4 ms·

I’m sure he is. It’s easier for Scandinavian countries because they don’t have such a large, deserted territory. But most of the Canadian population is concentr

I’m sure he is. It’s easier for Scandinavian countries because they don’t have such a large, deserted territory. But most of the Canadian population is concentrated in specific areas, mostly in the southern part. There are some relatively large towns below the 55th parallel, but for the most part it’s large, empty land with small communities and reservations spreaded across the territory. Starlink would provide broadband to communities that still don’t have it, or have it at a higher price because it’s a different satellite internet provider. Even more so past the 55th. I’m sure Santa would appreciate too.

nix23 4y ago
But why starlink then? A Stationary satellite for N.-Canada would do a much better job.
- francislavoie 4y ago
  No it doesn't. To have a "stationary satellite", you need to put it in a geosynchronous orbit, which is 32,000km up. With starlink, it's at about 550km up. The latency difference is _huge_. With starlink, you can easily get 50-150ms ping times. With geo satellites, you get like 2 _seconds_. That's completely unusable for many usecases of the internet like video calls or online videogames.
  - nix23 4y ago
    Well yeah that's true, but is ping really important when you live in the far north...is it so important that a whole part of a country is highly dependent on a private US company? >That's completely unusable for many usecases of the internet like video calls or online videogames. stationary is ~600, and it's absolutely possible for video-calls (from my own experience)...but yeah no good scores for your counter-strike...but then better go hunting/fishing irl when you up there. And if you look at the map: https://www.starlink.com/map https://www.starlink.com/map North Canada is not accessible...and probably never will (not enough customers)
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - monsieurbanana 4y ago
      > is it so important that a whole part of a country is highly dependent on a private US company? Sure, fine, that's something worrisome. But be honest with your arguments from the get-go, instead of saying a stationary satellite would be better. I'll pass on the weird condescending gaming tone.
    - Tuna-Fish 4y ago
      > Well yeah that's true, but is ping really important when you live in the far north...is it so important that a whole part of a country is highly dependent on a private US company? In a word, yes. High ping isn't bad for just gaming, so much of the internet is written by people who assume that roundtrips are cheap that ~600ms internet connections are just painful for everyday use. If you feel that relying on Starlink gives SpaceX too much power, you need to start thinking about other LEO constellations, not substituting with GEOsats. Because they are simply inadequate. > North Canada is not accessible...and probably never will (not enough customers) Literally everywhere in the world will be accessible once they get enough intersat links and the polar sats up. Right now, they are limited by both the bent-pipe architecture they use for the first shell of sats (because intersat links were not ready), and because they launched the 53° shells first (because they get the most customers with the fewest sats operational the fastest). And they need to do this even if they'd have only a single customer, because their FCC frequency allocation requires them to provide service in all 50 states, including the very northernmost parts of Alaska. They plan to achieve this with a 97.6° shell of 10 planes, which will provide service all the way to the pole.
      - nix23 4y ago
        >Literally everywhere in the world will be accessible once they get enough intersat links and the polar sats up. Elon cultist....or dreamer
        Tuna-Fish 4y ago
  - zekica 4y ago
    You are correct, but the exact ping times (to the ground station) is 6.7ms for Starlink (if directly above) or 10-15ms just for the link. For geostationary, it is 400ms if you are on the equator, and 450ms if you are north/south. Realistically it is about 600ms from what I have seen in Europe.
  - amelius 4y ago
    Perhaps Netflix and large downloads over stationary satellite, and all the rest over starlink?

nix23 4y ago

But why starlink then? A Stationary satellite for N.-Canada would do a much better job.

francislavoie 4y ago
No it doesn't. To have a "stationary satellite", you need to put it in a geosynchronous orbit, which is 32,000km up. With starlink, it's at about 550km up. The latency difference is _huge_. With starlink, you can easily get 50-150ms ping times. With geo satellites, you get like 2 _seconds_. That's completely unusable for many usecases of the internet like video calls or online videogames.
- nix23 4y ago
  Well yeah that's true, but is ping really important when you live in the far north...is it so important that a whole part of a country is highly dependent on a private US company? >That's completely unusable for many usecases of the internet like video calls or online videogames. stationary is ~600, and it's absolutely possible for video-calls (from my own experience)...but yeah no good scores for your counter-strike...but then better go hunting/fishing irl when you up there. And if you look at the map: https://www.starlink.com/map https://www.starlink.com/map North Canada is not accessible...and probably never will (not enough customers)
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - monsieurbanana 4y ago
    > is it so important that a whole part of a country is highly dependent on a private US company? Sure, fine, that's something worrisome. But be honest with your arguments from the get-go, instead of saying a stationary satellite would be better. I'll pass on the weird condescending gaming tone.
  - Tuna-Fish 4y ago
    > Well yeah that's true, but is ping really important when you live in the far north...is it so important that a whole part of a country is highly dependent on a private US company? In a word, yes. High ping isn't bad for just gaming, so much of the internet is written by people who assume that roundtrips are cheap that ~600ms internet connections are just painful for everyday use. If you feel that relying on Starlink gives SpaceX too much power, you need to start thinking about other LEO constellations, not substituting with GEOsats. Because they are simply inadequate. > North Canada is not accessible...and probably never will (not enough customers) Literally everywhere in the world will be accessible once they get enough intersat links and the polar sats up. Right now, they are limited by both the bent-pipe architecture they use for the first shell of sats (because intersat links were not ready), and because they launched the 53° shells first (because they get the most customers with the fewest sats operational the fastest). And they need to do this even if they'd have only a single customer, because their FCC frequency allocation requires them to provide service in all 50 states, including the very northernmost parts of Alaska. They plan to achieve this with a 97.6° shell of 10 planes, which will provide service all the way to the pole.
    - nix23 4y ago
      >Literally everywhere in the world will be accessible once they get enough intersat links and the polar sats up. Elon cultist....or dreamer
      - Tuna-Fish 4y ago
- zekica 4y ago
  You are correct, but the exact ping times (to the ground station) is 6.7ms for Starlink (if directly above) or 10-15ms just for the link. For geostationary, it is 400ms if you are on the equator, and 450ms if you are north/south. Realistically it is about 600ms from what I have seen in Europe.
- amelius 4y ago
  Perhaps Netflix and large downloads over stationary satellite, and all the rest over starlink?