4 ms·
It wasn't easy at all. Nobody except SpaceX could have done it at the time. This is the result of SpaceX being able to launch much cheaper than anyone before th
by wongarsu 8mo ago
It wasn't easy at all. Nobody except SpaceX could have done it at the time. This is the result of SpaceX being able to launch much cheaper than anyone before them, and being able to use these high-cadence launches to both implement and test incremental improvements in their rockets and streamline their reuse of preflown boosters.
SpaceX was the only conceivable launch provider for this, and if it had been an external customer that cares too much about the risk of these launches the incremental improvements that made this cost-effective wouldn't have been possible. Realistically this was only viable for SpaceX doing it as part of R&D for their own rockets. And even then this puts severe financial strain on them because their original business plan was built around having Starship available years ago for even cheaper deployment of bigger satellites
Of course now that it has been done and technology has advanced by ~7 years it is much easier for new mega constellations. But at the time SpaceX started doing it the idea was rightfully called insane
- gosub100 8mo agoAnd phased-array antennae. The network would be next to useless if each receiver needed to track the satellite physically.
- 0_____0 8mo agoBeamforming is an old technology though. It's not hard to do, just a pain to do cheaply when you've got a bajillion emitters unless you have custom silicon.
- xoa 8mo ago>Beamforming is an old technology though. It's not hard to do Well, so is satellite launch right? Cost, efficiency, and scaling are hard to do. That's SpaceX's entire raison d'etre. Doing a general public usable all weather maintenance free well designed phased array terminal they can sell for $250 and pump out by the millions is as worthy an achievement as near anything else in the Starlink project. And I'd love if it was more available too even terrestrially, for PtP/PtMP links alignment even motionless is a certain amount of work at long distances. And long range high bandwidth stuff isn't cheap. It'd be pretty cool if you could have units for $250 that you just needed to aim vaguely in the right direction and then it all just worked.
- 0_____0 8mo agoHardware gets a bit easier in some respects when you have unit scale and don't need to make COGS+margin back on the sale. If Ubiquiti sell a base station, half of the unit price is gross margin. If SpaceX sell a Starlink terminal, they don't even have to cover COGS for it to be a good business case, because they're selling the service not the device. The Starlink terminal is a very cool piece of kit, but it's not nearly as interesting as what they're hucking into LEO, and how they're doing it.
- simondotau 8mo ago> Well, so is satellite launch right? Cost, efficiency, and scaling are hard to do. The famous phrase 'Quantity has a quality of its own' comes to mind.
- perilunar 8mo agoI disagree. Driving a small dish antenna only requires a couple of small electric motors. The receivers would be more expensive, and require more power, but they would still be affordable enough.
- verzali 8mo agoThey would break more often. This was a key limitation of LEO systems prior to Starlink.
- gosub100 8mo agobut what about the interruption when the satellite crosses over the horizon? you would then need a 2nd antenna that was ready to take over, or tolerate several seconds of lost signal.
- Thlom 8mo agoI think OP was talking about the political side, not the technical side. How one company with the blessing of a regulatory body in one country could put thousands of satellites in LEO with minimal international coordination/deliberation.
- simondotau 8mo agoCapability creates reality first, and legal consensus usually arrives later. It has always been thus. On land, states must back claims with an ability to project force. In low Earth orbit, words mean little unless you can literally, physically show up and enforce them.