3 ms·
That's true and bandwidth is actually something I've been wondering about: what kind of bandwidth can an inexpensive ground-based system get, reliably? Sending
by rlonn 7y ago
That's true and bandwidth is actually something I've been wondering about: what kind of bandwidth can an inexpensive ground-based system get, reliably? Sending bits in a fiber is famously free of interference, while hundreds of miles of atmosphere is notoriously bad as a transmission medium. I haven't seen any kind of calculations around this. How many clients can hook up to one satellite concurrently, what kind of bandwidth will each get, realistically (theoretical max bandwidth is not so interesting). Without more information, my first thought has been that Star link sounds like an excellent, satellite-based internet technology ideal for connectivity in isolated places (far from urban areas, on ships and airplanes, etc) but which may not really be competitive for consumer internet access in urban areas. Hope I'm wrong.
- simonh 7y agoThe atmosphere shouldn’t be too much of a problem. It thins out very rapidly over a few km altitude, and the beam is going almost straight up. It’s nowhere near as bad as the same distance through the atmosphere at near ground level.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- fragmede 7y ago> what kind of bandwidth can an inexpensive ground-based system get, reliably? Theoretically 56 Kbit, but practically closer to 40 Kbit. I'm being serious! Given the choice between hugely expensive and high latency satellite Internet and dial-up, many have opted for dial-up, even in this day and age! We're not even talking that far away from urban centers, either, especially in hilly areas. A couple hour's drive outside of San Francisco is enough to get to cell-phone network dead spots, never mind LTE. There are some hyper-regional wireless ISPs using 802.12-based gear (Uniquity), but those are the exception. Given that, (which is so extreme that I'm sure that not everybody that reads this will even believe me), any competition to HughesNet will be very welcome. Prior to SpaceX, the cost of getting a constellation of satellites into orbit was prohibitively expensive, but with this being done by SpaceX, the launches for this will be done "at cost", (corporate accounting and cost centers notwithstanding). (Which, mind you, is still several million dollars per launch in rocket fuel.) Hopefully that means a genuine competitor to HughesNet, but that's a low bar. There is a large initial investment (of time and money), but FCC approval is an important first step towards providing this service.