7 ms·

SpaceX launches Starlink ‘flat high-performance’ dish for moving vehicles

105 points by awoodbeck 4y ago

stevespang 4y ago
tony_cannistra 4y ago
I was surprised to see this, because I thought a previous FCC regulatory decision limited Starlink terminals to being operational only when stationary. Some Googling revealed that the FCC reversed this in June of 2022. https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/30/23190463/spacex-starlink-satellite-internet-fcc-in-motion-authorized https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/30/23190463/spacex-starlink-...
- bpodgursky 4y ago
  I think SpaceX simply had never previously asked the FCC to authorize it. Not really a reversal of any particular opinionated stance.
- newZWhoDis 4y ago
  - googlryas 4y ago
    It sounds like you're upset that you're not considered an accredited investor - but even if you were, it's not like SpaceX would just give you some shares if you gave them $10M.
    - newZWhoDis 4y ago
      - arcticbull 4y ago
        What makes you think Elon would take your money? Do you plan to email him? Why take a large number of small dollar checks from people who (as a group) don't know the first thing about private company investment when you can take a $100M check from one of a few funds and individuals who do? What specifically do you bring to the table that your $10K investment will make up for the administrative costs of having you on the cap table? The reality is that companies who can raise capital from top-tier investors will do that and not bother with what to them is chump-change - but the companies that can't raise capital from top-tier investors will definitely take your money and then proceed to lose it all. [edit] The system we have right now is a pretty reasonable balance IMO and the bar has been going lower and lower over time as the $1M/$200K/yr limits aren't indexed to inflation.
        newZWhoDis 4y ago
        I have reply capabilities again. See my edit. It is documented fact that SpaceX takes private investment. It is also documented fact that the occupation regime has faux safety mechanisms designed to enrich their own at the expense of others.
      - bpodgursky 4y ago
        There are other (partly regulatory, partly logistical) reasons that companies don't like having extremely large cap sheets. At this scale if it's easy to raise $2B from 2-3 institutional investors you probably don't want to take money from 50,000 small investors.
        newZWhoDis 4y ago
        arcticbull 4y ago
        We did actually try this, and it was a contributing factor to the Great Depression. Because (a) you don't know Elon (b) you provide no value to them (c) at this stage they're not taking $10K checks from private investors because it would cost more to keep it on the cap table than it would benefit them and ... Theres massive adverse selection bias. Good companies get significantly more value from raising a few small checks than they do from a ton of tiny ones from people without experience doing so or specific skills/connections. So the ones that can, will, and the bad companies that can't will come for the small time chumps. This played out in the early 1900s, and no, nothing's really changed. Besides if Elon really wanted your $10K they could have raised via Reg CF (JOBS act 2012). However, they're actively choosing not to. And I keep using $10K as the number because honestly if you're writing a $100K check you're probably an accredited investor.
  - nrdvana 4y ago
    From what I read, Musk doesn't want your money for SpaceX/Starlink precisely because he doesn't want the funds of the company to be chained to a public perception war that distracts him from running the company, like happened with Tesla during the doubtful years when half of the market was betting against him. Why take public funding when you can reap all the revenue directly?
    - newZWhoDis 4y ago
      Being “public” has issue yes. That doesn’t mean we need maternalistic governmental policy to “”protect”” people.
- busymom0 4y ago
  What was the reasoning for FCC's original decision? Why would they try to stop it?
  - margalabargala 4y ago
    The original decision was this: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we get permitted for stationary satellite dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The new decision: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we also get permitted for moving dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The FCC didn't try to stop anything, they just weren't asked about moving dishes the first time.
    - godelski 4y ago
      I'm still curious about the legal situation here. Why is it banned by default? I mean other wireless communications are totally fine to use while in motion (HAM, cell service, wifi, CB, GPS, Satellite telephones, etc). Why does the FCC explicitly have to approve this kind of thing? I imagine it is more than bureaucracy?
      - lgats 4y ago
        I don’t think it’s banned by default, but the rules surrounding mobile and fixed differ slightly. Perhaps getting limited regulatory approval for a fixed network would face less regulatory hoops and thus be approved faster.
      - HWR_14 4y ago
        > Why is it banned by default? AFAIK all FCC rules on frequency allocation (which is what SpaceX needed) are usually geo-locked. It's a lot easier to commit to fixed transmitters early on with the idea that any specific problems can be dealt with than getting permission to move them around at will. Also, during this time the FCC has been redoing the rules on the bands they use to try to allow companies this kind of use. So in 2021 they asked for ideas, and SpaceX suggested mobile uplinks as a permissible use. Then, hearings and feedback from a lot of companies occurred.
      - margalabargala 4y ago
grecy 4y ago
A friend has regular "RV" starlink, and uses it all the time in motion strapped on top of his spare tire on the rear tailgate of his SUV. It works flawlessly.... except he's done a TON of off road driving on bad corrugations, which eventually killed it - I guess the internal motors are not designed for those kind of vibrations. SpaceX sent him a new dish free of charge.
- busymom0 4y ago
  What type of warranty does the dish come with? Also, do they have some mechanism to detect if it was used "incorrectly" similar to how old iPhones used to have a color changing strip inside to detect water damage?
  - grecy 4y ago
    I have no idea, but he said they were super easy about it - no worries, just send the old one in and we'll send you a new one, free. We both figured it's product testing, and they didn't seem put out at all.
photochemsyn 4y ago
This press release seems pretty light on information. This could be a phased array antenna according to this review (which seems to be focused on airplane-mounted devices): https://www.bcsatellite.net/blog/flat-panel-antennas-state-of-the-art/ https://www.bcsatellite.net/blog/flat-panel-antennas-state-o... > "Currently the most popular alternative to Gimbal antennas are Phased Array Antenna flat panel antennas, which are composed of many radiating elements that can be thought of as numerous, tiny, fixed antennas. Each one has a phase shifter which forms beams by shifting the phase of the signal emitted from each of the radiating elements (tiny antennas). This provides a constructive/destructive interference which may be used to steer the beam(s) in a particular direction. This entire process is all electric, so the beam direction can be controlled and pointed instantaneously in any direction. It is able to track the movement of a satellite in the sky, regardless of the movement of the car, boat, airplane, or train."
- HyperSane 4y ago
  The current Starlink antenna is phased-array.
  - nynx 4y ago
    Yes, all starlink user terminals are phased arrays.
    - HyperSane 4y ago
      They have to be due to how rapidly the sats move in and out of view.
      - iwillbenice 4y ago
        Also frequency re-use. They will talk on the same frequency to multiple ground terminals, but pointed different directions from the satellites perspective.
        4y ago
noncoml 4y ago
- bgorman 4y ago
  tbf, interruptions are also a problem with Satellite TV systems
  - hackernudes 4y ago
    I don't think interruptions are a problem with satellite TV. The satellites are in geosynchronous orbit (unlike Starlink in low-earth-orbit). As long as your view is not blocked or impeded by bad weather you will never see an interruption. Source: worked on satellite TV set top boxes (also had DirecTV for awhile).
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
noncoml 4y ago
My experience with Starlink is that it kind of works(I get 50-100Mb bandwidth) but I have multiple(as in 10s) sub-second interruptions every hour. Dishy view is completely unobstructed. And weather is clear most of the time in California. As much as I hate Comcast, if 100Mb Comcast was available in my area I would trade it in a heartbeat.
- bloudermilk 4y ago
  I’ve experienced these pauses as well but they’ve only been problematic on real time video calls in practice. I wouldn’t trade my fiber for full time Starlink but I would definitely choose it over any Comcast offering (for personal use)
- colechristensen 4y ago
  Horizon to horizon in all directions?
- Ninjinka 4y ago
  > if 100Mb Comcast was available in my area I would trade it in a heartbeat Um...duh. Starlink isn't meant to replace your internet where typical options are available. It's meant to give something where there was nothing, or replace much worse satellite internet options.
  - noncoml 4y ago
    That’s my experience, yes. I wonder if there are enough such people to make Starlink profitable.
    - gwicks56 4y ago
      Worldwide? Definitely. Enough that also have the resources to pay? Not 100% sure, but I would imagine so. I think I read 500,000 Australians alone live in places with very little internet connection, or are currently served with Geo-Sync internet heavily subsidized by our government.
    - onesociety2022 4y ago
sidcool 4y ago
A tangential comment. I opened the page on a non ad blocked browser and my eyes burnt. I am OK with ads but this is next level intrusive.
- visarga 4y ago
  You made me try and now I regret it. How could they imagine anyone would want to read their page stuffed with all that garbage is beyond me.
llsf 4y ago
Is it going to end up in Tesla truck and cars ? Tesla is building an army of connected robots on wheels.
- somedude895 4y ago
  Tesla vehicles and in fact most of today's cars and trucks have mobile connectivity, so the army of connected robots on wheels is already a thing.
  - llsf 4y ago
    Not sure if the current fleet talk much. With ubiquitous connectivity, maybe we could have all those vehicles talking to each other to act collectively.
majke 4y ago
(a) is it the same phased array antenna as dishy v2? (b) is power usage improved? at 90 Watts dishy v2 is not perfect for an RV. (c) dishy v2 has pretty slow startup time. It might be less than perfect if that thing required 10 minutes of unobstructed view to bootstrap. I have mixed experiences with dishyv2 tech. I've had situations when it was flawless with half-obstructed view. I've had moments when it had hiccups without any obstructions. Anyway, very interesting. Obviously this is a big deal for many applications.
- Already__Taken 4y ago
  There's not really an issue with power on moving vehicles except sail boats.
  - SigmundA 4y ago
    It is an issue when your parked off grid and run off battery, 90w is significant. My 5G router with wifi 6 pulls under 10w direct 12v DC. It looks like the flat dish is actually 110-150w and requires AC power, so not great for off grid usage as inverter losses will add another 10-20w on top.
treelovinhippie 4y ago
The majority of RV/vanlifers do not need internet in motion, they just want a regular static 12V dish that can be mounted fixed and flush to the roof/racks like any solar panel. $2500 for such a dish is the wrong target market. The only customer that needs internet in motion are things like boats, planes, trains and buses.
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  Normal dishy works fine in motion so while it would be nice to have a lower priced option more suitable for mounting that doesn't work while in motion, such a distinction would be software only, and that always feels scummy. How would you feel if you paid $700 for a vehicle mountable dish and then had the option to pay $2000 to "upgrade" it to allow to use it while it was in motion? That's the sort of thing that really bothers some people. Hacker News celebrated when New Jersey proposed banning that sort of thing in cars.
p5a0u9l 4y ago
Anybody know what RF frequency it operates on? Would have impact on FCC rules. I'm guessing 24GHz or thereabouts based on size.

105 points by awoodbeck 4y ago

I was surprised to see this, because I thought a previous FCC regulatory decision limited Starlink terminals to being operational only when stationary. Some Googling revealed that the FCC reversed this in June of 2022. https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/30/23190463/spacex-starlink-satellite-internet-fcc-in-motion-authorized https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/30/23190463/spacex-starlink-...

bpodgursky 4y ago
I think SpaceX simply had never previously asked the FCC to authorize it. Not really a reversal of any particular opinionated stance.
newZWhoDis 4y ago
- googlryas 4y ago
  It sounds like you're upset that you're not considered an accredited investor - but even if you were, it's not like SpaceX would just give you some shares if you gave them $10M.
  - newZWhoDis 4y ago
    - arcticbull 4y ago
      What makes you think Elon would take your money? Do you plan to email him? Why take a large number of small dollar checks from people who (as a group) don't know the first thing about private company investment when you can take a $100M check from one of a few funds and individuals who do? What specifically do you bring to the table that your $10K investment will make up for the administrative costs of having you on the cap table? The reality is that companies who can raise capital from top-tier investors will do that and not bother with what to them is chump-change - but the companies that can't raise capital from top-tier investors will definitely take your money and then proceed to lose it all. [edit] The system we have right now is a pretty reasonable balance IMO and the bar has been going lower and lower over time as the $1M/$200K/yr limits aren't indexed to inflation.
      - newZWhoDis 4y ago
        I have reply capabilities again. See my edit. It is documented fact that SpaceX takes private investment. It is also documented fact that the occupation regime has faux safety mechanisms designed to enrich their own at the expense of others.
    - bpodgursky 4y ago
      There are other (partly regulatory, partly logistical) reasons that companies don't like having extremely large cap sheets. At this scale if it's easy to raise $2B from 2-3 institutional investors you probably don't want to take money from 50,000 small investors.
      - newZWhoDis 4y ago
        arcticbull 4y ago
        We did actually try this, and it was a contributing factor to the Great Depression. Because (a) you don't know Elon (b) you provide no value to them (c) at this stage they're not taking $10K checks from private investors because it would cost more to keep it on the cap table than it would benefit them and ... Theres massive adverse selection bias. Good companies get significantly more value from raising a few small checks than they do from a ton of tiny ones from people without experience doing so or specific skills/connections. So the ones that can, will, and the bad companies that can't will come for the small time chumps. This played out in the early 1900s, and no, nothing's really changed. Besides if Elon really wanted your $10K they could have raised via Reg CF (JOBS act 2012). However, they're actively choosing not to. And I keep using $10K as the number because honestly if you're writing a $100K check you're probably an accredited investor.
- nrdvana 4y ago
  From what I read, Musk doesn't want your money for SpaceX/Starlink precisely because he doesn't want the funds of the company to be chained to a public perception war that distracts him from running the company, like happened with Tesla during the doubtful years when half of the market was betting against him. Why take public funding when you can reap all the revenue directly?
  - newZWhoDis 4y ago
    Being “public” has issue yes. That doesn’t mean we need maternalistic governmental policy to “”protect”” people.
busymom0 4y ago
What was the reasoning for FCC's original decision? Why would they try to stop it?
- margalabargala 4y ago
  The original decision was this: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we get permitted for stationary satellite dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The new decision: SpaceX: "Hey FCC, can we also get permitted for moving dishes?" FCC: "Yes." The FCC didn't try to stop anything, they just weren't asked about moving dishes the first time.
  - godelski 4y ago
    I'm still curious about the legal situation here. Why is it banned by default? I mean other wireless communications are totally fine to use while in motion (HAM, cell service, wifi, CB, GPS, Satellite telephones, etc). Why does the FCC explicitly have to approve this kind of thing? I imagine it is more than bureaucracy?
    - lgats 4y ago
      I don’t think it’s banned by default, but the rules surrounding mobile and fixed differ slightly. Perhaps getting limited regulatory approval for a fixed network would face less regulatory hoops and thus be approved faster.
    - HWR_14 4y ago
      > Why is it banned by default? AFAIK all FCC rules on frequency allocation (which is what SpaceX needed) are usually geo-locked. It's a lot easier to commit to fixed transmitters early on with the idea that any specific problems can be dealt with than getting permission to move them around at will. Also, during this time the FCC has been redoing the rules on the bands they use to try to allow companies this kind of use. So in 2021 they asked for ideas, and SpaceX suggested mobile uplinks as a permissible use. Then, hearings and feedback from a lot of companies occurred.
    - margalabargala 4y ago

grecy 4y ago

A friend has regular "RV" starlink, and uses it all the time in motion strapped on top of his spare tire on the rear tailgate of his SUV. It works flawlessly.... except he's done a TON of off road driving on bad corrugations, which eventually killed it - I guess the internal motors are not designed for those kind of vibrations. SpaceX sent him a new dish free of charge.

busymom0 4y ago
What type of warranty does the dish come with? Also, do they have some mechanism to detect if it was used "incorrectly" similar to how old iPhones used to have a color changing strip inside to detect water damage?
- grecy 4y ago
  I have no idea, but he said they were super easy about it - no worries, just send the old one in and we'll send you a new one, free. We both figured it's product testing, and they didn't seem put out at all.

photochemsyn 4y ago

This press release seems pretty light on information. This could be a phased array antenna according to this review (which seems to be focused on airplane-mounted devices): https://www.bcsatellite.net/blog/flat-panel-antennas-state-of-the-art/ https://www.bcsatellite.net/blog/flat-panel-antennas-state-o... > "Currently the most popular alternative to Gimbal antennas are Phased Array Antenna flat panel antennas, which are composed of many radiating elements that can be thought of as numerous, tiny, fixed antennas. Each one has a phase shifter which forms beams by shifting the phase of the signal emitted from each of the radiating elements (tiny antennas). This provides a constructive/destructive interference which may be used to steer the beam(s) in a particular direction. This entire process is all electric, so the beam direction can be controlled and pointed instantaneously in any direction. It is able to track the movement of a satellite in the sky, regardless of the movement of the car, boat, airplane, or train."

HyperSane 4y ago
The current Starlink antenna is phased-array.
- nynx 4y ago
  Yes, all starlink user terminals are phased arrays.
  - HyperSane 4y ago
    They have to be due to how rapidly the sats move in and out of view.
    - iwillbenice 4y ago
      Also frequency re-use. They will talk on the same frequency to multiple ground terminals, but pointed different directions from the satellites perspective.
      - 4y ago

noncoml 4y ago

bgorman 4y ago
tbf, interruptions are also a problem with Satellite TV systems
- hackernudes 4y ago
  I don't think interruptions are a problem with satellite TV. The satellites are in geosynchronous orbit (unlike Starlink in low-earth-orbit). As long as your view is not blocked or impeded by bad weather you will never see an interruption. Source: worked on satellite TV set top boxes (also had DirecTV for awhile).
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

noncoml 4y ago

My experience with Starlink is that it kind of works(I get 50-100Mb bandwidth) but I have multiple(as in 10s) sub-second interruptions every hour. Dishy view is completely unobstructed. And weather is clear most of the time in California. As much as I hate Comcast, if 100Mb Comcast was available in my area I would trade it in a heartbeat.

bloudermilk 4y ago
I’ve experienced these pauses as well but they’ve only been problematic on real time video calls in practice. I wouldn’t trade my fiber for full time Starlink but I would definitely choose it over any Comcast offering (for personal use)
colechristensen 4y ago
Horizon to horizon in all directions?
Ninjinka 4y ago
> if 100Mb Comcast was available in my area I would trade it in a heartbeat Um...duh. Starlink isn't meant to replace your internet where typical options are available. It's meant to give something where there was nothing, or replace much worse satellite internet options.
- noncoml 4y ago
  That’s my experience, yes. I wonder if there are enough such people to make Starlink profitable.
  - gwicks56 4y ago
    Worldwide? Definitely. Enough that also have the resources to pay? Not 100% sure, but I would imagine so. I think I read 500,000 Australians alone live in places with very little internet connection, or are currently served with Geo-Sync internet heavily subsidized by our government.
  - onesociety2022 4y ago

sidcool 4y ago

A tangential comment. I opened the page on a non ad blocked browser and my eyes burnt. I am OK with ads but this is next level intrusive.

visarga 4y ago
You made me try and now I regret it. How could they imagine anyone would want to read their page stuffed with all that garbage is beyond me.

llsf 4y ago

Is it going to end up in Tesla truck and cars ? Tesla is building an army of connected robots on wheels.

somedude895 4y ago
Tesla vehicles and in fact most of today's cars and trucks have mobile connectivity, so the army of connected robots on wheels is already a thing.
- llsf 4y ago
  Not sure if the current fleet talk much. With ubiquitous connectivity, maybe we could have all those vehicles talking to each other to act collectively.

majke 4y ago

(a) is it the same phased array antenna as dishy v2? (b) is power usage improved? at 90 Watts dishy v2 is not perfect for an RV. (c) dishy v2 has pretty slow startup time. It might be less than perfect if that thing required 10 minutes of unobstructed view to bootstrap. I have mixed experiences with dishyv2 tech. I've had situations when it was flawless with half-obstructed view. I've had moments when it had hiccups without any obstructions. Anyway, very interesting. Obviously this is a big deal for many applications.

Already__Taken 4y ago
There's not really an issue with power on moving vehicles except sail boats.
- SigmundA 4y ago
  It is an issue when your parked off grid and run off battery, 90w is significant. My 5G router with wifi 6 pulls under 10w direct 12v DC. It looks like the flat dish is actually 110-150w and requires AC power, so not great for off grid usage as inverter losses will add another 10-20w on top.

treelovinhippie 4y ago

The majority of RV/vanlifers do not need internet in motion, they just want a regular static 12V dish that can be mounted fixed and flush to the roof/racks like any solar panel. $2500 for such a dish is the wrong target market. The only customer that needs internet in motion are things like boats, planes, trains and buses.

bryanlarsen 4y ago
Normal dishy works fine in motion so while it would be nice to have a lower priced option more suitable for mounting that doesn't work while in motion, such a distinction would be software only, and that always feels scummy. How would you feel if you paid $700 for a vehicle mountable dish and then had the option to pay $2000 to "upgrade" it to allow to use it while it was in motion? That's the sort of thing that really bothers some people. Hacker News celebrated when New Jersey proposed banning that sort of thing in cars.

p5a0u9l 4y ago

Anybody know what RF frequency it operates on? Would have impact on FCC rules. I'm guessing 24GHz or thereabouts based on size.