5 ms·

Does this mean they've figured out satellite-to-satellite data transfer?

thatcherc 4y ago
Yup, I think that's the implication of the "space laser network". The plan for Starlink has been to have laser crosslinks between the satellites to provide coverage in places where the satellites can't directly see a ground station.
- deelowe 4y ago
  That's the plan, but it's an unimaginably difficult task. Many have speculated they wouldn't be able to pull it off at scale.
  - minhazm 4y ago
    Forgive my ignorance but I don't understand why it's an unimaginably difficult task. The satellites are operating in a vacuum with no weather interference or anything and have line of sight to each other. I would think that it should actually be easy to pull off, and actually should get easier at scale since the distances between individual satellites would shrink and would be easier to align the laser links.
    - samatman 4y ago
      I see it as one of those enormously difficult and yet practical things, like photolithography. The human sweat to produce this system is surely measured in decades, if not centuries depending on whose effort we want to count.
    - count 4y ago
      They're also moving in different, independent directions on different planes at extremely high speeds...
      - wmf 4y ago
        Some people have speculated that laser links within the same plane (where satellites are stationary relative to each other) are working and the others are not.
      - lsaferite 4y ago
        > at extremely high speeds Absolute speeds or relative to each other speeds?
        gpm 4y ago
        Both, they have two sets of orbital paths at roughly 90 degrees to eachother (I'm just eyeballing it, it's probably not exactly 90). With more sets if you count the satellites in polar orbits. Though they could, if they needed to, only connect to the satellites flying at low relative speed.
        mlindner 4y ago
        There's no need for them to transfer data to satellites crossing in perpendicular directions to each other.
        gpm 4y ago
        Right, that's what I was trying to say with my last sentence. It would sometimes reduce latency if they're able to though.
      - mlindner 4y ago
        Satellites in the same plane aren't moving at all relative to each other and satellites in adjacent planes move very little relative to each other.
    - deelowe 4y ago
      I don't remember the details, but I believe one of the issues is that the distances are extremely long.
    - mensetmanusman 4y ago
      Mirror tracking is hard. Low orbit stuff etches everything plastic with oxygen.
    - roflyear 4y ago
      Lasers don't need an atmosphere to make them difficult to shoot over distances either.
  - mlindner 4y ago
    If they wouldn't have been able to pull it off why would they have launched the satellites? I don't get why people constantly underestimate the ability of Elon Musk companies to points beyond what is reasonable. They're not going to just do something that's very likely to fail. That'd be completely uneconomic and unaffordable.
sp332 4y ago
This is the first mention of it working that I've seen. I wonder if it's a limited deployment for Antarctica or the beginning of a large rollout.
- cube2222 4y ago
  That's basically what I'm wondering about. Is this an unfortunate headline, or are we really there already?
  - sp332 4y ago
    It's taken straight from the Twitter account https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1570073223005622274 https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1570073223005622274 I just don't see any other info about it.
  - mlindner 4y ago
    It can't function in Antarctica without the satellite links, so it's already there.
AdamJacobMuller 4y ago
I think they have and are at least trialing it? I saw a post on reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/StarlinkEngineering/ https://www.reddit.com/r/StarlinkEngineering/ I think) where someone was showing how they can tell based on satellite positions and latency numbers that they are definitely receiving service even when satellites had no reach to ground stations.

Yup, I think that's the implication of the "space laser network". The plan for Starlink has been to have laser crosslinks between the satellites to provide coverage in places where the satellites can't directly see a ground station.

deelowe 4y ago
That's the plan, but it's an unimaginably difficult task. Many have speculated they wouldn't be able to pull it off at scale.
- minhazm 4y ago
  Forgive my ignorance but I don't understand why it's an unimaginably difficult task. The satellites are operating in a vacuum with no weather interference or anything and have line of sight to each other. I would think that it should actually be easy to pull off, and actually should get easier at scale since the distances between individual satellites would shrink and would be easier to align the laser links.
  - samatman 4y ago
    I see it as one of those enormously difficult and yet practical things, like photolithography. The human sweat to produce this system is surely measured in decades, if not centuries depending on whose effort we want to count.
  - count 4y ago
    They're also moving in different, independent directions on different planes at extremely high speeds...
    - wmf 4y ago
      Some people have speculated that laser links within the same plane (where satellites are stationary relative to each other) are working and the others are not.
    - lsaferite 4y ago
      > at extremely high speeds Absolute speeds or relative to each other speeds?
      - gpm 4y ago
        Both, they have two sets of orbital paths at roughly 90 degrees to eachother (I'm just eyeballing it, it's probably not exactly 90). With more sets if you count the satellites in polar orbits. Though they could, if they needed to, only connect to the satellites flying at low relative speed.
        mlindner 4y ago
        There's no need for them to transfer data to satellites crossing in perpendicular directions to each other.
        gpm 4y ago
        Right, that's what I was trying to say with my last sentence. It would sometimes reduce latency if they're able to though.
    - mlindner 4y ago
      Satellites in the same plane aren't moving at all relative to each other and satellites in adjacent planes move very little relative to each other.
  - deelowe 4y ago
    I don't remember the details, but I believe one of the issues is that the distances are extremely long.
  - mensetmanusman 4y ago
    Mirror tracking is hard. Low orbit stuff etches everything plastic with oxygen.
  - roflyear 4y ago
    Lasers don't need an atmosphere to make them difficult to shoot over distances either.
- mlindner 4y ago
  If they wouldn't have been able to pull it off why would they have launched the satellites? I don't get why people constantly underestimate the ability of Elon Musk companies to points beyond what is reasonable. They're not going to just do something that's very likely to fail. That'd be completely uneconomic and unaffordable.

sp332 4y ago

This is the first mention of it working that I've seen. I wonder if it's a limited deployment for Antarctica or the beginning of a large rollout.

cube2222 4y ago
That's basically what I'm wondering about. Is this an unfortunate headline, or are we really there already?
- sp332 4y ago
  It's taken straight from the Twitter account https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1570073223005622274 https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1570073223005622274 I just don't see any other info about it.
- mlindner 4y ago
  It can't function in Antarctica without the satellite links, so it's already there.

AdamJacobMuller 4y ago

I think they have and are at least trialing it? I saw a post on reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/StarlinkEngineering/ https://www.reddit.com/r/StarlinkEngineering/ I think) where someone was showing how they can tell based on satellite positions and latency numbers that they are definitely receiving service even when satellites had no reach to ground stations.