mass at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_satellite_constellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_satellite_constellation
- tyldum 10y agoI work for a company that supports a lot of the satellites launched with PSLV. Most are in high inclination polar orbits. Not only is the PSLV reliable, but it is also very precise in delivery.
- benjismith 10y agoYou gotta love the genius of a guy whose rocket company gets to practice for their Mars launch by sending up a bunch of satellites (powered by the solar panels he makes) to assemble a new worldwide wireless internet company, in order to provide ubiquitous connectivity for his autonomous car business.
- castratikron 10y agoActually I think the main motivation for this is just to make money, which will then be used to fund things like a Mars mission.
- walrus01 10y agoI am about 99.9% certain that these will not be powered by consumer grade Si solar cells in special panels/encapsulation. Satellites typically use triple junction GaAs cells (>30% efficient) which are rated for space: https://www.google.com/search?q=spectrolab+gaas&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b https://www.google.com/search?q=spectrolab+gaas&ie=utf-8&oe=... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-junction_solar_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-junction_solar_cell Spectrolab is owned by Boeing.
- craigds 10y agoTypically, but SpaceX has made rather a habit of ignoring expensive space-grade components in favour of consumer-grade ones they test themselves for a fraction of the cost. I guess we'll see.
- akiselev 10y agoSpaceX has made a habit of doing that only for their rockets, not telecommunications satellites, and only when it makes sense. Their biggest cost savings are in operations, manufacturing processes, and their engines because there really isn't much room to skimp on anything else. Even at a cost of $10k per kg it makes very little sense to use 50% less efficient solar panels to save a few thousand, especially when the superior technology is also far better tested in space. It makes sense to use an Android instead of a $100k RAD hardened processor if your entire CubeSAT barely costs that much. Since most satellites cost a minimum of a million each, very few can afford the risk to save money on parts (and if you're mass producing thousands of them you can get really cheap germanium panels).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- bmon 10y agoI've looked through the reddit post and this and haven't found much discussion regarding the increase in latency that would come with such a service. Does anyone have a general idea of how much slower a round trip is when you count the transmission to the satellites and back? In some multiplayer games a difference of 100ms provides a massive advantage, making it much harder to play competitively on slower connections.
- Anchor 10y agoThe satellites are on Low Earth Orbit (LEO), so they are much closer to Earth than typical communication satellites. When the distance from ground station is 1000-1500 kilometers up, latency is not a problem. In fact, latency via satellites may be smaller than through fiber as speed of light is greater in vacuum. IIRC in fiber it is something around 0.6c, so a 40 % off from a space-based approach. Also there's probably going to be more switches along a ground-based path than along the satellite-to-satellite route.
- rjmunro 10y agoAlso the fibre doesn't go in a straight line. Undersea, it has to route around continents and the polar ice cap, and sometimes underwater features.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoPerfect solution: communicate with neutrinos directly through the earth for a point-to-point absolute minimum latency link.
- ericd 10y agoBrilliant. Only problem is the enormous antenna and the >99.9% ping timeout rate :-)
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoDepends upon the signal strength?
- spiderfarmer 10y agoWould anyone be surprised if this is (in part) responsible for the shift in focus for Google Fiber? Why would Google invest Billions for a small portion of coverage while Elon is busy building an ISP for the whole world? Elon and Larry are friends, and Elon has talked about using LEO satellites for internet access before.
- schiffern 10y agoMusk says that 90% of connectivity in cities will be fiber, only 10% satellite. Fiber works great in high density areas.
- mayrak 10y agoCan't wait for global internet!!!!
- huhtenberg 10y ago... as opposed to local internet that we have now?
- mbrookes 10y agoWhat is the FCCs regulatory remit when it comes to satellites? Presumably the application only affects satellites with a US footprint, and only if broadcasting on regulated frequencies?
- mountaineer22 10y agoSo, would this be consumer-facing internet, or would SpaceX be subletting capacity on their network for various providers to offer "space internet"? This has been mentioned before in the context of municipalities building/maintaining fiber infrastructure and subletting to ISPs.
- kauegimenes 10y agoWhere is the satellite quantity for this application? I cant find it.
- grecy 10y agoI'm still not sure why they are doing this - I'm in West Africa now, have been through some very poor countries, and every single one has blazing fast 3G connectivity, even in the remote mountain towns. I'm tethered to 3G, and for all purposes it's as fast as cellular internet I've used anywhere in the world. It is a little more expensive than most locals really can afford, although they are all checking facebook multiple times per day..... So I really don't understand this idea of "bring internet to the 3rd world" they have it already.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoI've said for years, you want fast internet you need to be a rice farmer in China. Because they leapfrogged the copper infrastructure that my local phone company is still depreciating down.
- jbob2000 10y agoI'm sure there's a term for this, but people in the West have this idea that everyone not in the West is a dirty savage living in a mud hut. Also, you aren't a real rich person until you've "helped the Africa".
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- grecy 10y ago> people in the West have this idea that everyone not in the West is a dirty savage living in a mud hut. Yes, very much. Now I've been moving around for 5 months my eyes are very much open to the reality. People also thought I would be murdered on day 1, when in fact I have met many, many kind kind friendly people who have welcomed me into their home. The culture of the West really does teach it's pupils they are the best, and everyone else is crap. The Media further enhances this idea. I loved when I met a guy in a rural, poor part of Gambia - he said "Oh yeah, my brother lives in Australia. I was there for a few years. I came back here, I like it more". Africa is not the hell-hole people think it is.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoMakes me think: by the time we get to Mars, Mars will have Internet (and GPS etc).
- planteen 10y agoI'm late to this thread and very disappointed in the HN crowd that nobody has mentioned any of these things. OneWeb is trying to do the same thing and already has rights to the spectrum from the ITU. They are using Arianespace to launch and Airbus build their spacecraft. It's possible this whole application is a ploy to disrupt Arianespace since SpaceX is upset about not getting a massive launch contract. http://spacenews.com/one-year-after-kickoff-oneweb-says-its-700-satellite-constellation-is-on-schedule/ http://spacenews.com/one-year-after-kickoff-oneweb-says-its-... Commercial satellite constellations do not have a great track record. Iridium and GlobalStar tried to do phone networks and both went bankrupt. GlobalStar was backed by Qualcomm and Iridium by Motorola. Though they both have complete, functioning constellations. Look at GSAT and IRDM to see how well they are doing post bankruptcy. Teledesic tried to do the same thing in the 90s and was backed by Bill Gates. It didn't go anywhere.
- heymijo 10y agoTren Griffin, the 4th employee at Teledesic, has a good write up of it with lessons learned. May be able to see if anything has changed that may make these new efforts work where others failed. https://25iq.com/2016/07/23/a-dozen-things-i-learned-being-involved-in-one-of-the-most-ambitious-startups-ever-conceived-teledesic/ https://25iq.com/2016/07/23/a-dozen-things-i-learned-being-i...
- planteen 10y agoThanks for that. That was an excellent post. As someone who has worked in the space industry, this quote is so true: "They [big aerospace contractors] liked the idea of PhDs assembling massive satellites in clean rooms out of custom parts since it created a barrier to entry."
- everlost 10y ago"You probably have heard the story about the chicken being involved in breakfast because she laid an egg but that the pig was committed to breakfast since he supplied the bacon. Investors are like the chicken, but startup up employees are like the pig." I liked this quote... perfect way to describe the startup-investor relationship.
- Gruselbauer 10y agoAm on satellite internet. When it works, it's kinda okay. 25mbps down are possible and sometimes achieved. On a Friday evening though, the shared medium hits hard. Last week an 'aptitude update' took an entire business day. So, yeah, I'm gonna assume people who're by every definition smarter than me aren't going to try this kind of 'meh' technology for their own Google Fiber like plans. Ground based RF networks make a lot more sense imho.
- bosdev 10y agoThe SpaceX plan puts the satellites in low earth orbit, much closer than the geosynchronous satellites you can connect to now. That lowers latency into the 25-30ms range. There will also be many more of them, and presumably they are being built with the understanding they will need to support the bandwidth requirements of the Netflix-era of internet usage.
- Gruselbauer 10y agoThanks for clearing that up. Latency is another of these things currently, pings below 800ms are a rarity for me. Very noticeable and pretty annoying. I'm not presuming I know better than a bunch of SpaceX engineers.
- hash-set 10y agoThe problem with satellite Internet is the uplink and downlink speeds.
- mandeepj 10y agoSpaceX might target phone business also besides internet
- likeInThatBook 10y agoMusk's 4.4k strong array of communications satellites in LEO becomes a weapon (think Lex Luthor) if you can point the full transmit power of a bunch of them at a single point (think MIMO). How much microwave energy do you need to put on a watermelon to make it pop?
- ksec 10y agoThis got me to think if it is possible to create a super giant Wireless Network, With Satellites, and Microwave tower on ground as well as Whitespace Super WiFi / LTE mesh network.