7 ms·

I've been a pretty harsh critic of Starlink. I don't think it's going to compete well against terrestrial wireless links, specifically 5G FWA. But if they can a

by Zigurd 1y ago

I've been a pretty harsh critic of Starlink. I don't think it's going to compete well against terrestrial wireless links, specifically 5G FWA. But if they can actually do something interesting with distributed SAR in a large constellation, that's one of those national security breakthroughs that's worth every penny.

stuff4ben 1y ago
> national security breakthroughs Can you explain what you mean by this? Still not sure how SAR would fit in here...
- robszumski 1y ago
  If a giant chunk of the constellation can act as a truly huge antenna, what can you get from that? Super high resolution? Seek/dwell time on a target that is effectively infinite?
  - mdhb 1y ago
    And we are going to put that in the hands of Elon musk? Are you fucking kidding me?
    - next_xibalba 1y ago
      Is there a viable alternative? SpaceX is the only launch provider and satellite operator that is progressing at a rapid pace and driving costs down.
      - JKCalhoun 1y ago
        > Is there a viable alternative? Always a good answer. ;-)
      - Zigurd 1y ago
        2/3 of Falcon 9 launches are for Starlink. No outside revenue. SpaceX continues to require new investment rounds. So the whole "driving costs down" thing might only work until investors expect some actual free cash flow. There have been 11 test launches of starship. You might've missed the last one because it didn't do anything new, except shedding parts and exploding less. There's a pretty good chance that program will never beat the cost of Falcon Heavy, or that the technology, like multiple refueling flights to get beyond low Earth orbit, is ever made workable.
        wongarsu 1y ago
        The last Starship launch was indeed unspectacular because it didn't try pushing the envelope particularly hard. The previous launches were much more precarious, with many fire balls. But I'm a strong believer in iterative development. It's bad PR when everyone can see every failed prototype, but the "design it once, simulate, and make sure the first prototype flies without issues" boxes you in to conservative design decisions.
        ACCount37 1y ago
        They did push Starship hard enough on reentry that, reportedly, it ended up with multiple holes burned through the metal hull and into the tanks. It survived that - did that entire "simulated landing" burn and all.
        wildzzz 1y ago
        If SpaceX only had contract money as revenue, they'd be fine but they probably would not be innovating as fast. The investment rounds are to pay for Starlink build-out and Starship.
        mrDmrTmrJ 1y ago
        Well, if 2/3 of SpaceX's current launches are for Starlink (which deploys satellites in LEO), isn't a two-stage, fully reusable vehicle optimized for LEO deployment the thing SpaceX would want to build? In terms of "free cash flow" expectations, are you aware that approximately 90% of "space" revenue and profit comes from satellite telecom services, with launch services accounting for about 10% of the mix? SpaceX's development of a telecommunications constellation (Starlink) is highly consistent with historical industry patterns of what makes profit in space. https://brycetech.com/reports/report-documents/global_satellite_industry_revenues_2024/BryceTech_2024_Global_Satellite_Industry_Revenues.pdf https://brycetech.com/reports/report-documents/global_satell...
      - m4rtink 1y ago
        Chinese companies seem to be in process of cloning Falcon 9 and even Starlink (Thousand Sails and other constellations). In the west the Rocketlab Neutron partial RLV and planned Stokes Space full RLV stand out. And maybe in a few decades even Arianespace will end up with a Falcon 9 class vehicle! ;-)
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - notahacker 1y ago
        No need for the satellite manufacturer to be the same as the launch provider, and there's nothing at all special about short-lived commodity satellites for LEO constellations. SpaceX is going to be cost-effective at building them given their experience with Starlink, but cost isn't typically a major concern of the US govt, and certainly not a higher priority than concerns about the satellite operator frequently suggesting that access to his satellites might be contigent upon his views on a particular conflict.
        dylan604 1y ago
        > but cost isn't typically a major concern of the US govt tell that to any project that has had their budget slashed or out right canceled because somebody thought their project was a waste of money. every contractor is bidding unless your name is Halliburton. what's the famous astronaut quote about sitting on top of a rocket built by the lowest bidding contractor?
        notahacker 1y ago
        > tell that to any project that has had their budget slashed or out right canceled because somebody thought their project was a waste of money. Their contracts aren't in defense...
    - krisoft 1y ago
      Nobody is discussing putting anything in Elon's hand. We are discussing what he already has in his hand, or can grab for himself if he chooses to.
    - marcellus23 1y ago
      You're more worried about that than having it in the hands of the US government?
      - epolanski 1y ago
        How could you even think the opposite to be a better option? The US does suffer from a serious amount of issues politically (I'm 100% convinced that presidential republics are flawed) but it's still an organization with plenty of checks requiring popular mandate. No single private individual should ever hold this kind of influence imho, not even if it is Gandhi or a saint and Musk is quite the other end of the spectrum.
- inemesitaffia 1y ago
  Search "NRO you can't hide"
ACCount37 1y ago
The issue with terrestrial wireless links is that you just aren't going to cover every inch of Earth's surface with terrestrial wireless links. At the same time: coverage comes cheap to Starlink. Which makes it perfect for serving areas no one wants to serve. Such as rural areas, anything outside the largest cities in underdeveloped countries, the open ocean, and so it goes.
- Zigurd 1y ago
  Places only Starllink can reach are an insufficient and shrinking TAM. The only places a terrestrial wireless provider doesn't want to serve are places that can't afford FWA even though it costs less.
  - greenavocado 1y ago
    Until the next war
  - Incipient 1y ago
    Starlink has plenty of good use cases: - camper van coverage across whole countries/continents - rural farms/communities - global coverage for convenience (eg business travellers) - huge military use ...just depends if it's economically viable
  - pavel_lishin 1y ago
    > Places only Starllink can reach are an insufficient and shrinking TAM. And yet, people live in those places, and you telling them that they're not economically worth serving isn't really solving their problem.
    - lokar 1y ago
      Pretending that they are worth economically serving with current tech or even tech that could be available soon does not help them either.
      - 1y ago
mensetmanusman 1y ago
I’m surprised there are technologists that are harsh critics of low earth orbit satellites.
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> if they can actually do something interesting with distributed SAR in a large constellation, that's one of those national security breakthroughs that's worth every penny ...could comprehensive SAR over the Earth's oceans uncloak submerged submarines when they're under power?
- yencabulator 1y ago
  Radio doesn't penetrate water well, for practical purposes almost at all.

by Zigurd 1y ago

stuff4ben 1y ago

> national security breakthroughs Can you explain what you mean by this? Still not sure how SAR would fit in here...

robszumski 1y ago
If a giant chunk of the constellation can act as a truly huge antenna, what can you get from that? Super high resolution? Seek/dwell time on a target that is effectively infinite?
- mdhb 1y ago
  And we are going to put that in the hands of Elon musk? Are you fucking kidding me?
  - next_xibalba 1y ago
    Is there a viable alternative? SpaceX is the only launch provider and satellite operator that is progressing at a rapid pace and driving costs down.
    - JKCalhoun 1y ago
      > Is there a viable alternative? Always a good answer. ;-)
    - Zigurd 1y ago
      2/3 of Falcon 9 launches are for Starlink. No outside revenue. SpaceX continues to require new investment rounds. So the whole "driving costs down" thing might only work until investors expect some actual free cash flow. There have been 11 test launches of starship. You might've missed the last one because it didn't do anything new, except shedding parts and exploding less. There's a pretty good chance that program will never beat the cost of Falcon Heavy, or that the technology, like multiple refueling flights to get beyond low Earth orbit, is ever made workable.
      - wongarsu 1y ago
        The last Starship launch was indeed unspectacular because it didn't try pushing the envelope particularly hard. The previous launches were much more precarious, with many fire balls. But I'm a strong believer in iterative development. It's bad PR when everyone can see every failed prototype, but the "design it once, simulate, and make sure the first prototype flies without issues" boxes you in to conservative design decisions.
        ACCount37 1y ago
        They did push Starship hard enough on reentry that, reportedly, it ended up with multiple holes burned through the metal hull and into the tanks. It survived that - did that entire "simulated landing" burn and all.
      - wildzzz 1y ago
        If SpaceX only had contract money as revenue, they'd be fine but they probably would not be innovating as fast. The investment rounds are to pay for Starlink build-out and Starship.
      - mrDmrTmrJ 1y ago
        Well, if 2/3 of SpaceX's current launches are for Starlink (which deploys satellites in LEO), isn't a two-stage, fully reusable vehicle optimized for LEO deployment the thing SpaceX would want to build? In terms of "free cash flow" expectations, are you aware that approximately 90% of "space" revenue and profit comes from satellite telecom services, with launch services accounting for about 10% of the mix? SpaceX's development of a telecommunications constellation (Starlink) is highly consistent with historical industry patterns of what makes profit in space. https://brycetech.com/reports/report-documents/global_satellite_industry_revenues_2024/BryceTech_2024_Global_Satellite_Industry_Revenues.pdf https://brycetech.com/reports/report-documents/global_satell...
    - m4rtink 1y ago
      Chinese companies seem to be in process of cloning Falcon 9 and even Starlink (Thousand Sails and other constellations). In the west the Rocketlab Neutron partial RLV and planned Stokes Space full RLV stand out. And maybe in a few decades even Arianespace will end up with a Falcon 9 class vehicle! ;-)
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
    - notahacker 1y ago
      No need for the satellite manufacturer to be the same as the launch provider, and there's nothing at all special about short-lived commodity satellites for LEO constellations. SpaceX is going to be cost-effective at building them given their experience with Starlink, but cost isn't typically a major concern of the US govt, and certainly not a higher priority than concerns about the satellite operator frequently suggesting that access to his satellites might be contigent upon his views on a particular conflict.
      - dylan604 1y ago
        > but cost isn't typically a major concern of the US govt tell that to any project that has had their budget slashed or out right canceled because somebody thought their project was a waste of money. every contractor is bidding unless your name is Halliburton. what's the famous astronaut quote about sitting on top of a rocket built by the lowest bidding contractor?
        notahacker 1y ago
        > tell that to any project that has had their budget slashed or out right canceled because somebody thought their project was a waste of money. Their contracts aren't in defense...
  - krisoft 1y ago
    Nobody is discussing putting anything in Elon's hand. We are discussing what he already has in his hand, or can grab for himself if he chooses to.
  - marcellus23 1y ago
    You're more worried about that than having it in the hands of the US government?
    - epolanski 1y ago
      How could you even think the opposite to be a better option? The US does suffer from a serious amount of issues politically (I'm 100% convinced that presidential republics are flawed) but it's still an organization with plenty of checks requiring popular mandate. No single private individual should ever hold this kind of influence imho, not even if it is Gandhi or a saint and Musk is quite the other end of the spectrum.
inemesitaffia 1y ago
Search "NRO you can't hide"

ACCount37 1y ago

The issue with terrestrial wireless links is that you just aren't going to cover every inch of Earth's surface with terrestrial wireless links. At the same time: coverage comes cheap to Starlink. Which makes it perfect for serving areas no one wants to serve. Such as rural areas, anything outside the largest cities in underdeveloped countries, the open ocean, and so it goes.

Zigurd 1y ago
Places only Starllink can reach are an insufficient and shrinking TAM. The only places a terrestrial wireless provider doesn't want to serve are places that can't afford FWA even though it costs less.
- greenavocado 1y ago
  Until the next war
- Incipient 1y ago
  Starlink has plenty of good use cases: - camper van coverage across whole countries/continents - rural farms/communities - global coverage for convenience (eg business travellers) - huge military use ...just depends if it's economically viable
- pavel_lishin 1y ago
  > Places only Starllink can reach are an insufficient and shrinking TAM. And yet, people live in those places, and you telling them that they're not economically worth serving isn't really solving their problem.
  - lokar 1y ago
    Pretending that they are worth economically serving with current tech or even tech that could be available soon does not help them either.
    - 1y ago

mensetmanusman 1y ago

I’m surprised there are technologists that are harsh critics of low earth orbit satellites.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> if they can actually do something interesting with distributed SAR in a large constellation, that's one of those national security breakthroughs that's worth every penny ...could comprehensive SAR over the Earth's oceans uncloak submerged submarines when they're under power?

yencabulator 1y ago
Radio doesn't penetrate water well, for practical purposes almost at all.