4 ms·

It also makes the big assumption of "when laser links are implemented". There is no timeframe for that, and it's possible that it's never implemented.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
Already successfully tested (early September 2020). https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starlink-space-lasers-first-orbital-test/ https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starlink-space-lasers-first...
- shaklee3 6y ago
  Yup, and Starlink was also going to provide a 1Gbps service with a very low failure rate (now we know both of those aren't true). That article cites no sources, and SpaceX has not publicly said they've successfully tested cross-links. Even if they had, it only matters when they're actually being used.
  - JaggedJax 6y ago
    What is the failure rate issue they are having? I haven't seen anything about that. Is this referring to their early satellites being decommissioned? Does that matter as long as their coverage stays the same since those were early prototypes and they are replacing them so quickly?
    - shaklee3 6y ago
      https://planet4589.org/space/stats/megacon/starbad.html https://planet4589.org/space/stats/megacon/starbad.html
      - karkisuni 6y ago
        Ignoring the "0.9" satellites, this says 694 out of 713 launched so far are good. Is 97% success bad?
        shaklee3 6y ago
        97% success is very bad when the number of satellite is so high that it causes space junk, yes. See here: https://twitter.com/ProfHughLewis/status/1312021242900295688 https://twitter.com/ProfHughLewis/status/1312021242900295688
        JaggedJax 6y ago
        Thankfully these are all in LEO and the vast majority are under a controlled decay, and those that are not currently were most likely placed in a specific orbit to decay safely first per your starbad link.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - nickik 6y ago
    The failure rate is low, everything else is just FUD spread by the competition who no they can't win in a fair fight. And how do you know 1Gbps is not achievable? Just because the first couple test publically available test didn't doesn't mean much really. The have said that they have launched with laser links, however not that it was successfully tested them.
    - shaklee3 6y ago
      The existing satellite providers could provide a 1Gbps plan, but it's not economically feasible. Any of the multiple Gbps communications satellites could do that. SpaceX can also do it, but it's not economically feasible based on everything we know about the cost of the system. I know Elon gets a pass on pretty much anything he says, but it's not okay to continually make claims that will clearly not be true.
      - nickik 6y ago
        The difference is that Starlink will have 10000+ satellites and traditional systems have far, far, far, far less. Saying 'its not viable for <old system>' and concluding its not viable for Starlink is a terrible line of argument. I would assume the base performance is not that much, but it clearly not some crazy number for the Starlink system.
        shaklee3 6y ago
        The number of satellites has nothing to do with my hard the inter satellite links are. higher bandwidth links are much more expensive and harder to get right (harder meaning never been done at those rates). It's fine that you are in the camp of anything as possible, but that doesn't mean that it really is.
        nickik 6y ago
        Often you don't even have to go threw inter satellite links, often it makes more sense to go down to the closes base stations. Specially if those base stations are right on the roof or next to the datacenters of the major companies. SpaceX base stations will likely be colocated with exchanges and that is also where many caches are (Netflix, Google and so on). Even if you use inter satellite links, Starlink has many links and can schedule the path depending on demand on the network. I'm not sure what you are even arguing, its very likely possible to get 1Gb, if SpaceX will over this, or only over it for limited time for extra price is clearly jet unknown. But saying 'current GEO satellites don't offer it so Starlink will not' simply doesn't work as an argument. > harder meaning never been done at those rates So nobody has done it so its not possible? That the worst argument ever. Laser link technology is at the very beginning. I think SpaceX had enough of 'experts' claiming things aren't possible even when physics doesn't at all show this to be the case.
Rebelgecko 6y ago
It seems unlikely that it would never be implemented. The benefits are pretty clear, and even though it isn't easy they're no fundamental roadblocks. Lasercomms has been done before, just not with hundreds/thousands of nodes in the network.
- shaklee3 6y ago
  Sure, the benefits are very clear. But high-frequency inter-satellite links are very difficult. Facebook formed a group to test this early on, and eventually cancelled the project (and are now trying again). It's not just laser comms, it's the very high bandwidth needed in the last comms.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

Already successfully tested (early September 2020). https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starlink-space-lasers-first-orbital-test/ https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starlink-space-lasers-first...

shaklee3 6y ago
Yup, and Starlink was also going to provide a 1Gbps service with a very low failure rate (now we know both of those aren't true). That article cites no sources, and SpaceX has not publicly said they've successfully tested cross-links. Even if they had, it only matters when they're actually being used.
- JaggedJax 6y ago
  What is the failure rate issue they are having? I haven't seen anything about that. Is this referring to their early satellites being decommissioned? Does that matter as long as their coverage stays the same since those were early prototypes and they are replacing them so quickly?
  - shaklee3 6y ago
    https://planet4589.org/space/stats/megacon/starbad.html https://planet4589.org/space/stats/megacon/starbad.html
    - karkisuni 6y ago
      Ignoring the "0.9" satellites, this says 694 out of 713 launched so far are good. Is 97% success bad?
      - shaklee3 6y ago
        97% success is very bad when the number of satellite is so high that it causes space junk, yes. See here: https://twitter.com/ProfHughLewis/status/1312021242900295688 https://twitter.com/ProfHughLewis/status/1312021242900295688
        JaggedJax 6y ago
        Thankfully these are all in LEO and the vast majority are under a controlled decay, and those that are not currently were most likely placed in a specific orbit to decay safely first per your starbad link.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- nickik 6y ago
  The failure rate is low, everything else is just FUD spread by the competition who no they can't win in a fair fight. And how do you know 1Gbps is not achievable? Just because the first couple test publically available test didn't doesn't mean much really. The have said that they have launched with laser links, however not that it was successfully tested them.
  - shaklee3 6y ago
    The existing satellite providers could provide a 1Gbps plan, but it's not economically feasible. Any of the multiple Gbps communications satellites could do that. SpaceX can also do it, but it's not economically feasible based on everything we know about the cost of the system. I know Elon gets a pass on pretty much anything he says, but it's not okay to continually make claims that will clearly not be true.
    - nickik 6y ago
      The difference is that Starlink will have 10000+ satellites and traditional systems have far, far, far, far less. Saying 'its not viable for <old system>' and concluding its not viable for Starlink is a terrible line of argument. I would assume the base performance is not that much, but it clearly not some crazy number for the Starlink system.
      - shaklee3 6y ago
        The number of satellites has nothing to do with my hard the inter satellite links are. higher bandwidth links are much more expensive and harder to get right (harder meaning never been done at those rates). It's fine that you are in the camp of anything as possible, but that doesn't mean that it really is.
        nickik 6y ago
        Often you don't even have to go threw inter satellite links, often it makes more sense to go down to the closes base stations. Specially if those base stations are right on the roof or next to the datacenters of the major companies. SpaceX base stations will likely be colocated with exchanges and that is also where many caches are (Netflix, Google and so on). Even if you use inter satellite links, Starlink has many links and can schedule the path depending on demand on the network. I'm not sure what you are even arguing, its very likely possible to get 1Gb, if SpaceX will over this, or only over it for limited time for extra price is clearly jet unknown. But saying 'current GEO satellites don't offer it so Starlink will not' simply doesn't work as an argument. > harder meaning never been done at those rates So nobody has done it so its not possible? That the worst argument ever. Laser link technology is at the very beginning. I think SpaceX had enough of 'experts' claiming things aren't possible even when physics doesn't at all show this to be the case.

Rebelgecko 6y ago

It seems unlikely that it would never be implemented. The benefits are pretty clear, and even though it isn't easy they're no fundamental roadblocks. Lasercomms has been done before, just not with hundreds/thousands of nodes in the network.

shaklee3 6y ago
Sure, the benefits are very clear. But high-frequency inter-satellite links are very difficult. Facebook formed a group to test this early on, and eventually cancelled the project (and are now trying again). It's not just laser comms, it's the very high bandwidth needed in the last comms.