6 ms·

While I wish it was Iridium I guess it sort of makes sense. Out of all the GMDSS satellite provider Globalstar had the weakest offshore coverage. It appears the

by yardie 4y ago

While I wish it was Iridium I guess it sort of makes sense. Out of all the GMDSS satellite provider Globalstar had the weakest offshore coverage. It appears they focus on the probably more popular land based coverage rather than true global open water coverage. Iridium probably has more expensive product for true global coverage.

walrus01 4y ago
Globalstar having "weak" offshore and truly global coverage is because the present globalstar architecture is a bent pipe, a satellite needs to be simultaneously in view of a globalstar-run earth station and the end user terminal (handheld phone, data modem module with antenna, etc). Globalstar in the serious two way satellite business has been a joke for 15+ years, everyone who needs something serious that'll work anywhere on the planet has implemented solutions with Iridium, or something else geostationary based for low data rate (inmarsat isatphone, if not needed for very high latitude services). Or of course the wide array of different types of Inmarsat medium speed much more costly data terminals for briefcase-size folding (BGAN terminals, etc), ground vehicles, ships and aviation. One of the Inmarsat 3rd party RF/modem partners is now making a data terminal for the medium sized UAV market which is about 3.5 pounds of stuff total including the antenna and good for 200-300 kbps of data, albeit at a typically high inmarsat $ per MB cost. Or with small ku/ka-band self aiming vsat terminals in radome (commonly seen on ships), which get costly, which are quickly having their market eaten by starlink's much higher speeds and lower costs. The value of globalstar at this point is probably in its spectrum licenses and legal entity's ability to operate, which given sufficiently deep pockets in capital resources, can be replaced with much newer and better tech in the L/S-band satellite-to-phone RF segment. I would bet good money that the people who are bankrolling this believe that they now have reliable access to two things: a) relatively low $/kilogram cost for launches to LEO on some spacex competitor b) low cost per unit mass production of satellites in an assembly line fashion, much as starlink satellites are currently churned out in large quantities. Obviously they now know that what Motorola designed in 1997 for satellite-to-satellite data links in the same orbital plane for Iridium was the right way to go, I'd be shocked if a replacement Globalstar network did not implement a more modern version of the same. Same general idea as spacex's beta satellite-to-satellite laser links. In the defense contractor/military/DoD world I have literally never seen a Globalstar terminal in use for anything anybody cares about. The only globalstar phones I've seen were in the hands of the staff of enthusiastic-but-utterly-telecom-clueless international aid NGOs, which not surprisingly completely failed to work in the location where they were trying to use them. They ended up packing them back into their boxes, putting them in a closet and buying Iridium handhelds. Here's a CURRENT globalstar coverage map: https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Images/Coverage%20Maps/Globalstar-Coverage-Voice-and-Data-Gen1.png https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Image... The part in the filing that says this: > Partner has agreed to make certain payments to the Company for (i) 95% of the approved capital expenditures Globalstar makes in connection with the new satellites described I translate this as meaning that they intend to forklift upgrade the entire network to something that they think can reasonably compete with Iridium (and now SpaceX/Starlink) in addition to other regional players like Thuraya, and also of course Inmarsat.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- kylehotchkiss 4y ago
  Apple figured out how to effectively buy a satellite network without inheriting their pile of debt! What happens to the apple funded satellites if Globalstar goes under, is there some special clause that moves them directly to Apple? If Apple really does acquire, I hope they ditch the bent pipe architecture, work on sat-to-sat connection, and most importantly for us, allow 2-way messaging on phones from sat, enough to send photos and stuff.
  - walrus01 4y ago
    If one looks at the past 10 years of revenue and company size as a whole of Globalstar, it's absolutely minuscule as a corporate entity, apple could buy them on a casual whim.
  - hackernewds 4y ago
    Globalstar is a terrible asset and has limbered along for 15 years. The fact that they would give up almost all their capacity without even calling for an acquisition speaks to their desperation, perhaps even Apple's
    - walrus01 4y ago
      I am actually quite surprised that it hasn't gone fully belly up some time in the past 10-12 years as their product has been eclipsed by much more robust offerings from competitors. How they've limped along with additional funding I truly don't know.
      - kylehotchkiss 4y ago
        > Global customer segments include oil and gas, government, mining, forestry, commercial fishing, utilities, military, transportation, heavy construction, emergency preparedness, and business continuity as well as individual recreational users. From wikipedia. Their customers seem to be pretty phone-call heavy industries, they aren't competitive on the data front, but aren't they cheaper than Iridium for phone calls?

by yardie 4y ago

walrus01 4y ago

Globalstar having "weak" offshore and truly global coverage is because the present globalstar architecture is a bent pipe, a satellite needs to be simultaneously in view of a globalstar-run earth station and the end user terminal (handheld phone, data modem module with antenna, etc). Globalstar in the serious two way satellite business has been a joke for 15+ years, everyone who needs something serious that'll work anywhere on the planet has implemented solutions with Iridium, or something else geostationary based for low data rate (inmarsat isatphone, if not needed for very high latitude services). Or of course the wide array of different types of Inmarsat medium speed much more costly data terminals for briefcase-size folding (BGAN terminals, etc), ground vehicles, ships and aviation. One of the Inmarsat 3rd party RF/modem partners is now making a data terminal for the medium sized UAV market which is about 3.5 pounds of stuff total including the antenna and good for 200-300 kbps of data, albeit at a typically high inmarsat $ per MB cost. Or with small ku/ka-band self aiming vsat terminals in radome (commonly seen on ships), which get costly, which are quickly having their market eaten by starlink's much higher speeds and lower costs. The value of globalstar at this point is probably in its spectrum licenses and legal entity's ability to operate, which given sufficiently deep pockets in capital resources, can be replaced with much newer and better tech in the L/S-band satellite-to-phone RF segment. I would bet good money that the people who are bankrolling this believe that they now have reliable access to two things: a) relatively low $/kilogram cost for launches to LEO on some spacex competitor b) low cost per unit mass production of satellites in an assembly line fashion, much as starlink satellites are currently churned out in large quantities. Obviously they now know that what Motorola designed in 1997 for satellite-to-satellite data links in the same orbital plane for Iridium was the right way to go, I'd be shocked if a replacement Globalstar network did not implement a more modern version of the same. Same general idea as spacex's beta satellite-to-satellite laser links. In the defense contractor/military/DoD world I have literally never seen a Globalstar terminal in use for anything anybody cares about. The only globalstar phones I've seen were in the hands of the staff of enthusiastic-but-utterly-telecom-clueless international aid NGOs, which not surprisingly completely failed to work in the location where they were trying to use them. They ended up packing them back into their boxes, putting them in a closet and buying Iridium handhelds. Here's a CURRENT globalstar coverage map: https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Images/Coverage%20Maps/Globalstar-Coverage-Voice-and-Data-Gen1.png https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Image... The part in the filing that says this: > Partner has agreed to make certain payments to the Company for (i) 95% of the approved capital expenditures Globalstar makes in connection with the new satellites described I translate this as meaning that they intend to forklift upgrade the entire network to something that they think can reasonably compete with Iridium (and now SpaceX/Starlink) in addition to other regional players like Thuraya, and also of course Inmarsat.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kylehotchkiss 4y ago
Apple figured out how to effectively buy a satellite network without inheriting their pile of debt! What happens to the apple funded satellites if Globalstar goes under, is there some special clause that moves them directly to Apple? If Apple really does acquire, I hope they ditch the bent pipe architecture, work on sat-to-sat connection, and most importantly for us, allow 2-way messaging on phones from sat, enough to send photos and stuff.
- walrus01 4y ago
  If one looks at the past 10 years of revenue and company size as a whole of Globalstar, it's absolutely minuscule as a corporate entity, apple could buy them on a casual whim.
- hackernewds 4y ago
  Globalstar is a terrible asset and has limbered along for 15 years. The fact that they would give up almost all their capacity without even calling for an acquisition speaks to their desperation, perhaps even Apple's
  - walrus01 4y ago
    I am actually quite surprised that it hasn't gone fully belly up some time in the past 10-12 years as their product has been eclipsed by much more robust offerings from competitors. How they've limped along with additional funding I truly don't know.
    - kylehotchkiss 4y ago
      > Global customer segments include oil and gas, government, mining, forestry, commercial fishing, utilities, military, transportation, heavy construction, emergency preparedness, and business continuity as well as individual recreational users. From wikipedia. Their customers seem to be pretty phone-call heavy industries, they aren't competitive on the data front, but aren't they cheaper than Iridium for phone calls?