7 ms·

SpaceX Has Launched Starlink's First Direct-to-Smartphone Satellites

42 points by srirangr 3y ago

Sporktacular 3y ago
Sounds (and is) cool, but it breaks the whole concept of cellular, severely limiting system capacity. Hard to see it scaling up to provide voice for many simultaneous users.
jakozaur 3y ago
Satellite to smartphone can cover gaps in rural areas, but unlikely to be high bandwidth or support many users.
Podgajski 3y ago
I wonder if they did any SAR level testing on those phones. I mean I’m sure that cell phone has to use a lot of power to transmit to a satellite and I know from FCC regulations you can’t be closer than 11 inches from a stink dish when it’s in operation. I know the two are not the same just to comparison. Of power.
- thejohnconway 3y ago
  Stink dish? I feel this comment may need a little editing for clarity!
  - Podgajski 3y ago
    Startink, stink..What’s the difference? :)
- pmontra 3y ago
  According to https://direct.starlink.com/ https://direct.starlink.com/ they are unmodified phones. I guess that the battery drain will be huge. I don't know how low those satellites will fly but the satellite to phone distance should be in the hundreds of km, not single digit km at most like we usually do.
  - Podgajski 3y ago
    So that this makes me think well, how strong and how much power is in the downlink and is that too much EMF exposure?
    - CyberDildonics 3y ago
      Wait until you find out how much exposure you get by being outside in the sunlight surrounded by cell phone towers.
    - pmontra 3y ago
      Communication is bidirectional so there is no need for the downlink to be more powerful than the uplink: the phone must be able to send data to the satellite using its own antenna and battery. However in theory a more powerful downlink could send data down to the phone faster than the phone sends it up to the satellite.
    - lxgr 3y ago
      A really powerful satellite has a power supply of about 1 kilowatt. Assuming perfectly efficient antennas and a single spot beam with a diameter of about 300 kilometers (realistically, it's going to project dozens of these for a total of several thousand kilometers, but let's stick with the worst case here), that's an area of about 200 000 square kilometers to cover with that one kilowatt, i.e. 5 milliwatt per square kilometer. This is roughly the same amount of maximum EM radiation emitted by a single AirPod – now spread that over one square kilometer. Compare that with a regular LTE or 5G cell with a cell radius of at absolute best 30 kilometers (but often much, much less, e.g. 1 kilometer) and an unusually high EIRP of 50 watt, and you get 17 milliwatt per square kilometer. Or take an AM radio station: These transmit with 50 kilowatt and are much closer to people, sometimes located on rooftops in densely populated cities. Realistically, what arrives down on earth is probably still a few orders of magnitude less than that and just at the edge of the noise threshhold for the phone. It's not exactly a beam weapon.
- wkat4242 3y ago
  The phones are normal phones but it's very likely they will be transmitting at their maximum power. Which is the power they're already being tested for. However because it's only for texting for now, you won't be holding it too close to your head. And it will transmit for only a fraction of a second. Because radio energy drops really fast with distance it won't be a problem and will in fact be better than when you're having a phone call in bad coverage.
asmnzxklopqw 3y ago
It seems like a very expensive solution for a problem that was mostly solved 15 years ago
- simondotau 3y ago
  Being able to send an SMS from deep in the Amazon or from Antarctica wasn’t “mostly solved 15 years ago”
  - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
    Inmarsat has been offering that since at least 2008.
    - inglor_cz 3y ago
      Isn't an Inmarsat phone with antenna, like, 8x heavier and 4x more expensive than a not-very-fancy 5G smartphone? A SMS limited to 160 characters for half a dollar? Standard 5G is a lot more efficient. The difference seems to me at least the same as between a steam train and an electric train.
teleforce 3y ago
Apparently it does not support the non-terrestrial networks (NTN) 5G standards [1],[2]. Perhaps it is not a bad thing since 5G phones with NTN capability are just being released but this will make it not future proof. Since it is not Starlink main business of providing satellite cellular services, it should be fine. [1] Starlink indicates its satellite-to-phone service will drop next year: https://www.telecoms.com/telecoms-infrastructure/starlink-indicates-its-satellite-to-phone-service-will-drop-next-year https://www.telecoms.com/telecoms-infrastructure/starlink-in... [2] Connecting the world with 5G NTN: https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/se/solutions/test-and-measurement/wireless-communication/cellular-standards/5g-test-and-measurement/non-terrestrial-networks-ntn-/non-terrestrial-networks-ntn-_256719.html https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/se/solutions/test-and-measurem...
- dotnet00 3y ago
  With the way the constellation works (needing regular replenishment of satellites as they deorbit every 5 years or so), not currently supporting NTN isn't a big deal. If it sufficiently catches on, the satellites being launched will be given the necessary upgrades and over time the entire constellation will end up with the necessary upgrades.
limaoscarjuliet 3y ago
Most folks commenting seem to miss the fact this is for text messages only, and likely "emergency" ones, i.e. rate limited, at that. This would not result in power drain during normal LTE operation, but - my guess - would instead check with the satellite to send/recv txt messages every now and then AND only when not in LTE coverage.
throw0101d 3y ago
Meta: the Slashdot article points to: * https://spacenews.com/spacex-deploys-direct-to-smartphone-satellites-in-first-launch-of-2024/ https://spacenews.com/spacex-deploys-direct-to-smartphone-sa... Perhaps that would be a better link.
chewmieser 3y ago
To clarify for those that may have missed it - These satellites mimic 5G so most existing 5G phones should be compatible without additional hardware. The beams are REALLY low bandwidth (7MB per beam and the beams are “very big”), and that bandwidth is shared with the whole beam. You will only use this for emergencies, at least for now. The point will be to expand coverage in areas that it may be difficult to add coverage. It won’t replace or augment regular towers. It will only allow texting later this year, and they expect to scale up to voice and data next year as well as IOT - whatever that means since they broke it out separately.
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  For IOT think swarm technologies.
- Y_Y 3y ago
  IoT is when your fridge knows your eating habits and credit card number and autonomously shares that information with interested third parties.
  - Gare 3y ago
    Or it might be some solar powered sensor deep in the forest detecting trees falling down.
    - conover 3y ago
      The sound aspect of the simulation of reality is going to take up a lot more cycles if we’re going to be hearing every tree that falls in the forest…
      - sph 3y ago
        The thing is we're in the simulation as well, so we wouldn't notice any slowdown of the "host" machine itself. But yeah, maybe it'll start consuming so much energy our alien gods will just shut our universe down. Thanks, Elon.
tambourine_man 3y ago
Weird to see a link to Slashdot these days. My immediate reaction is that it's either a historical article or news they're shutting down. I used to read it daily, much like HN.
- bicx 3y ago
  I liked Slashdot’s comment rating system. More expressive than a simple upvote or downvote.
rightbyte 3y ago
Can this be used to triangulate my phone from space? Like, can roaming towers be used for triangulation of a specific phone?
- Gare 3y ago
  I would not be surprised that advanced nation-state space SIGINT has that capability for quite some time.
  - jorvi 3y ago
    5G is a godsend for them because it requires many small cells. On the other hand, that also enhances the accuracy of things like GPS. I feel like if you combine Galileo + 5G + WiFi sourcing you might get ridiculously accurate.
    - alphabettsy 3y ago
      That’s specific to mmWave though right?
    - vel0city 3y ago
      5G can (and usually does) run on practically the same frequencies, the same towers, the same grid sizes that LTE operates on. Phones have been using tower location for more accurate and rapid location for decades. Some of the first standards came in 3G networks.
      - jorvi 3y ago
        I am aware of A-GPS. And the providers in my country have complained about having to place many more towers for 5G, so yeah. It’s very easy to follow the logic - denser cells allow for more accurate triangulation.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    [dead]
  - 3y ago
amm 3y ago
Cool stuff, but it sure looks like they shipped a premature version asap to front-run the competition. AST SpaceMobile is getting ready for commercial ops this year with „full broadband“ 5G satellites. For the record, I am not affiliated with them. I just need that kind of service desperately.
- atq2119 3y ago
  Perhaps. The awesome part is the launch capabilities that allow them to do that.
orbisvicis 3y ago
As I'm reminded, ASTS is far ahead in this area. https://twitter.com/AST_SpaceMobile/status/1743421561422430357 https://twitter.com/AST_SpaceMobile/status/17434215614224303...
- HALtheWise 3y ago
  As I see it, ASTS is perhaps ahead on the antenna technology demonstration, and SpaceX is definitely ahead on deployment at scale (i.e. SpaceX launched six satellites just now, ASTS has launched one afaik). Which of those metrics is "more important" isn't clear to me, but I suspect SpaceX has the overall velocity advantage. One thing I don't know is how the size of the relevant satellites compares. If ASTS is getting twice the bandwidth from a comparable size satellite, that's impressive. If their satellite is an order of magnitude larger than a Starlink sat that'll be an issue.
  - orbisvicis 3y ago
    I was speaking technologically. Both Starlink and ASTS satellites are technological demonstrations so I would argue only the technology matters. Since ASTS plans to launch using SpaceX and manufacture through 3rd-party contracts I don't believe Starlink's existing constellation provides any benefits; rather the competition will come down to funding and manufacturing expertise. The 6-1 satellite advantage doesn't necessarily favor Starlink. BlueWalker 3 was launched 15 months before Starlink's first mobile communications satellite and was itself preceded 5 months by BlueWalker 1. However the six Starlink v2-Mini-D2D satellites feature inter-satellite links, so that is a point in favor of Starlink. BlueWalker will be succeeded by five commercial satellites called BlueBirds which are currently under construction. As for technology, I can't find any information about the Starlink direct-to-cell satellites. As far as I can tell they haven't been even given NORAD IDs yet.The entire Jan 2 Group 7-9 launch seems to be classified as 58699/Object-A. Given that the launch lifted 21 rather than the standard 22 satellites we can assume the new design is similar to the Starlink v2-Mini in size and weight - perhaps only 125 kg heavier. This suggest the efficiency/weight ratio favors Starlink. Starlink v2-Mini weighs 800 kg edit: better sources: starlink v2-mini: * antenna array: 11.07 m2 * solar array: 104.96 m2 * magnitude: +7.87 +- 0.09 (mean, distance-adjusted) * weight: ~800 kg starlink v2-mini d2d: * antenna array: 19.98 m2 (1?) * solar array: ? * magnitude: ? * weight: ~970 kg * mobile bandwidth: "~7Mb / beam" (40-100km radius) bluewalker 3: * antenna array: 64 m2 (front side) * solar array: 64 m2 (back side) * magnitude: +3.09 +- 0.04 (mean, distance-adjusted) * weight: ~1500 kg (redacted?) * mobile bandwidth: "14 Mbps" (2) 1. I don't have access to the FCC filings so I multiplied the new bus length by the old width. 2. Per-beam, I assume. From what I gather satellite mass is more correlated with coverage (number of beams) rather than beam efficiency. For the moment, ASTS antennas are just better ($/bandwidth not published). And the new BlueBird satellites are going to be horribly massive and horribly bright compared to BlueWalker-3. P.S. Anyone know what BlueWalker-3-deb represents?
ChrisArchitect 3y ago
[dupe] Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38856845 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38856845

42 points by srirangr 3y ago

Sounds (and is) cool, but it breaks the whole concept of cellular, severely limiting system capacity. Hard to see it scaling up to provide voice for many simultaneous users.

jakozaur 3y ago

Satellite to smartphone can cover gaps in rural areas, but unlikely to be high bandwidth or support many users.

Podgajski 3y ago

I wonder if they did any SAR level testing on those phones. I mean I’m sure that cell phone has to use a lot of power to transmit to a satellite and I know from FCC regulations you can’t be closer than 11 inches from a stink dish when it’s in operation. I know the two are not the same just to comparison. Of power.

thejohnconway 3y ago
Stink dish? I feel this comment may need a little editing for clarity!
- Podgajski 3y ago
  Startink, stink..What’s the difference? :)
pmontra 3y ago
According to https://direct.starlink.com/ https://direct.starlink.com/ they are unmodified phones. I guess that the battery drain will be huge. I don't know how low those satellites will fly but the satellite to phone distance should be in the hundreds of km, not single digit km at most like we usually do.
- Podgajski 3y ago
  So that this makes me think well, how strong and how much power is in the downlink and is that too much EMF exposure?
  - CyberDildonics 3y ago
    Wait until you find out how much exposure you get by being outside in the sunlight surrounded by cell phone towers.
  - pmontra 3y ago
    Communication is bidirectional so there is no need for the downlink to be more powerful than the uplink: the phone must be able to send data to the satellite using its own antenna and battery. However in theory a more powerful downlink could send data down to the phone faster than the phone sends it up to the satellite.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    A really powerful satellite has a power supply of about 1 kilowatt. Assuming perfectly efficient antennas and a single spot beam with a diameter of about 300 kilometers (realistically, it's going to project dozens of these for a total of several thousand kilometers, but let's stick with the worst case here), that's an area of about 200 000 square kilometers to cover with that one kilowatt, i.e. 5 milliwatt per square kilometer. This is roughly the same amount of maximum EM radiation emitted by a single AirPod – now spread that over one square kilometer. Compare that with a regular LTE or 5G cell with a cell radius of at absolute best 30 kilometers (but often much, much less, e.g. 1 kilometer) and an unusually high EIRP of 50 watt, and you get 17 milliwatt per square kilometer. Or take an AM radio station: These transmit with 50 kilowatt and are much closer to people, sometimes located on rooftops in densely populated cities. Realistically, what arrives down on earth is probably still a few orders of magnitude less than that and just at the edge of the noise threshhold for the phone. It's not exactly a beam weapon.
wkat4242 3y ago
The phones are normal phones but it's very likely they will be transmitting at their maximum power. Which is the power they're already being tested for. However because it's only for texting for now, you won't be holding it too close to your head. And it will transmit for only a fraction of a second. Because radio energy drops really fast with distance it won't be a problem and will in fact be better than when you're having a phone call in bad coverage.

asmnzxklopqw 3y ago

It seems like a very expensive solution for a problem that was mostly solved 15 years ago

simondotau 3y ago
Being able to send an SMS from deep in the Amazon or from Antarctica wasn’t “mostly solved 15 years ago”
- TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
  Inmarsat has been offering that since at least 2008.
  - inglor_cz 3y ago
    Isn't an Inmarsat phone with antenna, like, 8x heavier and 4x more expensive than a not-very-fancy 5G smartphone? A SMS limited to 160 characters for half a dollar? Standard 5G is a lot more efficient. The difference seems to me at least the same as between a steam train and an electric train.

teleforce 3y ago

Apparently it does not support the non-terrestrial networks (NTN) 5G standards [1],[2]. Perhaps it is not a bad thing since 5G phones with NTN capability are just being released but this will make it not future proof. Since it is not Starlink main business of providing satellite cellular services, it should be fine. [1] Starlink indicates its satellite-to-phone service will drop next year: https://www.telecoms.com/telecoms-infrastructure/starlink-indicates-its-satellite-to-phone-service-will-drop-next-year https://www.telecoms.com/telecoms-infrastructure/starlink-in... [2] Connecting the world with 5G NTN: https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/se/solutions/test-and-measurement/wireless-communication/cellular-standards/5g-test-and-measurement/non-terrestrial-networks-ntn-/non-terrestrial-networks-ntn-_256719.html https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/se/solutions/test-and-measurem...

dotnet00 3y ago
With the way the constellation works (needing regular replenishment of satellites as they deorbit every 5 years or so), not currently supporting NTN isn't a big deal. If it sufficiently catches on, the satellites being launched will be given the necessary upgrades and over time the entire constellation will end up with the necessary upgrades.

limaoscarjuliet 3y ago

Most folks commenting seem to miss the fact this is for text messages only, and likely "emergency" ones, i.e. rate limited, at that. This would not result in power drain during normal LTE operation, but - my guess - would instead check with the satellite to send/recv txt messages every now and then AND only when not in LTE coverage.

throw0101d 3y ago

Meta: the Slashdot article points to: * https://spacenews.com/spacex-deploys-direct-to-smartphone-satellites-in-first-launch-of-2024/ https://spacenews.com/spacex-deploys-direct-to-smartphone-sa... Perhaps that would be a better link.

chewmieser 3y ago

To clarify for those that may have missed it - These satellites mimic 5G so most existing 5G phones should be compatible without additional hardware. The beams are REALLY low bandwidth (7MB per beam and the beams are “very big”), and that bandwidth is shared with the whole beam. You will only use this for emergencies, at least for now. The point will be to expand coverage in areas that it may be difficult to add coverage. It won’t replace or augment regular towers. It will only allow texting later this year, and they expect to scale up to voice and data next year as well as IOT - whatever that means since they broke it out separately.

inemesitaffia 3y ago
For IOT think swarm technologies.
Y_Y 3y ago
IoT is when your fridge knows your eating habits and credit card number and autonomously shares that information with interested third parties.
- Gare 3y ago
  Or it might be some solar powered sensor deep in the forest detecting trees falling down.
  - conover 3y ago
    The sound aspect of the simulation of reality is going to take up a lot more cycles if we’re going to be hearing every tree that falls in the forest…
    - sph 3y ago
      The thing is we're in the simulation as well, so we wouldn't notice any slowdown of the "host" machine itself. But yeah, maybe it'll start consuming so much energy our alien gods will just shut our universe down. Thanks, Elon.

tambourine_man 3y ago

Weird to see a link to Slashdot these days. My immediate reaction is that it's either a historical article or news they're shutting down. I used to read it daily, much like HN.

bicx 3y ago
I liked Slashdot’s comment rating system. More expressive than a simple upvote or downvote.

rightbyte 3y ago

Can this be used to triangulate my phone from space? Like, can roaming towers be used for triangulation of a specific phone?

Gare 3y ago
I would not be surprised that advanced nation-state space SIGINT has that capability for quite some time.
- jorvi 3y ago
  5G is a godsend for them because it requires many small cells. On the other hand, that also enhances the accuracy of things like GPS. I feel like if you combine Galileo + 5G + WiFi sourcing you might get ridiculously accurate.
  - alphabettsy 3y ago
    That’s specific to mmWave though right?
  - vel0city 3y ago
    5G can (and usually does) run on practically the same frequencies, the same towers, the same grid sizes that LTE operates on. Phones have been using tower location for more accurate and rapid location for decades. Some of the first standards came in 3G networks.
    - jorvi 3y ago
      I am aware of A-GPS. And the providers in my country have complained about having to place many more towers for 5G, so yeah. It’s very easy to follow the logic - denser cells allow for more accurate triangulation.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  [dead]
- 3y ago

amm 3y ago

Cool stuff, but it sure looks like they shipped a premature version asap to front-run the competition. AST SpaceMobile is getting ready for commercial ops this year with „full broadband“ 5G satellites. For the record, I am not affiliated with them. I just need that kind of service desperately.

atq2119 3y ago
Perhaps. The awesome part is the launch capabilities that allow them to do that.

orbisvicis 3y ago

As I'm reminded, ASTS is far ahead in this area. https://twitter.com/AST_SpaceMobile/status/1743421561422430357 https://twitter.com/AST_SpaceMobile/status/17434215614224303...

HALtheWise 3y ago
As I see it, ASTS is perhaps ahead on the antenna technology demonstration, and SpaceX is definitely ahead on deployment at scale (i.e. SpaceX launched six satellites just now, ASTS has launched one afaik). Which of those metrics is "more important" isn't clear to me, but I suspect SpaceX has the overall velocity advantage. One thing I don't know is how the size of the relevant satellites compares. If ASTS is getting twice the bandwidth from a comparable size satellite, that's impressive. If their satellite is an order of magnitude larger than a Starlink sat that'll be an issue.
- orbisvicis 3y ago
  I was speaking technologically. Both Starlink and ASTS satellites are technological demonstrations so I would argue only the technology matters. Since ASTS plans to launch using SpaceX and manufacture through 3rd-party contracts I don't believe Starlink's existing constellation provides any benefits; rather the competition will come down to funding and manufacturing expertise. The 6-1 satellite advantage doesn't necessarily favor Starlink. BlueWalker 3 was launched 15 months before Starlink's first mobile communications satellite and was itself preceded 5 months by BlueWalker 1. However the six Starlink v2-Mini-D2D satellites feature inter-satellite links, so that is a point in favor of Starlink. BlueWalker will be succeeded by five commercial satellites called BlueBirds which are currently under construction. As for technology, I can't find any information about the Starlink direct-to-cell satellites. As far as I can tell they haven't been even given NORAD IDs yet.The entire Jan 2 Group 7-9 launch seems to be classified as 58699/Object-A. Given that the launch lifted 21 rather than the standard 22 satellites we can assume the new design is similar to the Starlink v2-Mini in size and weight - perhaps only 125 kg heavier. This suggest the efficiency/weight ratio favors Starlink. Starlink v2-Mini weighs 800 kg edit: better sources: starlink v2-mini: * antenna array: 11.07 m2 * solar array: 104.96 m2 * magnitude: +7.87 +- 0.09 (mean, distance-adjusted) * weight: ~800 kg starlink v2-mini d2d: * antenna array: 19.98 m2 (1?) * solar array: ? * magnitude: ? * weight: ~970 kg * mobile bandwidth: "~7Mb / beam" (40-100km radius) bluewalker 3: * antenna array: 64 m2 (front side) * solar array: 64 m2 (back side) * magnitude: +3.09 +- 0.04 (mean, distance-adjusted) * weight: ~1500 kg (redacted?) * mobile bandwidth: "14 Mbps" (2) 1. I don't have access to the FCC filings so I multiplied the new bus length by the old width. 2. Per-beam, I assume. From what I gather satellite mass is more correlated with coverage (number of beams) rather than beam efficiency. For the moment, ASTS antennas are just better ($/bandwidth not published). And the new BlueBird satellites are going to be horribly massive and horribly bright compared to BlueWalker-3. P.S. Anyone know what BlueWalker-3-deb represents?

ChrisArchitect 3y ago

[dupe] Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38856845 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38856845