3 ms·
> Matching Starlink’s 40,000 would take “a couple of months, not years.” Wow, that's faster than I would have expected. Good thing in this case!
by palata 2y ago
> Matching Starlink’s 40,000 would take “a couple of months, not years.”
Wow, that's faster than I would have expected. Good thing in this case!
- raverbashing 2y agoI think matching in coverage, not necessarily matching in the same LEO scheme as Starlink
- friseurtermin 2y agoThe article phrases this weirdly, but they are talking about the 40,000 Starlink terminals in Ukraine that Eutelsat is trying to match, not about LEO satellites.
- _fizz_buzz_ 2y agoEutelsat's oneweb subsidary currently has something over 500 satellites in LEO orbit. I think starlink has over 7000. I don't know much about all of this, but I assume if it just about covering ukraine they won't have to match the 7000 starlink satellites. The whole situation might open a opportunity for oneweb to catch up with starlink.
- ninalanyon 2y agoThe number refers to the ground terminals not satellites.
- mlindner 2y agoEutelsat already has global coverage. So coverage is also the wrong word to use.
- mlindner 2y agoThe CEO is blatantly lying to you at a level that I would call securities fraud. First off the basic facts are wrong, SpaceX has just over 7000 satellites, not 40,000. Secondly it is physically impossible to launch even 7000 satellites within a few months, even for SpaceX. The satellites do not exist and would need to be built which takes over a year at a minimum. Europe launches rockets into space a couple times a year and you can only launch around a dozen or two satellites per launch. That means just to reach 7000 satellites, assuming 20 per launch and a generous 10 launches per year is over 3.5 years to launch all those satellites. Edit: The problem appears to be with the low quality terminology. It is using the word "satellites" to refer to ground terminals. Ground terminals are not "satellites". It is still incorrect however as Eutelsat doesn't have the bandwidth required to serve what SpaceX is providing to Ukraine. They can provide a backup, but it will be significantly degraded versus what Ukraine already uses.
- argsnd 2y agoThey’re not lying you’re just not reading. They’re talking about terminals on the ground.
- porridgeraisin 2y ago> low quality terminology What? The article never used satellite to refer to ground terminals. They used the word terminals.
- yencabulator 2y agoThe byline does say "to get as many satellites into Ukraine as [...]", which doesn't sound pleasant.