3 ms·
Starlink is better in this regard now. First, the ground station density in the US is really quite good and you're likely to be able to hit a single up/down pat
by dgacmu 2y ago
Starlink is better in this regard now. First, the ground station density in the US is really quite good and you're likely to be able to hit a single up/down path through most emergencies. And, second, over the last year they've turned on a lot of inter-satellite links (ISLs). The ISLs have a huge effect on reach -- you can now have a sat terminal in parts of eastern Africa and reach the ground station in Lagos, for example.
(No affiliation with them; I'm working with a Ph.D. student studying this question.)
I'd say that one advantage of ham is that you can operate it on much lower power equipment still - there's no such thing as a starlink HT yet, although we're starting to get close with cell phones with emergency satellite messaging. But starlink has a bandwidth advantage if you need to send photos or tunnel cell. Different capabilities - it's good to have both!
AC3ME
- mikece 2y ago"...there's no such thing as a starlink HT yet..." The FCC just gave emergency authorization for Starlink to enable direct-to-satellite service for T-Mobile customers in western North Carolina. It's my understanding that this is what Starlink was planning on releasing but they are doing a live beta right now. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/fcc-lets-starlink-provide-service-to-cell-phones-in-areas-hit-by-hurricane/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/fcc-lets-starlin...
- hilbert42 2y agoAny comparison between Amateur Radio and commercial communication services serves little point, it's like comparing apples and oranges. It's been thus since the early 1930s when commercial shortwave services became commonplace. Amateur Radio operators are a unique cliquey bunch with practices not easily understood by those who aren't inculcated into the culture.