4 ms·

Time for a Starlink backup then

by mgoetzke 2y ago

sunbum 2y ago
That's not how satellites work.
- ViewTrick1002 2y ago
  Starlink can act as a backup for the ground station utilizing the laser links.
  - chtitux 2y ago
    Maybe just use Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station. Starlink Ground Station Network is global, spread in many different countries and look more resilient than a single one.
    - tedivm 2y ago
      That would require replacing all the satellites with new ones capable of doing that, which doesn't seem feasible. Starlink also doesn't have great coverage of the polar regions.
      - cbeach 2y ago
        Starlink's laser system is already up and running. Back in January it was delivering over 42 petabytes per day: https://uk.pcmag.com/networking/150673/starlinks-laser-system-is-beaming-42-million-gb-of-data-per-day https://uk.pcmag.com/networking/150673/starlinks-laser-syste... “We're passing over terabits per second [of data] every day across 9,000 lasers,” SpaceX engineer Travis Brashears said today at SPIE Photonics West, an event in San Francisco focused on the latest advancements in optics and light. "We actually serve over lasers all of our users on Starlink at a given time in like a two-hour window.”
        tedivm 2y ago
        Again though, you can't do "Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station" unless all of the satellites support talking to Starlink, which they don't. That means they'd have to be replaced.
        cbeach 2y ago
        I feel like I'm missing something here. As I understand it, the Starlink network has a number of ground stations, and an active inter-satellite "mesh," thanks to laser links, which would allow it to route around the loss of one or more ground stations? (although obviously it requires at least one ground station to be live in order to access the non-Starlink-connected Internet) The lasers began being integrated between 2020 and 2021, so it's likely SpaceX has made decent progress equipping their network with this capability, although I can't find the latest figures for the proportion of satellites that have lasers. It sounds like there's something I'm missing if we can't do "Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station" Could you help me understand the limitation?
        tedivm 2y ago
        Do you understand what the problem trying to be solved is? There are satellites in orbit today that have nothing to do with Starlink. Some of these have been up for a long time. We're talking weather satellites and research satellites. The ones in a polar orbit can only use one of two ground stations to communicate back with the earth, simply due to their location. One of those ground stations has lost it's fiber optic connection so it can't be used at full bandwidth right now. None of that so far has anything to do with Starlink. We're talking about a system os satellites that already exists and predates Starlink sometimes by decades. The person that started this thread proposed: "Maybe just use Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station." In other words, have these already existing satellites integrate with the (relatively new) Starlink system. So they're saying that we somehow make those old satellites, which are already in orbit and have their own communication systems designed to interface with ground stations, somehow stop using the ground station and start using Starlink instead.
    - amarant 2y ago
      It's a good idea for future satellites, but upgrading existing satellites is probably not feasible. And these polar orbit satellite typically live a lot longer than the relatively short lived starlink satellites, potentially opening you to a (perhaps unlikely?) scenario where starlink moves to new and incompatible hardware for inter-satellite communications, and your satellite is then made obsolete. Vertical integration is not cheap, but it does have it's upsides.
partomniscient 2y ago
Its the groundstation that needs backing up and the location is surrounded by the sea.
- ViewTrick1002 2y ago
  Which Starlink solves utilizing the laser links between satellites.
  - tedivm 2y ago
    You're grossly underestimating the bandwidth needs of the site. You're not going to replace a cluster of fiber optic cables with Starlink.
    - inemesitaffia 2y ago
      10 Gbps in Ka and 100 in E band
    - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
      We're talking backup vs. primary. Of course the backup is not going to be as good.
      - tedivm 2y ago
        Starlink has an upload speed between 5 and 20 Mbps. The Svalbard cable is a 10Gbps link. It's still a major difference. That said apparently they do have a satellite backup, just not through Starlink.
        ViewTrick1002 2y ago
        For a consumer grade connection. Why on earth would an enterprise contract be limited to those speeds??
      - sandworm101 2y ago
        >> We're talking backup vs. primary. Of course the backup is not going to be as good. Then it isn't really a backup. A lower-bandwidth failover capacity is properly described as an alternative or degraded pathway. To be a proper "backup" a thing has to actually do the primary job at least temporarily.
onnimonni 2y ago
You can look at the https://satellitemap.space/ https://satellitemap.space/ to see that starlink isn't (yet) too feasible in the northern/arctic areas. Even in the Nordic countries the connections are not that great.
red-iron-pine 2y ago
definitely not. volumes just aren't there and Elon Musk is openly in bed with dubious characters.

Time for a Starlink backup then

sunbum 2y ago

That's not how satellites work.

ViewTrick1002 2y ago
Starlink can act as a backup for the ground station utilizing the laser links.
- chtitux 2y ago
  Maybe just use Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station. Starlink Ground Station Network is global, spread in many different countries and look more resilient than a single one.
  - tedivm 2y ago
    That would require replacing all the satellites with new ones capable of doing that, which doesn't seem feasible. Starlink also doesn't have great coverage of the polar regions.
    - cbeach 2y ago
      Starlink's laser system is already up and running. Back in January it was delivering over 42 petabytes per day: https://uk.pcmag.com/networking/150673/starlinks-laser-system-is-beaming-42-million-gb-of-data-per-day https://uk.pcmag.com/networking/150673/starlinks-laser-syste... “We're passing over terabits per second [of data] every day across 9,000 lasers,” SpaceX engineer Travis Brashears said today at SPIE Photonics West, an event in San Francisco focused on the latest advancements in optics and light. "We actually serve over lasers all of our users on Starlink at a given time in like a two-hour window.”
      - tedivm 2y ago
        Again though, you can't do "Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station" unless all of the satellites support talking to Starlink, which they don't. That means they'd have to be replaced.
        cbeach 2y ago
        I feel like I'm missing something here. As I understand it, the Starlink network has a number of ground stations, and an active inter-satellite "mesh," thanks to laser links, which would allow it to route around the loss of one or more ground stations? (although obviously it requires at least one ground station to be live in order to access the non-Starlink-connected Internet) The lasers began being integrated between 2020 and 2021, so it's likely SpaceX has made decent progress equipping their network with this capability, although I can't find the latest figures for the proportion of satellites that have lasers. It sounds like there's something I'm missing if we can't do "Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station" Could you help me understand the limitation?
        tedivm 2y ago
        Do you understand what the problem trying to be solved is? There are satellites in orbit today that have nothing to do with Starlink. Some of these have been up for a long time. We're talking weather satellites and research satellites. The ones in a polar orbit can only use one of two ground stations to communicate back with the earth, simply due to their location. One of those ground stations has lost it's fiber optic connection so it can't be used at full bandwidth right now. None of that so far has anything to do with Starlink. We're talking about a system os satellites that already exists and predates Starlink sometimes by decades. The person that started this thread proposed: "Maybe just use Starlink from the satellites, so we don't rely on a specific ground station." In other words, have these already existing satellites integrate with the (relatively new) Starlink system. So they're saying that we somehow make those old satellites, which are already in orbit and have their own communication systems designed to interface with ground stations, somehow stop using the ground station and start using Starlink instead.
  - amarant 2y ago
    It's a good idea for future satellites, but upgrading existing satellites is probably not feasible. And these polar orbit satellite typically live a lot longer than the relatively short lived starlink satellites, potentially opening you to a (perhaps unlikely?) scenario where starlink moves to new and incompatible hardware for inter-satellite communications, and your satellite is then made obsolete. Vertical integration is not cheap, but it does have it's upsides.

partomniscient 2y ago

Its the groundstation that needs backing up and the location is surrounded by the sea.

ViewTrick1002 2y ago
Which Starlink solves utilizing the laser links between satellites.
- tedivm 2y ago
  You're grossly underestimating the bandwidth needs of the site. You're not going to replace a cluster of fiber optic cables with Starlink.
  - inemesitaffia 2y ago
    10 Gbps in Ka and 100 in E band
  - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
    We're talking backup vs. primary. Of course the backup is not going to be as good.
    - tedivm 2y ago
      Starlink has an upload speed between 5 and 20 Mbps. The Svalbard cable is a 10Gbps link. It's still a major difference. That said apparently they do have a satellite backup, just not through Starlink.
      - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
        For a consumer grade connection. Why on earth would an enterprise contract be limited to those speeds??
    - sandworm101 2y ago
      >> We're talking backup vs. primary. Of course the backup is not going to be as good. Then it isn't really a backup. A lower-bandwidth failover capacity is properly described as an alternative or degraded pathway. To be a proper "backup" a thing has to actually do the primary job at least temporarily.

onnimonni 2y ago

You can look at the https://satellitemap.space/ https://satellitemap.space/ to see that starlink isn't (yet) too feasible in the northern/arctic areas. Even in the Nordic countries the connections are not that great.

red-iron-pine 2y ago

definitely not. volumes just aren't there and Elon Musk is openly in bed with dubious characters.