22 ms·

Starlink Direct to Cell

706 points by pr337h4m 3y ago

simonw 3y ago
"Direct to Cell works with existing LTE phones wherever you can see the sky. No changes to hardware, firmware, or special apps are required, providing seamless access to text, voice, and data." "Starlink satellites with Direct to Cell capability have an advanced eNodeB modem onboard that acts like a cellphone tower in space, allowing network integration similar to a standard roaming partner." It looks like all that's new here is the website: the service itself has been announced for over a year now. Here's one story about it from March: https://www.engadget.com/spacex-is-getting-ready-to-test-its-starlink-satellite-to-cell-phone-service-181810564.html https://www.engadget.com/spacex-is-getting-ready-to-test-its... And here's a story covering the initial announcement in August 2022 as a partnership with T-Mobile: https://www.engadget.com/t-mobile-starlink-partnership-012539605.html https://www.engadget.com/t-mobile-starlink-partnership-01253...
- piperswe 3y ago
  I think there's some new info in the carrier list too: - T-Mobile [US] (we knew this one) - Rogers [CA] - KDDI [JP] - Optus [AU] - One NZ [NZ] - Salt [CH]
  - dzhiurgis 3y ago
    Wonder how it’s going to work if you use a mvno?
    - throwaway2037 3y ago
      My guess: It will not be offered as a service.
  - Scoundreller 3y ago
    For Rogers… they’re probably going to charge a lot. Not surprised to see them signing on instead of Bell/Telus; Rogers has much poorer coverage in the sticks than Bell/Telus.
  - inemesitaffia 3y ago
    There's nothing new here to me. Heard about the individual announcements
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  That Loon LTE IP purchase is paying off.
  - hiatus 3y ago
    I can't find anything public about Starlink purchasing Loon IP, could you share more?
    - ClassicOrgin 3y ago
      This might just be a misunderstanding. I believe Loon is still owned by Google X, which changed its name to X Development and sometimes just calls itself X. Then of course you have the unrelated Musk company also called X.
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        Not a misunderstanding, mostly rumors [1]. When Loon shut down [2], they made a non-assertion pledge for roughly 200 patents originated during the project's lifetime [3]. Part of the platform was an LTE stack [4], and those patents aren't in the non-assertion pledge. The interesting bit is: > To support ongoing innovation in the High Altitude Platform Station (HAPS) communications industry, Loon transferred a number of stratospheric ballooning and networking patents to partners working in similar fields. Hard to say for certain of course without any public records with regards to an IP transaction or patent/FCC filings showing the transfer of patent assignees. Google and Fidelity invested $1B in SpaceX previously (2015), which leads us to the thesis that Loon died because of Starlink. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37806035 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37806035 [2] https://x.company/projects/loon/ https://x.company/projects/loon/ [3] https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Loon%20Patent%20Portfolio%20Non-Assertion%20Pledge.pdf https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Loon... [3] https://thenextweb.com/news/google-celebrates-project-loons-birthday-first-lte-experiments-launch-near-equator https://thenextweb.com/news/google-celebrates-project-loons-...
        mlindner 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
greatjack613 3y ago
The tech behind this is great, but I fear what the TV makers will do with this to prevent you from disabling ads. Samsung is bad enough as is, having a built in connection will make it even worse.
- piperswe 3y ago
  Plain cellular connectivity would be enough for that, just about every TV would have a good terrestrial cell signal.
  - bitdivision 3y ago
    And this will almost certainly be more expensive than plain old cellular. TV manufacturers would be covering a very niche market of people who have a TV in a location with no cellular coverage.
  - keep_reading 3y ago
    If it was economical to do it they would, but that's still a long ways away I think
    - derefr 3y ago
      But I believe it's uneconomical more for licensing reasons than BOM reasons. Cellular baseband modems are an oligopoly, and so they attach all sorts of rev-share fees to use of their chips, beyond just the cost of the chip itself.
      - arcticbull 3y ago
        Apple actually owns the baseband/modem group they bought from Intel a couple of years ago. The 11 and 11 Pro were shipped with in-house ex-Intel modems. Since then they have moved back to Qualcomm but I have to imagine they're continuing development and will cut Qualcomm out one day. [1] [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/01/qualcomm-ceo-says-planning-for-apple-to-make-own-iphone-modems-from-2024-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/01/qualcomm-ceo-says-planning-f...
drunner 3y ago
Please disrupt the personal satellite beacon market. Currently the only options are proprietary devices that cost several hundred dollars AND a subscription plan that will run you $12 a month or more.
- stetrain 3y ago
  New iPhones include satellite SOS and location features. The monthly cost has not been announced yet, all phones with this feature are still in the 2-year free trial period. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213426 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213426 https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/send-your-location-via-satellite-iph2aac8ae20/ios https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/send-your-location-vi...
  - drunner 3y ago
    SOS only being a key point I missed in my first post. Yes, thankfully they are launching it, but SOS only is a drag.
    - coder543 3y ago
      It’s not SOS only. You can also update your location in the Find My app, so your friends/family can keep track of you on a backpacking trip. With iPhone 15, they also introduced the ability to call for roadside assistance from AAA via satellite too. (I’m not sure if this is also available on 14 now or not.)
      - kccqzy 3y ago
        Are you sure Find My uses satellite connectivity? I don't think so. Apple says this https://www.apple.com/icloud/find-my/ https://www.apple.com/icloud/find-my/ > If your missing device can’t connect to the internet or has little to no battery life, the Find My app can still help you track it down using the Find My network — hundreds of millions of iPhone, iPad, and Mac devices around the world. So this isn't going to help you in the wilderness.
modeless 3y ago
They used to launch 60 satellites per launch, now they launch 21. I'm guessing this hardware is a big part of the reason why. It needs a folding antenna much larger than the ones used for the broadband service.
- asadotzler 3y ago
  This phone texting support hardware is tiny compared to the size and weight increase the v2 sats took on for their primary mission, broadband capacity, which went from from about 20 Gbps per bird in the v1 config to as much as (estimated) 80-100 Gbps per sat in this v2(mini) config. It was this increase that made the sats that much heavier and cut the total number per launch about in half.
- mlindner 3y ago
  The hardware for this, is as far as we know, not on any of the currently flying satellites. They were explicitly downsized to fit on Falcon 9 and thusly named "v2 mini". Most likely the major thing stripped off was the large folding antenna that would be required for cell phone signal. The move from 60 to 22 (or 21) satellites was to maximize the normal Starlink service on the satellites. (21 are on board when launched from the west coast and 22 are on board when launched from the east coast.)
  - dotnet00 3y ago
    There was an article recently saying that they'd be testing the service in December [1]. I would've taken that to mean that the hardware is up there and just undergoing preparation, but this is SpaceX, they launch like every 4 days, I guess they very well can have not launched the ones with this functionality yet. [1] Can't find the one I had read, but this one published just a few minutes ago also mentions this https://cordcuttersnews.com/spacexs-starlink-is-looking-for-partners-to-offer-texts-calls-lte-data-from-space/ https://cordcuttersnews.com/spacexs-starlink-is-looking-for-...
    - mlindner 3y ago
      I’m not seeing your claim in that linked article unless I missed it. It talks about v2 satellites, which have yet to launch.
2bitencryption 3y ago
Is there any company even remotely close to competing with Starlink in the "global satellite ISP" space? I remember reading somewhere that literally most of the satellites orbiting earth are Starlink satellites. As in, more than half of all satellites are Starlink. Obviously that statistic does not mean they have a successful business, that there's enough of a market, etc etc. But one can imagine the types of services you can supply in just a few years to customers when you have by far the largest satellite constellation in the sky, with global coverage, and the ability to launch dozens of new satellites at low cost.
- hnreport 3y ago
  Is there any company even remotely close to competing with Starlink in the "global satellite ISP" space? No, or anything similar with SpaceX and Tesla But alas, I’m accused of being a Musk dick rider.
  - meepmorp 3y ago
    > But alas, I’m accused of being a Musk dick rider. The fact that you feel compelled to add this unbidden disclaimer says more than the disclaimer itself.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - dzhiurgis 3y ago
    Rivian, Lucid and Mercedes if you want to pay 3x for somewhat better build but somewhat worse software. I agree tho long term at lower end there’s just no way anyone can compete (except in cars of anti-software or anti-feature).
    - FireBeyond 3y ago
cozzyd 3y ago
Anybody know what bands they'll use? There must be FCC filings somewhere...
- BlueThoughts 3y ago
  If I recall correctly. At the initial announcement it was said that T-Mobile's nationwide 1900mhz license made this service possible.
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  T-Mobile PCS I believe.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
kaycebasques 3y ago
What is the approximate value of Google's investment in SpaceX now? Would Google have to disclose if it bought more stake or sold any of its original stake? https://spacenews.com/google-spacex-investment-is-900-million/ https://spacenews.com/google-spacex-investment-is-900-millio... (disclosure: googler, just something I've been curious about and figured someone here would have more insight on)
- mikeyouse 3y ago
  It looks like they invested via convertible bonds -- you can see the appreciation via the "Non-Marketable Debt Securities" line in their financial statements. It was about $1b in 2015 after they made the investment - if you ignore other little sales/purchases, it had increased to $1.8 billion in 2017. They then note "During the year ended December 31, 2018, the terms of a non-marketable debt security were modified resulting in an unrealized $1.3 billion gain" and then the balance sheet shows a non-marketable equity security, so they must have converted at that point. The value increased by $4 billion in 2018 and another $3 billion in 2019 -- though both include other investments they'd made in private companies. By 2022, they had a total of $12 billion in unrealized gains in that category.. The majority of that is likely SpaceX so probably at minimum 10x'ed their investment?
  - kaycebasques 3y ago
    Exactly the kind of analysis I was hoping for. Thank you very much.
carabiner 3y ago
Massive price drops on Garmin Inreach?
- apitman 3y ago
  This is the use case I'm most interested in replacing, ie emergency contact when out backpacking etc.
- lxgr 3y ago
  I believe the real threat here is to Verizon and AT&T in rural areas, if they actually make it work. And conversely, as Garmin I'd be more concerned about Apple than about Starlink/T-Mobile.
moffkalast 3y ago
So what they used to need a pizza sized phased array antenna that draws 10 Amps for is now possible with existing hardware? A bit impossible to believe unless there's a major caveat. I suppose it wouldn't be too hard to get the signal to the ground, but how can the satellites receive anything from the phone? Regardless, if this works then infinite range robotics with just a 4G modem is now possible. Anyone wanna fly a solar powered RC plane across the Atlantic? :P
- stetrain 3y ago
  The major caveat is extremely limited bandwidth. They are basically putting an LTE cell tower on the satellites. This can be used for very low-bandwidth applications, starting with just text messages. They are not providing 100MB+ broadband via this connection.
  - moffkalast 3y ago
    Ah, so more like a LoRa level connection. Would still work for receiving telemetry and sending autopilot commands I guess. I would've thought that an LTE tower would have more throughput, but I suppose they might need far more error correction than usual?
    - stetrain 3y ago
      The website says text messages in 2024, voice and data starting in 2025, and IoT in 2026. So it seems they have had the same thought on the usefulness for remote telemetry data. I don't know a lot about LTE signals but given the distances to the satellite and wide coverage area each satellite is responsible for it makes sense that performance is significantly diminished compared to your local cell tower.
    - olyjohn 3y ago
      There's only a few thousand satellites up in orbit right now. Maybe 4000-5000? Half of them are on the other side of the planet at any given time... The service is already strained in a lot of areas. It's not gonna be easy to give bandwidth to another few million phones.
audessuscest 3y ago
does that mean internet in plane ?
- everfree 3y ago
  In the USA at least, it's not legal for a passenger of a plane to use cell radios at all. That's apart from the signal being blocked by the plane's metal hull unless perhaps you're holding your device up to a window. So at least for now, you're stuck with their overpriced wifi. https://travel.stackexchange.com/a/163104 https://travel.stackexchange.com/a/163104 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/22.925 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/22.925
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    > So at least for now, you're stuck with their overpriced wifi. Many/most flights on Delta offer free Wifi with a (free) Skymiles membership.
- ianburrell 3y ago
  Starlink has Aviation product for planes already. That gives internet in flight. The Direct to Cell gives tiny bandwidth, kilobytes per second. Not enough for normal Internet. Should be enough to text or call somebody.
- mlindner 3y ago
  Starlink already provides Aviation service. https://www.starlink.com/business/aviation https://www.starlink.com/business/aviation This is in the process of being installed by some airlines. https://newsroom.hawaiianairlines.com/releases/hawaiian-airlines-to-offer-free-high-speed-starlink-internet-connectivity-on-transpacific-fleet https://newsroom.hawaiianairlines.com/releases/hawaiian-airl...
carabiner 3y ago
Why is it just T-Mobile in the US? Is there something about that carrier that supports this service, or could Verizon get this capability too?
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  Each company has a partner. The issue is the bands
blhack 3y ago
This is for very low bandwidth text communications when you're out in the country and can see the sky. Stuff like this has existed from companies like garmin for some time. This is very cool, though. Here is when this was announced: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzli-Ww26Qs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzli-Ww26Qs Pretty cool! Also kindof funny to see the TMobile CEO trying to hype people up and Elon sortof reigning it in.
- colordrops 3y ago
  The starlink website directly says "texting, calling, and browsing"
  - blhack 3y ago
    I believe this is addressed in the video that I linked. There are very good compression algorithms to allow voice, and "browsing" means something akin to slow dialup. This is not something that could, for instance, replace your cell phone carrier. In the video at 21:00 Elon clarifies: 2-4 megabits per cell zone.
    - valianteffort 3y ago
      This is a service being provided by your carrier.
      - blhack 3y ago
        Sorry if that was confusing. I mean that for instance: tmobile will be adding this to their coverage map, but they're not getting rid of the towers, and the primary way your phone is communicating with the world is not going to be via starlink satellites.
    - Scoundreller 3y ago
      > browsing" means something akin to slow dialup. I mean, I fire up and use lynx from time to time for a couple newspapers and magazine. Beyond evading some paywalls, it also presents it the way I want it: a wall of text. “Slow dialup” to me is 2.4kbps. The HN crowd could get a lot done over a console.
LAC-Tech 3y ago
Is this as good as it appears? Is the answer to connectivity to every remote deployment of tech just "use starlink direct"?
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  It's 2G performance
- mlindner 3y ago
  You don't get to beat physics just by being in orbit. Transmitting from a cell phone at a distance of 500km (in the best case) versus less than a dozen for a cell tower still makes things difficult. This will never be competitive with even moderately dense cell tower deployments. It does however put a global floor on cell service and stops the need to build cell towers in almost uninhabited deserts, or on every mountain top to reach every narrow valley in the mountains. Even mass produced, a "cell phone tower in space" is going to inherently be massively larger and more sensitive than a tower on Earth. It does however let providers/governments focus investment on where people are rather than needing to maintain very remote towers for the very few that use them.
  - LAC-Tech 3y ago
    I'm curious then what the physical ceiling is to this global floor, in terms of latency and bandwidth.
    - mlindner 3y ago
      If cost is of no concern you could build a network of satellites with similar performance to what is available on the ground, the cost will be eye watering however and a waste compared to building it on Earth. The “floor” I reference is in terms of the crossover point in cost versus the alternative. I don’t know where that precisely will be given it depends on the internal proprietary costs of the businesses in question.
conjecTech 3y ago
Can anyone explain this from an RF/networking perspective? What frequencies does this operate at? How well matched are the antennas in most phones? How much more power are you using to be able to do this? What kind of modulation are you using for TX/RX?
- mlindner 3y ago
  > What frequencies does this operate at? That part is answered on the website: > Direct to Cell works with existing LTE phones wherever you can see the sky. No changes to hardware, firmware, or special apps are required, providing seamless access to text, voice, and data. It's also notable that this service isn't available yet, it starts (optimistically) sometime in 2024, probably very late 2024.
  - theonlybutlet 3y ago
    I imagine that's done to not all existing satellites having eNodeB yet and waiting for their laser network to work to create additional capacity.
    - mlindner 3y ago
      Starlink’s laser network has been working for well over a year. There’s entire countries in Africa served only by the laser network.
      - theonlybutlet 3y ago
        Thank you for clarifying
- ledauphin 3y ago
  I'm particularly curious about TX - it's really impressive that a satellite would be able to pick out a signal coming from the tiny thing I'm holding in my hand.
  - 3y ago
aeturnum 3y ago
This is exciting! My family has an off-the-grid cabin which has weak LTE service. Using Starlink is possible (and other people in the area use it) but the power demands are quite high. I was going to first try a 4g antenna hooked up to a local hotspot, but this might give us other options. It's a little unclear how it works from this info - hopefully they have a version that individuals can stand up if there's no network operator in their area.
- darknavi 3y ago
  This will give you _very_ low data speeds. Like 1-2Mbps on a good day. FWIW you can use Starlink with a DC power supply and under volt it to get pretty decent power draw.
  - guntars 3y ago
    Tell us more about the DC supply option. I’m seeing ~50 W at the AC side which, while not a lot, does add up over time. Edit: https://boathackers.com/starlink/#:~:text=I'm%20very%20happy%20with,No%20inverter%20required https://boathackers.com/starlink/#:~:text=I'm%20very%20happy.... They are saying they are using about 25W after the conversion.
    - darknavi 3y ago
      What you linked is basically what I read before. A decent reduction in power usage!
  - lxgr 3y ago
    I'd be very, very surprised if it got anything more than 1 kbps in the next couple of years. Very likely much less (think several seconds to send a single SMS-length message). That's how much Iridium and Globalstar (the two existing comparable LEO solutions) can do without large external antennas for current satellite messengers (Garmin InReach, SPOT, more recently Apple iPhones etc.) Actually using 1-2 Mbps will likely remain unaffordable for a while even once it becomes possible, given the cell sizes and frequencies involved. Starlink is much cheaper than that because it uses the Ka-band (which has tens to hundreds of times more bandwidth available for this application) and directional beams on both ends of the connection, vastly increasing spatial reuse.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
mrtksn 3y ago
Global connectivity is amazing but a part of me has this feeling of losing something. It will be no longer possible to be away from everything unless you seek it actively. Overall it’s a good thing but it still makes me sad in a particular way that I don’t have a word to describe it.
- colordrops 3y ago
  > It will be no longer possible to be away from everything unless you seek it actively This has already been the case for most people for decades. The change is a matter of degree rather than some new paradigm shift.
  - mrtksn 3y ago
    There’s a difference between turning off your phone and going somewhere outside of the major population and have no option but be disconnected.
    - grecy 3y ago
      Just don't bring your phone. If you must for emergencies, bring it turned off locked away, and promise yourself you will only take it out in an emergency. But then you didn't need one for emergencies before it was possible, so I'd argue you still don't need one.
      - mrtksn 3y ago
        That would be irrational, the trick of going somewhere far away is that you rationalize it through something else and you don’t have the option to have the Internet or the phone. No one goes somewhere far away, explicitly for being disconnected, that’s an implicit goal. Otherwise, you can just turn off your phone do I have to leave it.
        grecy 3y ago
        so, uh, I lived in the Yukon for 4 years and have spent months in the Arctic Circle and all over AK and Yukon. I drove from Alaska to Argentina, I drove right around Africa and I drove around Australia, including the world's most remote 4x4 track - 1,050 miles in ten days without seeing another person or vehicle. I, umm, know a thing or two about going remote without communications.
getcrunk 3y ago
Can someone eli5 how this works. Wouldn’t the phone expend a lot of power to transmit?
- quenix 3y ago
  I suppose the fact that it's LOS reduces the power requirements. There's really no way around it: they specifically stress that the UE is unmodified.
- stevehawk 3y ago
  transmitter doesn't need to be super powerful if the receiver is super sensitive
  - lxgr 3y ago
    And/or if you can take a really long time to send your message. It’s ultimately a question of energy per bit.
  - manquer 3y ago
    If commercial satellites can pick up individual cellphone signals and receive them with no modifications, the military would have this tech for years? Just listening on where devices are currently and the signal power strength (must be higher while calling/transmitting data) could be a major source of signal intelligence.
    - Palpatineli 3y ago
      Not necessarily, starlink satellite and receiver are the cutting edge technology. Raytheon may have this technology years ago in their skunkwork equivalent but the military never formally bought anything like that.
      - manquer 3y ago
        Military doesn't need same quality to monitor, Starlink needs to also transmit and receive data(albeit slow speed), a military sat would just need to listen for a signal and know active and possibly identify some characteristics which combined other data sources Signal Int will have access to could be used to uniquely identify. Starlink satellites are designed to be cheap(<$1M) and small in weight (~1,000Kg) and size(fit 20-60 in Falcon 9), and lot of the innovation is manufacturing at scale. I am skeptical they come anywhere close to purpose built military satellites which costs upwards of $300-$400M[1] and are much larger in weight (5,000Kg-10,000+) and size (use full fairing ) and fly DH, Atlas as well and lever vertical integration. Given what we know about KH-11s, Trump photo tweet, the tech in the donated mirrors etc Military seem generation ahead in production tech not just experimental ones. [1] There is some pork for sure in all government contracts, but not $299M worth.
frob 3y ago
[flagged]
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  The blocker is starship. The tech isn't unique. There's two other competitors. They'll launch test sats subject to approval soonish.
  - frob 3y ago
    Ahh, so the blocker is his companny lying to the feds about environmmental damanage and assessments. And I bet it will communicate with his "piece of shit"[0] solar shingles. He is a charlatan piping away an entrancing tune to many gullible fools. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/26/22404639/elon-musk-tesla-solar-roof-mistakes-cost-price-increase https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/26/22404639/elon-musk-tesla-...
m3kw9 3y ago
Take that traditional cell service provider! I hope starlink compete the heck out of them price wise
- pavon 3y ago
  They aren't offering service directly to consumers. This is a B2B service to cellphone carriers, the current ones are listed in the link.
Unfrozen0688 3y ago
Say what you will about Elon but man Starlink and Spacex really seem like amazing products!
thibran 3y ago
So we will have two providers in the near future: SpaceX and AST SpaceMobile
- lxgr 3y ago
  We already have many more existing satellite-to-mobile providers: - Iridium (partnership with Qualcomm) - Globalstar (my bet is that Apple will buy them before too long) - Skylo (using leased transponders on various existing GEO MSATs for 5G NTN; used by e.g. Bullit/“Motorola”) - Inmarsat (pretty clunky phones for now, but they own a lot of L-band spectrum and are apparently one of Skylo’s partners for 5G NTN) - Thuraya (regional only)
lxgr 3y ago
I'm very curious how this will work on a technical level. My estimate is that (at least initially) it won't be actual texting (i.e. SMS) – unmodified LTE and 5G seem way too verbose to be able to handle the constraints of a much higher number of devices per base station, combined with the significantly higher transmission delay and free space path loss. One of the IoT spinoff standards of LTE and 5G seem much more plausible candidates – they are built with very similar constraints (extremely low received signal strengths, many devices per base station etc.) and are already being successfully used for satellite applications. I've been testing one device using geostationary satellites myself. But that would require updates to both the baseband firmware and OS of current or future phones (if not entirely new basebands!), and at that point it's going to be very interesting to see whether Apple (accounting for a very large share of the US market) will play along with that or rather push their own (Globalstar-based) satellite solution.
- tpmx 3y ago
  unmodified LTE and 5G seem way too verbose to be able to handle the constraints of a much higher number of devices per base station That's a matter of pricing, isn't it? Also, won't this primarily be used where very few people roam? Otherwise they could just use the regular land-based LTE infra. Remember: SpaceX can't just magically offer cheaper mobile coverage globally; they don't own any rights to use 4G/5G frequency bands. These are typically very expensive. It makes a lot of sense for SpaceX to partner with mobile operators who own these rights but don't utilize them very well in sparsely inhabited areas.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    > That's a matter of pricing, isn't it? Not necessarily: Users don't pay for signalling traffic. I could imagine even just rejecting attachment requests of thousands of roaming clients could easily saturate a single satellite cell. Existing mobile-to-satellite protocols are much more optimized in that regard (and limited in that there are simply not that many clients out there looking for signal).
    - tpmx 3y ago
altairprime 3y ago
CLECs in space~! Because, as the FCC is likely to realize, once SpaceX (a US company) is acting as a common carrier for other service provider networks, they will end up being required to carry at reasonable cost and without deprioritization anyone who wishes to do business upon their network with customers, under equitable terms to (in this case) T-Mobile and others — just like the old copper-line DSL networks of the nineties. Space is a limited resource and SpaceX’s exclusive network will ensure a regulatory climate that Elon will loathe, and I expect be compelled under telecom law to accept and obey. I can’t wait to see it. Happily, anyone could write the FCC and ask what their plans are regarding CLECs and SpaceX today — or, for example, ask questions like “Which US governing body regulates the SpaceX common carrier network?”. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/filing-informal-complaint https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/filing-informal-complai... is ready and waiting :)
- lxgr 3y ago
  That's an interesting point of view – is the same true for MVNOs today? That seems like a similar situation.
  - vel0city 3y ago
    Yes, it's essentially these regulations that make MVNOs possible.
- hcurtiss 3y ago
  To the degree this magical technology is available today (or soon) because of the profit motive, I sincerely hope you’re wrong. I want the promise of fabulous reward to drive what was science fiction only a couple decades ago.
  - altairprime 3y ago
    They’re already doing six carriers — the more money the merrier for SpaceX when all the rest sign up too!
    - 3y ago
layer8 3y ago
How many simultaneous users can this tech support? I.e. how does it scale? (Per satellite?) I’m also a little bit grossed out by all these competing satellite networks filling up LEO, and having to more or less continuously launch new satellites to replace the existing failing ones.
isykt 3y ago
Surveillance coming to every inch of the earth
phillipseamore 3y ago
Related from 6 months ago, "SpaceX based 4G/5G coverage coming to New Zealand": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35432008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35432008 The page then stated regarding LTE bandwidth: "We will provide 2-4mbps download or uplink per beam. [...] Each beam will cover a 50km diameter on the ground." [https://web.archive.org/web/20230402230610im_/https://content.vodafone.co.nz/dims4/default/4b4148d/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2356x746+0+0/resize/2021x640!/quality/100/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fvodafonenz-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fcd%2F9b%2F553927e3413f854658a4ed9c5457%2Fdk-apollo-timeline-with-text.jpg https://web.archive.org/web/20230402230610im_/https://conten...]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
danielovichdk 3y ago
[flagged]
brgormz 3y ago
Assuming reasonable affordability, when this becomes broadly available - would definitely use this as primary texting service in the backcountry but still bring Garmin Inreach Mini as back-up / emergency nav. The UI/UX for texting via Garmin's messenger app on iphone is very good...syncs contacts, etc. Limited to text vs. multimedia (assuming pictures would not be available until '25 via Starlink as part of 'data' launch?). As with all satellite services, connectivity comes/goes with Garmin - would expect the same for Starlink. A real gamechanger for emergency/SAR situations would be if one could enable the Starlink service from an iPhone _while_ in the backcountry vs. needing to set it up a priori...many people realize they wish they had an InReach once bad things occur. Don't imagine that is possible today.
34679 3y ago
"wherever you may be on land, lakes, or coastal waters" I wonder why the limitation to coastal waters? They've been cracking down on offshore sailors using Starlink with the RV/Roaming plan, too. By all accounts it worked fine, but SpaceX wants to charge significantly more for an offshore plan. It certainly can't be a congestion issue.
- plussed_reader 3y ago
  'Just good business'.
- jdminhbg 3y ago
  > It certainly can't be a congestion issue. There aren't any ground stations in the open ocean, so it all has to be routed between satellites to hop to one that has a connection to one. So it is a congestion issue.
  - wmf 3y ago
    Direct-to-phone is so slow that it can't congest the lasers.
    - lxgr 3y ago
      It might well be a "dumb pipe" implementation (i.e. no regeneration and smart inter-satellite routing on the satellites), although Starlink does significantly mention an "onboard eNodeB modem", which sounds like it should be possible to forward that over the laser links.
      - dvdbloc 3y ago
        Have they incorporated the laser links into prod on their sats yet? I thought that they were launching sats with them yet hadn’t successfully routed traffic yet through them in prod which is why they have a limitation to near the coast.
        3y ago
Aerbil313 3y ago
All I got to say is if this is realized, this will be game changing in terms of geopolitics, intelligence and economics. They said they partnered with local telecom providers, but the thing is they ideally don't need to. I am not a member of a nation which is in very good relations with the nation of the company here (America), and for this sole reason I hate the centralization of power with progressing technology. Don't bother telling me X tech is actually decentralizing. Yes it probably is, yet please compare the modern world with 1000s to see the amount of centralization. In my country, in the case of a war, if Google Maps were to stop operating, many forms and a high percentage of the transportation and cargo delivery would grind to a halt. If Visa and Mastercard stop operating an even bigger chaos would immediately ensue. Thank God we at least own the internet infrastructure.
PaulHoule 3y ago
This is what “6G” wireless is like. Lack of coverage is holding back wireless applications more than anything else and it does not matter at all if any other attributes of performance improve if nothing is done about coverage. And this is the only way to do it unless people invent gravity wave, neutrino or axion radio.
- ianburrell 3y ago
  This is more like 1G wireless everywhere. That is what the experience will be like, texting, voice, and tiny amount of data.
jaflo 3y ago
Pretty cool that they are enforcing reciprocal access to all partners globally.
gigatexal 3y ago
Any word on cost?
nomilk 3y ago
Will this allow for mobile hotspotting? (using one's mobile as a source of internet for other devices e.g. laptop)
- gsich 3y ago
  Yes? This is not enforcable. There might be some heuristics like TTL is off by one to detect another NAT but this is not reliable.
bahmboo 3y ago
This looks like the end of the road for Swarm. They are a small cube sat company that provides occasionally connected data packet connectivity globally. Space X bought them in 2021. The cofounder is now one of the main leaders of direct to cell.
nelox 3y ago
Will this support SOS calling on mobile? e.g. If I’m with a non-partnered carrier and I dial 112, will I be connected to local emergency services?
acrophiliac 3y ago
Overuse of the SOS feature for non-emergency situations, and false activations are already taxing Search-and-Rescue organizations. Starlink will make this MUCH worse. (Source: Accidents in North American Mountaineering 2023)
fijiaarone 3y ago
If you have Starlink in a rural area, you’ll notice it always wants to point towards that one cell tower the distance. Starlink has always been primarily a high gain 4G/5G antenna.
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  It's easy to buy the dish and measure the waveguides. Or get a spectrum analyzer.. There's Ku band phased array antennas that offer cell connectivity. Starlink isn't one of them
moneywoes 3y ago
is this a consumer product or b2b?
JoshTriplett 3y ago
I look forward to this eliminating the need for the ground station, too, and just connecting directly to the user's carrier wherever it is in the world. (Yes, there are politics involved there. That's part of why I look forward to that being bypassed.)
sroussey 3y ago
What’s the difference between this and https://lynk.world/ https://lynk.world/ or AST?
- Palpatineli 3y ago
  AST has one very large satellite, so it supports higher bandwidth for each device, giving them 18Mbps speed. Starlink satellites, even with gen 2, are smaller but more numerous. So while AST may support 40 simultanuous callers and sell the service to 40000 customers, starlink direct to cell gives you lower bandwidth but can support 40000 simulatnuous callers and sell to 4M people. (numbers are my best guesses)
  - sroussey 3y ago
    So closer to Lynk then. Curious how that patent fight will work out.
pynchia 3y ago
That was tried before by Iridium (owned by Motorola). It was killed by local ground/mobile network operators based on unfair competition rules. In the end lots of countries demanded Iridium opened a local company and exchange. What makes Elon think he'll win this time?
- wmf 3y ago
  This time he's working with the telcos instead of against them.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
vikarti 3y ago
How it works with totally unmodified cellular hardware? I thought there are physical max limits on cell size and they were lower than LEO orbits. Could it in future allow for LTE speeds? Could it work in any place where regular starlink could?(assuming SpaceX ignores licensing rules for countries who says it's their territory/it's high seas/they got license). What about 911/112?
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  Look up ASTS and Lynk
  - vikarti 3y ago
    I thought they were still at "we could provide EDGE-like performance".
    - inemesitaffia 3y ago
      SpaceX is offering less
jerrygoyal 3y ago
I like the choice of simple language on the landing page.
grammers 3y ago
I'm doubtful whether it's a good idea to give a private company like Starlink so much power over our communication in general. Why should they have the satellites for such a network? Wouldn't it be better that something crucial as this is publicly owned? Just thinking about the incident when Starlink cut access for Ukraine in fear their use of Starlink might trigger an atomic war. Why should one business person be able to make such a decision?
- snovv_crash 3y ago
  I'm fairly sure if you took an AT&T branded cell tower repeater into a warzone the wouldn't be very keen on supporting it either.
digidong320 3y ago
Cool development!
oldbbsnickname 3y ago
T-Mobile is forcing all of it's unlimited data plan users to more expensive plans without a choice under the justification that it's part of the Sprint merger. The roaming charges in space are insane. ;)
Humphrey 3y ago
According to the Optus press release [1] this will a service Starlink sells to phone companies to extend their coverage. This is a big deal in Australia because 60% of the land mass still has no standard phone coverage. Telstra has the best rural phone coverage by far, so if you frequently go to the wilderness you use Telstra. If Starlink lives up to the promises, I suspect a lot of people will be switching from Telstra to Optus over the next few years. [1] https://www.optus.com.au/about/media-centre/media-releases/2023/07/together-optus-and-spacex-plan-to-cover-100-percent-of-australia https://www.optus.com.au/about/media-centre/media-releases/2...
- Sporktacular 3y ago
  Don't count on satellite voice working in areas under-served by GSM etc. 2-4 mbps for 2000 sqkm per beam isn't that much for many voice users.
  - Humphrey 3y ago
    Yes, but most areas under-served by ground based networks have very few people - so it'll be interesting to see how it works out. Even fewer Optus customers.
Sporktacular 3y ago
Strong doubts about voice service being useful, assuming 2-4mbps per 50 km diameter spot. The point of cellular is frequency reuse. If your cell is huge that's one channel blocked for that entire area. You can't reuse the it within that area to serve more terminals with more bandwidth. So the system capacity will suck. Number of simultaneous voice users would be limited to the capacity of a single channel for 2000 sqkm. Don't hope for much.

706 points by pr337h4m 3y ago

"Direct to Cell works with existing LTE phones wherever you can see the sky. No changes to hardware, firmware, or special apps are required, providing seamless access to text, voice, and data." "Starlink satellites with Direct to Cell capability have an advanced eNodeB modem onboard that acts like a cellphone tower in space, allowing network integration similar to a standard roaming partner." It looks like all that's new here is the website: the service itself has been announced for over a year now. Here's one story about it from March: https://www.engadget.com/spacex-is-getting-ready-to-test-its-starlink-satellite-to-cell-phone-service-181810564.html https://www.engadget.com/spacex-is-getting-ready-to-test-its... And here's a story covering the initial announcement in August 2022 as a partnership with T-Mobile: https://www.engadget.com/t-mobile-starlink-partnership-012539605.html https://www.engadget.com/t-mobile-starlink-partnership-01253...

piperswe 3y ago
I think there's some new info in the carrier list too: - T-Mobile [US] (we knew this one) - Rogers [CA] - KDDI [JP] - Optus [AU] - One NZ [NZ] - Salt [CH]
- dzhiurgis 3y ago
  Wonder how it’s going to work if you use a mvno?
  - throwaway2037 3y ago
    My guess: It will not be offered as a service.
- Scoundreller 3y ago
  For Rogers… they’re probably going to charge a lot. Not surprised to see them signing on instead of Bell/Telus; Rogers has much poorer coverage in the sticks than Bell/Telus.
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  There's nothing new here to me. Heard about the individual announcements
toomuchtodo 3y ago
That Loon LTE IP purchase is paying off.
- hiatus 3y ago
  I can't find anything public about Starlink purchasing Loon IP, could you share more?
  - ClassicOrgin 3y ago
    This might just be a misunderstanding. I believe Loon is still owned by Google X, which changed its name to X Development and sometimes just calls itself X. Then of course you have the unrelated Musk company also called X.
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      Not a misunderstanding, mostly rumors [1]. When Loon shut down [2], they made a non-assertion pledge for roughly 200 patents originated during the project's lifetime [3]. Part of the platform was an LTE stack [4], and those patents aren't in the non-assertion pledge. The interesting bit is: > To support ongoing innovation in the High Altitude Platform Station (HAPS) communications industry, Loon transferred a number of stratospheric ballooning and networking patents to partners working in similar fields. Hard to say for certain of course without any public records with regards to an IP transaction or patent/FCC filings showing the transfer of patent assignees. Google and Fidelity invested $1B in SpaceX previously (2015), which leads us to the thesis that Loon died because of Starlink. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37806035 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37806035 [2] https://x.company/projects/loon/ https://x.company/projects/loon/ [3] https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Loon%20Patent%20Portfolio%20Non-Assertion%20Pledge.pdf https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Loon... [3] https://thenextweb.com/news/google-celebrates-project-loons-birthday-first-lte-experiments-launch-near-equator https://thenextweb.com/news/google-celebrates-project-loons-...
      - mlindner 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

greatjack613 3y ago

The tech behind this is great, but I fear what the TV makers will do with this to prevent you from disabling ads. Samsung is bad enough as is, having a built in connection will make it even worse.

piperswe 3y ago
Plain cellular connectivity would be enough for that, just about every TV would have a good terrestrial cell signal.
- bitdivision 3y ago
  And this will almost certainly be more expensive than plain old cellular. TV manufacturers would be covering a very niche market of people who have a TV in a location with no cellular coverage.
- keep_reading 3y ago
  If it was economical to do it they would, but that's still a long ways away I think
  - derefr 3y ago
    But I believe it's uneconomical more for licensing reasons than BOM reasons. Cellular baseband modems are an oligopoly, and so they attach all sorts of rev-share fees to use of their chips, beyond just the cost of the chip itself.
    - arcticbull 3y ago
      Apple actually owns the baseband/modem group they bought from Intel a couple of years ago. The 11 and 11 Pro were shipped with in-house ex-Intel modems. Since then they have moved back to Qualcomm but I have to imagine they're continuing development and will cut Qualcomm out one day. [1] [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/01/qualcomm-ceo-says-planning-for-apple-to-make-own-iphone-modems-from-2024-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/01/qualcomm-ceo-says-planning-f...

drunner 3y ago

Please disrupt the personal satellite beacon market. Currently the only options are proprietary devices that cost several hundred dollars AND a subscription plan that will run you $12 a month or more.

stetrain 3y ago
New iPhones include satellite SOS and location features. The monthly cost has not been announced yet, all phones with this feature are still in the 2-year free trial period. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213426 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213426 https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/send-your-location-via-satellite-iph2aac8ae20/ios https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/send-your-location-vi...
- drunner 3y ago
  SOS only being a key point I missed in my first post. Yes, thankfully they are launching it, but SOS only is a drag.
  - coder543 3y ago
    It’s not SOS only. You can also update your location in the Find My app, so your friends/family can keep track of you on a backpacking trip. With iPhone 15, they also introduced the ability to call for roadside assistance from AAA via satellite too. (I’m not sure if this is also available on 14 now or not.)
    - kccqzy 3y ago
      Are you sure Find My uses satellite connectivity? I don't think so. Apple says this https://www.apple.com/icloud/find-my/ https://www.apple.com/icloud/find-my/ > If your missing device can’t connect to the internet or has little to no battery life, the Find My app can still help you track it down using the Find My network — hundreds of millions of iPhone, iPad, and Mac devices around the world. So this isn't going to help you in the wilderness.

modeless 3y ago

They used to launch 60 satellites per launch, now they launch 21. I'm guessing this hardware is a big part of the reason why. It needs a folding antenna much larger than the ones used for the broadband service.

asadotzler 3y ago
This phone texting support hardware is tiny compared to the size and weight increase the v2 sats took on for their primary mission, broadband capacity, which went from from about 20 Gbps per bird in the v1 config to as much as (estimated) 80-100 Gbps per sat in this v2(mini) config. It was this increase that made the sats that much heavier and cut the total number per launch about in half.
mlindner 3y ago
The hardware for this, is as far as we know, not on any of the currently flying satellites. They were explicitly downsized to fit on Falcon 9 and thusly named "v2 mini". Most likely the major thing stripped off was the large folding antenna that would be required for cell phone signal. The move from 60 to 22 (or 21) satellites was to maximize the normal Starlink service on the satellites. (21 are on board when launched from the west coast and 22 are on board when launched from the east coast.)
- dotnet00 3y ago
  There was an article recently saying that they'd be testing the service in December [1]. I would've taken that to mean that the hardware is up there and just undergoing preparation, but this is SpaceX, they launch like every 4 days, I guess they very well can have not launched the ones with this functionality yet. [1] Can't find the one I had read, but this one published just a few minutes ago also mentions this https://cordcuttersnews.com/spacexs-starlink-is-looking-for-partners-to-offer-texts-calls-lte-data-from-space/ https://cordcuttersnews.com/spacexs-starlink-is-looking-for-...
  - mlindner 3y ago
    I’m not seeing your claim in that linked article unless I missed it. It talks about v2 satellites, which have yet to launch.

2bitencryption 3y ago

Is there any company even remotely close to competing with Starlink in the "global satellite ISP" space? I remember reading somewhere that literally most of the satellites orbiting earth are Starlink satellites. As in, more than half of all satellites are Starlink. Obviously that statistic does not mean they have a successful business, that there's enough of a market, etc etc. But one can imagine the types of services you can supply in just a few years to customers when you have by far the largest satellite constellation in the sky, with global coverage, and the ability to launch dozens of new satellites at low cost.

hnreport 3y ago
Is there any company even remotely close to competing with Starlink in the "global satellite ISP" space? No, or anything similar with SpaceX and Tesla But alas, I’m accused of being a Musk dick rider.
- meepmorp 3y ago
  > But alas, I’m accused of being a Musk dick rider. The fact that you feel compelled to add this unbidden disclaimer says more than the disclaimer itself.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dzhiurgis 3y ago
  Rivian, Lucid and Mercedes if you want to pay 3x for somewhat better build but somewhat worse software. I agree tho long term at lower end there’s just no way anyone can compete (except in cars of anti-software or anti-feature).
  - FireBeyond 3y ago

cozzyd 3y ago

Anybody know what bands they'll use? There must be FCC filings somewhere...

BlueThoughts 3y ago
If I recall correctly. At the initial announcement it was said that T-Mobile's nationwide 1900mhz license made this service possible.
inemesitaffia 3y ago
T-Mobile PCS I believe.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

kaycebasques 3y ago

What is the approximate value of Google's investment in SpaceX now? Would Google have to disclose if it bought more stake or sold any of its original stake? https://spacenews.com/google-spacex-investment-is-900-million/ https://spacenews.com/google-spacex-investment-is-900-millio... (disclosure: googler, just something I've been curious about and figured someone here would have more insight on)

mikeyouse 3y ago
It looks like they invested via convertible bonds -- you can see the appreciation via the "Non-Marketable Debt Securities" line in their financial statements. It was about $1b in 2015 after they made the investment - if you ignore other little sales/purchases, it had increased to $1.8 billion in 2017. They then note "During the year ended December 31, 2018, the terms of a non-marketable debt security were modified resulting in an unrealized $1.3 billion gain" and then the balance sheet shows a non-marketable equity security, so they must have converted at that point. The value increased by $4 billion in 2018 and another $3 billion in 2019 -- though both include other investments they'd made in private companies. By 2022, they had a total of $12 billion in unrealized gains in that category.. The majority of that is likely SpaceX so probably at minimum 10x'ed their investment?
- kaycebasques 3y ago
  Exactly the kind of analysis I was hoping for. Thank you very much.

carabiner 3y ago

Massive price drops on Garmin Inreach?

apitman 3y ago
This is the use case I'm most interested in replacing, ie emergency contact when out backpacking etc.
lxgr 3y ago
I believe the real threat here is to Verizon and AT&T in rural areas, if they actually make it work. And conversely, as Garmin I'd be more concerned about Apple than about Starlink/T-Mobile.

moffkalast 3y ago

So what they used to need a pizza sized phased array antenna that draws 10 Amps for is now possible with existing hardware? A bit impossible to believe unless there's a major caveat. I suppose it wouldn't be too hard to get the signal to the ground, but how can the satellites receive anything from the phone? Regardless, if this works then infinite range robotics with just a 4G modem is now possible. Anyone wanna fly a solar powered RC plane across the Atlantic? :P

stetrain 3y ago
The major caveat is extremely limited bandwidth. They are basically putting an LTE cell tower on the satellites. This can be used for very low-bandwidth applications, starting with just text messages. They are not providing 100MB+ broadband via this connection.
- moffkalast 3y ago
  Ah, so more like a LoRa level connection. Would still work for receiving telemetry and sending autopilot commands I guess. I would've thought that an LTE tower would have more throughput, but I suppose they might need far more error correction than usual?
  - stetrain 3y ago
    The website says text messages in 2024, voice and data starting in 2025, and IoT in 2026. So it seems they have had the same thought on the usefulness for remote telemetry data. I don't know a lot about LTE signals but given the distances to the satellite and wide coverage area each satellite is responsible for it makes sense that performance is significantly diminished compared to your local cell tower.
  - olyjohn 3y ago
    There's only a few thousand satellites up in orbit right now. Maybe 4000-5000? Half of them are on the other side of the planet at any given time... The service is already strained in a lot of areas. It's not gonna be easy to give bandwidth to another few million phones.

audessuscest 3y ago

does that mean internet in plane ?

everfree 3y ago
In the USA at least, it's not legal for a passenger of a plane to use cell radios at all. That's apart from the signal being blocked by the plane's metal hull unless perhaps you're holding your device up to a window. So at least for now, you're stuck with their overpriced wifi. https://travel.stackexchange.com/a/163104 https://travel.stackexchange.com/a/163104 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/22.925 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/22.925
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  > So at least for now, you're stuck with their overpriced wifi. Many/most flights on Delta offer free Wifi with a (free) Skymiles membership.
ianburrell 3y ago
Starlink has Aviation product for planes already. That gives internet in flight. The Direct to Cell gives tiny bandwidth, kilobytes per second. Not enough for normal Internet. Should be enough to text or call somebody.
mlindner 3y ago
Starlink already provides Aviation service. https://www.starlink.com/business/aviation https://www.starlink.com/business/aviation This is in the process of being installed by some airlines. https://newsroom.hawaiianairlines.com/releases/hawaiian-airlines-to-offer-free-high-speed-starlink-internet-connectivity-on-transpacific-fleet https://newsroom.hawaiianairlines.com/releases/hawaiian-airl...

carabiner 3y ago

Why is it just T-Mobile in the US? Is there something about that carrier that supports this service, or could Verizon get this capability too?

inemesitaffia 3y ago
Each company has a partner. The issue is the bands

blhack 3y ago

This is for very low bandwidth text communications when you're out in the country and can see the sky. Stuff like this has existed from companies like garmin for some time. This is very cool, though. Here is when this was announced: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzli-Ww26Qs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzli-Ww26Qs Pretty cool! Also kindof funny to see the TMobile CEO trying to hype people up and Elon sortof reigning it in.

colordrops 3y ago
The starlink website directly says "texting, calling, and browsing"
- blhack 3y ago
  I believe this is addressed in the video that I linked. There are very good compression algorithms to allow voice, and "browsing" means something akin to slow dialup. This is not something that could, for instance, replace your cell phone carrier. In the video at 21:00 Elon clarifies: 2-4 megabits per cell zone.
  - valianteffort 3y ago
    This is a service being provided by your carrier.
    - blhack 3y ago
      Sorry if that was confusing. I mean that for instance: tmobile will be adding this to their coverage map, but they're not getting rid of the towers, and the primary way your phone is communicating with the world is not going to be via starlink satellites.
  - Scoundreller 3y ago
    > browsing" means something akin to slow dialup. I mean, I fire up and use lynx from time to time for a couple newspapers and magazine. Beyond evading some paywalls, it also presents it the way I want it: a wall of text. “Slow dialup” to me is 2.4kbps. The HN crowd could get a lot done over a console.

LAC-Tech 3y ago

Is this as good as it appears? Is the answer to connectivity to every remote deployment of tech just "use starlink direct"?

inemesitaffia 3y ago
It's 2G performance
mlindner 3y ago
You don't get to beat physics just by being in orbit. Transmitting from a cell phone at a distance of 500km (in the best case) versus less than a dozen for a cell tower still makes things difficult. This will never be competitive with even moderately dense cell tower deployments. It does however put a global floor on cell service and stops the need to build cell towers in almost uninhabited deserts, or on every mountain top to reach every narrow valley in the mountains. Even mass produced, a "cell phone tower in space" is going to inherently be massively larger and more sensitive than a tower on Earth. It does however let providers/governments focus investment on where people are rather than needing to maintain very remote towers for the very few that use them.
- LAC-Tech 3y ago
  I'm curious then what the physical ceiling is to this global floor, in terms of latency and bandwidth.
  - mlindner 3y ago
    If cost is of no concern you could build a network of satellites with similar performance to what is available on the ground, the cost will be eye watering however and a waste compared to building it on Earth. The “floor” I reference is in terms of the crossover point in cost versus the alternative. I don’t know where that precisely will be given it depends on the internal proprietary costs of the businesses in question.

conjecTech 3y ago

Can anyone explain this from an RF/networking perspective? What frequencies does this operate at? How well matched are the antennas in most phones? How much more power are you using to be able to do this? What kind of modulation are you using for TX/RX?

mlindner 3y ago
> What frequencies does this operate at? That part is answered on the website: > Direct to Cell works with existing LTE phones wherever you can see the sky. No changes to hardware, firmware, or special apps are required, providing seamless access to text, voice, and data. It's also notable that this service isn't available yet, it starts (optimistically) sometime in 2024, probably very late 2024.
- theonlybutlet 3y ago
  I imagine that's done to not all existing satellites having eNodeB yet and waiting for their laser network to work to create additional capacity.
  - mlindner 3y ago
    Starlink’s laser network has been working for well over a year. There’s entire countries in Africa served only by the laser network.
    - theonlybutlet 3y ago
      Thank you for clarifying
ledauphin 3y ago
I'm particularly curious about TX - it's really impressive that a satellite would be able to pick out a signal coming from the tiny thing I'm holding in my hand.
- 3y ago

aeturnum 3y ago

This is exciting! My family has an off-the-grid cabin which has weak LTE service. Using Starlink is possible (and other people in the area use it) but the power demands are quite high. I was going to first try a 4g antenna hooked up to a local hotspot, but this might give us other options. It's a little unclear how it works from this info - hopefully they have a version that individuals can stand up if there's no network operator in their area.

darknavi 3y ago
This will give you _very_ low data speeds. Like 1-2Mbps on a good day. FWIW you can use Starlink with a DC power supply and under volt it to get pretty decent power draw.
- guntars 3y ago
  Tell us more about the DC supply option. I’m seeing ~50 W at the AC side which, while not a lot, does add up over time. Edit: https://boathackers.com/starlink/#:~:text=I'm%20very%20happy%20with,No%20inverter%20required https://boathackers.com/starlink/#:~:text=I'm%20very%20happy.... They are saying they are using about 25W after the conversion.
  - darknavi 3y ago
    What you linked is basically what I read before. A decent reduction in power usage!
- lxgr 3y ago
  I'd be very, very surprised if it got anything more than 1 kbps in the next couple of years. Very likely much less (think several seconds to send a single SMS-length message). That's how much Iridium and Globalstar (the two existing comparable LEO solutions) can do without large external antennas for current satellite messengers (Garmin InReach, SPOT, more recently Apple iPhones etc.) Actually using 1-2 Mbps will likely remain unaffordable for a while even once it becomes possible, given the cell sizes and frequencies involved. Starlink is much cheaper than that because it uses the Ka-band (which has tens to hundreds of times more bandwidth available for this application) and directional beams on both ends of the connection, vastly increasing spatial reuse.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

mrtksn 3y ago

Global connectivity is amazing but a part of me has this feeling of losing something. It will be no longer possible to be away from everything unless you seek it actively. Overall it’s a good thing but it still makes me sad in a particular way that I don’t have a word to describe it.

colordrops 3y ago
> It will be no longer possible to be away from everything unless you seek it actively This has already been the case for most people for decades. The change is a matter of degree rather than some new paradigm shift.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  There’s a difference between turning off your phone and going somewhere outside of the major population and have no option but be disconnected.
  - grecy 3y ago
    Just don't bring your phone. If you must for emergencies, bring it turned off locked away, and promise yourself you will only take it out in an emergency. But then you didn't need one for emergencies before it was possible, so I'd argue you still don't need one.
    - mrtksn 3y ago
      That would be irrational, the trick of going somewhere far away is that you rationalize it through something else and you don’t have the option to have the Internet or the phone. No one goes somewhere far away, explicitly for being disconnected, that’s an implicit goal. Otherwise, you can just turn off your phone do I have to leave it.
      - grecy 3y ago
        so, uh, I lived in the Yukon for 4 years and have spent months in the Arctic Circle and all over AK and Yukon. I drove from Alaska to Argentina, I drove right around Africa and I drove around Australia, including the world's most remote 4x4 track - 1,050 miles in ten days without seeing another person or vehicle. I, umm, know a thing or two about going remote without communications.

getcrunk 3y ago

Can someone eli5 how this works. Wouldn’t the phone expend a lot of power to transmit?

quenix 3y ago
I suppose the fact that it's LOS reduces the power requirements. There's really no way around it: they specifically stress that the UE is unmodified.
stevehawk 3y ago
transmitter doesn't need to be super powerful if the receiver is super sensitive
- lxgr 3y ago
  And/or if you can take a really long time to send your message. It’s ultimately a question of energy per bit.
- manquer 3y ago
  If commercial satellites can pick up individual cellphone signals and receive them with no modifications, the military would have this tech for years? Just listening on where devices are currently and the signal power strength (must be higher while calling/transmitting data) could be a major source of signal intelligence.
  - Palpatineli 3y ago
    Not necessarily, starlink satellite and receiver are the cutting edge technology. Raytheon may have this technology years ago in their skunkwork equivalent but the military never formally bought anything like that.
    - manquer 3y ago
      Military doesn't need same quality to monitor, Starlink needs to also transmit and receive data(albeit slow speed), a military sat would just need to listen for a signal and know active and possibly identify some characteristics which combined other data sources Signal Int will have access to could be used to uniquely identify. Starlink satellites are designed to be cheap(<$1M) and small in weight (~1,000Kg) and size(fit 20-60 in Falcon 9), and lot of the innovation is manufacturing at scale. I am skeptical they come anywhere close to purpose built military satellites which costs upwards of $300-$400M[1] and are much larger in weight (5,000Kg-10,000+) and size (use full fairing ) and fly DH, Atlas as well and lever vertical integration. Given what we know about KH-11s, Trump photo tweet, the tech in the donated mirrors etc Military seem generation ahead in production tech not just experimental ones. [1] There is some pork for sure in all government contracts, but not $299M worth.

frob 3y ago

[flagged]

inemesitaffia 3y ago
The blocker is starship. The tech isn't unique. There's two other competitors. They'll launch test sats subject to approval soonish.
- frob 3y ago
  Ahh, so the blocker is his companny lying to the feds about environmmental damanage and assessments. And I bet it will communicate with his "piece of shit"[0] solar shingles. He is a charlatan piping away an entrancing tune to many gullible fools. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/26/22404639/elon-musk-tesla-solar-roof-mistakes-cost-price-increase https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/26/22404639/elon-musk-tesla-...

m3kw9 3y ago

Take that traditional cell service provider! I hope starlink compete the heck out of them price wise

pavon 3y ago
They aren't offering service directly to consumers. This is a B2B service to cellphone carriers, the current ones are listed in the link.

Unfrozen0688 3y ago

Say what you will about Elon but man Starlink and Spacex really seem like amazing products!

thibran 3y ago

So we will have two providers in the near future: SpaceX and AST SpaceMobile

lxgr 3y ago
We already have many more existing satellite-to-mobile providers: - Iridium (partnership with Qualcomm) - Globalstar (my bet is that Apple will buy them before too long) - Skylo (using leased transponders on various existing GEO MSATs for 5G NTN; used by e.g. Bullit/“Motorola”) - Inmarsat (pretty clunky phones for now, but they own a lot of L-band spectrum and are apparently one of Skylo’s partners for 5G NTN) - Thuraya (regional only)

lxgr 3y ago

I'm very curious how this will work on a technical level. My estimate is that (at least initially) it won't be actual texting (i.e. SMS) – unmodified LTE and 5G seem way too verbose to be able to handle the constraints of a much higher number of devices per base station, combined with the significantly higher transmission delay and free space path loss. One of the IoT spinoff standards of LTE and 5G seem much more plausible candidates – they are built with very similar constraints (extremely low received signal strengths, many devices per base station etc.) and are already being successfully used for satellite applications. I've been testing one device using geostationary satellites myself. But that would require updates to both the baseband firmware and OS of current or future phones (if not entirely new basebands!), and at that point it's going to be very interesting to see whether Apple (accounting for a very large share of the US market) will play along with that or rather push their own (Globalstar-based) satellite solution.

tpmx 3y ago
unmodified LTE and 5G seem way too verbose to be able to handle the constraints of a much higher number of devices per base station That's a matter of pricing, isn't it? Also, won't this primarily be used where very few people roam? Otherwise they could just use the regular land-based LTE infra. Remember: SpaceX can't just magically offer cheaper mobile coverage globally; they don't own any rights to use 4G/5G frequency bands. These are typically very expensive. It makes a lot of sense for SpaceX to partner with mobile operators who own these rights but don't utilize them very well in sparsely inhabited areas.
- lxgr 3y ago
  > That's a matter of pricing, isn't it? Not necessarily: Users don't pay for signalling traffic. I could imagine even just rejecting attachment requests of thousands of roaming clients could easily saturate a single satellite cell. Existing mobile-to-satellite protocols are much more optimized in that regard (and limited in that there are simply not that many clients out there looking for signal).
  - tpmx 3y ago

altairprime 3y ago

CLECs in space~! Because, as the FCC is likely to realize, once SpaceX (a US company) is acting as a common carrier for other service provider networks, they will end up being required to carry at reasonable cost and without deprioritization anyone who wishes to do business upon their network with customers, under equitable terms to (in this case) T-Mobile and others — just like the old copper-line DSL networks of the nineties. Space is a limited resource and SpaceX’s exclusive network will ensure a regulatory climate that Elon will loathe, and I expect be compelled under telecom law to accept and obey. I can’t wait to see it. Happily, anyone could write the FCC and ask what their plans are regarding CLECs and SpaceX today — or, for example, ask questions like “Which US governing body regulates the SpaceX common carrier network?”. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/filing-informal-complaint https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/filing-informal-complai... is ready and waiting :)

lxgr 3y ago
That's an interesting point of view – is the same true for MVNOs today? That seems like a similar situation.
- vel0city 3y ago
  Yes, it's essentially these regulations that make MVNOs possible.
hcurtiss 3y ago
To the degree this magical technology is available today (or soon) because of the profit motive, I sincerely hope you’re wrong. I want the promise of fabulous reward to drive what was science fiction only a couple decades ago.
- altairprime 3y ago
  They’re already doing six carriers — the more money the merrier for SpaceX when all the rest sign up too!
  - 3y ago

layer8 3y ago

How many simultaneous users can this tech support? I.e. how does it scale? (Per satellite?) I’m also a little bit grossed out by all these competing satellite networks filling up LEO, and having to more or less continuously launch new satellites to replace the existing failing ones.

isykt 3y ago

Surveillance coming to every inch of the earth

phillipseamore 3y ago

Related from 6 months ago, "SpaceX based 4G/5G coverage coming to New Zealand": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35432008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35432008 The page then stated regarding LTE bandwidth: "We will provide 2-4mbps download or uplink per beam. [...] Each beam will cover a 50km diameter on the ground." [https://web.archive.org/web/20230402230610im_/https://content.vodafone.co.nz/dims4/default/4b4148d/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2356x746+0+0/resize/2021x640!/quality/100/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fvodafonenz-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fcd%2F9b%2F553927e3413f854658a4ed9c5457%2Fdk-apollo-timeline-with-text.jpg https://web.archive.org/web/20230402230610im_/https://conten...]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

danielovichdk 3y ago

[flagged]

brgormz 3y ago

Assuming reasonable affordability, when this becomes broadly available - would definitely use this as primary texting service in the backcountry but still bring Garmin Inreach Mini as back-up / emergency nav. The UI/UX for texting via Garmin's messenger app on iphone is very good...syncs contacts, etc. Limited to text vs. multimedia (assuming pictures would not be available until '25 via Starlink as part of 'data' launch?). As with all satellite services, connectivity comes/goes with Garmin - would expect the same for Starlink. A real gamechanger for emergency/SAR situations would be if one could enable the Starlink service from an iPhone _while_ in the backcountry vs. needing to set it up a priori...many people realize they wish they had an InReach once bad things occur. Don't imagine that is possible today.

34679 3y ago

"wherever you may be on land, lakes, or coastal waters" I wonder why the limitation to coastal waters? They've been cracking down on offshore sailors using Starlink with the RV/Roaming plan, too. By all accounts it worked fine, but SpaceX wants to charge significantly more for an offshore plan. It certainly can't be a congestion issue.

plussed_reader 3y ago
'Just good business'.
jdminhbg 3y ago
> It certainly can't be a congestion issue. There aren't any ground stations in the open ocean, so it all has to be routed between satellites to hop to one that has a connection to one. So it is a congestion issue.
- wmf 3y ago
  Direct-to-phone is so slow that it can't congest the lasers.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    It might well be a "dumb pipe" implementation (i.e. no regeneration and smart inter-satellite routing on the satellites), although Starlink does significantly mention an "onboard eNodeB modem", which sounds like it should be possible to forward that over the laser links.
    - dvdbloc 3y ago
      Have they incorporated the laser links into prod on their sats yet? I thought that they were launching sats with them yet hadn’t successfully routed traffic yet through them in prod which is why they have a limitation to near the coast.
      - 3y ago

Aerbil313 3y ago

All I got to say is if this is realized, this will be game changing in terms of geopolitics, intelligence and economics. They said they partnered with local telecom providers, but the thing is they ideally don't need to. I am not a member of a nation which is in very good relations with the nation of the company here (America), and for this sole reason I hate the centralization of power with progressing technology. Don't bother telling me X tech is actually decentralizing. Yes it probably is, yet please compare the modern world with 1000s to see the amount of centralization. In my country, in the case of a war, if Google Maps were to stop operating, many forms and a high percentage of the transportation and cargo delivery would grind to a halt. If Visa and Mastercard stop operating an even bigger chaos would immediately ensue. Thank God we at least own the internet infrastructure.

PaulHoule 3y ago

This is what “6G” wireless is like. Lack of coverage is holding back wireless applications more than anything else and it does not matter at all if any other attributes of performance improve if nothing is done about coverage. And this is the only way to do it unless people invent gravity wave, neutrino or axion radio.

ianburrell 3y ago
This is more like 1G wireless everywhere. That is what the experience will be like, texting, voice, and tiny amount of data.

jaflo 3y ago

Pretty cool that they are enforcing reciprocal access to all partners globally.

gigatexal 3y ago

Any word on cost?

nomilk 3y ago

Will this allow for mobile hotspotting? (using one's mobile as a source of internet for other devices e.g. laptop)

gsich 3y ago
Yes? This is not enforcable. There might be some heuristics like TTL is off by one to detect another NAT but this is not reliable.

bahmboo 3y ago

This looks like the end of the road for Swarm. They are a small cube sat company that provides occasionally connected data packet connectivity globally. Space X bought them in 2021. The cofounder is now one of the main leaders of direct to cell.

nelox 3y ago

Will this support SOS calling on mobile? e.g. If I’m with a non-partnered carrier and I dial 112, will I be connected to local emergency services?

acrophiliac 3y ago

Overuse of the SOS feature for non-emergency situations, and false activations are already taxing Search-and-Rescue organizations. Starlink will make this MUCH worse. (Source: Accidents in North American Mountaineering 2023)

fijiaarone 3y ago

If you have Starlink in a rural area, you’ll notice it always wants to point towards that one cell tower the distance. Starlink has always been primarily a high gain 4G/5G antenna.

inemesitaffia 3y ago
It's easy to buy the dish and measure the waveguides. Or get a spectrum analyzer.. There's Ku band phased array antennas that offer cell connectivity. Starlink isn't one of them

moneywoes 3y ago

is this a consumer product or b2b?

JoshTriplett 3y ago

I look forward to this eliminating the need for the ground station, too, and just connecting directly to the user's carrier wherever it is in the world. (Yes, there are politics involved there. That's part of why I look forward to that being bypassed.)

sroussey 3y ago

What’s the difference between this and https://lynk.world/ https://lynk.world/ or AST?

Palpatineli 3y ago
AST has one very large satellite, so it supports higher bandwidth for each device, giving them 18Mbps speed. Starlink satellites, even with gen 2, are smaller but more numerous. So while AST may support 40 simultanuous callers and sell the service to 40000 customers, starlink direct to cell gives you lower bandwidth but can support 40000 simulatnuous callers and sell to 4M people. (numbers are my best guesses)
- sroussey 3y ago
  So closer to Lynk then. Curious how that patent fight will work out.

pynchia 3y ago

That was tried before by Iridium (owned by Motorola). It was killed by local ground/mobile network operators based on unfair competition rules. In the end lots of countries demanded Iridium opened a local company and exchange. What makes Elon think he'll win this time?

wmf 3y ago
This time he's working with the telcos instead of against them.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

vikarti 3y ago

How it works with totally unmodified cellular hardware? I thought there are physical max limits on cell size and they were lower than LEO orbits. Could it in future allow for LTE speeds? Could it work in any place where regular starlink could?(assuming SpaceX ignores licensing rules for countries who says it's their territory/it's high seas/they got license). What about 911/112?

inemesitaffia 3y ago
Look up ASTS and Lynk
- vikarti 3y ago
  I thought they were still at "we could provide EDGE-like performance".
  - inemesitaffia 3y ago
    SpaceX is offering less

jerrygoyal 3y ago

I like the choice of simple language on the landing page.

grammers 3y ago

I'm doubtful whether it's a good idea to give a private company like Starlink so much power over our communication in general. Why should they have the satellites for such a network? Wouldn't it be better that something crucial as this is publicly owned? Just thinking about the incident when Starlink cut access for Ukraine in fear their use of Starlink might trigger an atomic war. Why should one business person be able to make such a decision?

snovv_crash 3y ago
I'm fairly sure if you took an AT&T branded cell tower repeater into a warzone the wouldn't be very keen on supporting it either.

digidong320 3y ago

Cool development!

oldbbsnickname 3y ago

T-Mobile is forcing all of it's unlimited data plan users to more expensive plans without a choice under the justification that it's part of the Sprint merger. The roaming charges in space are insane. ;)

Humphrey 3y ago

According to the Optus press release [1] this will a service Starlink sells to phone companies to extend their coverage. This is a big deal in Australia because 60% of the land mass still has no standard phone coverage. Telstra has the best rural phone coverage by far, so if you frequently go to the wilderness you use Telstra. If Starlink lives up to the promises, I suspect a lot of people will be switching from Telstra to Optus over the next few years. [1] https://www.optus.com.au/about/media-centre/media-releases/2023/07/together-optus-and-spacex-plan-to-cover-100-percent-of-australia https://www.optus.com.au/about/media-centre/media-releases/2...

Sporktacular 3y ago
Don't count on satellite voice working in areas under-served by GSM etc. 2-4 mbps for 2000 sqkm per beam isn't that much for many voice users.
- Humphrey 3y ago
  Yes, but most areas under-served by ground based networks have very few people - so it'll be interesting to see how it works out. Even fewer Optus customers.

Sporktacular 3y ago

Strong doubts about voice service being useful, assuming 2-4mbps per 50 km diameter spot. The point of cellular is frequency reuse. If your cell is huge that's one channel blocked for that entire area. You can't reuse the it within that area to serve more terminals with more bandwidth. So the system capacity will suck. Number of simultaneous voice users would be limited to the capacity of a single channel for 2000 sqkm. Don't hope for much.