Miscellaneous Tech News
-
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller Do you have a link to that particular page?
No, I got that from a third party.
-
Each won't cover very much ground, but if there is a little bit of overlap between a couple of satellites, the switching between satellites should almost be seamless.
-
@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
The current satellites are in geostationary orbit, which puts them at a higher orbit. These satellites will be at a lower orbit and will work as a mesh network with each other, but they will not be in geostationary orbit. Therefore, you will be changing POP ever so often. Less latency.
Less latency is strictly a matter of the altitude of the orbit.
Not entirely, also that it is a sky-based mesh. Normal satellites are very high and so there is lots of time to get the signal up, and back down. But also they tend to go back down to a very specific point on the ground, typically this adds a lot of latency, too. Like if your satellite only talks to Chicago. Then a sat user in Mexico City and a sat user in London both need to have the high latency of the satellite itself, but also the ground communications through Chicago. But the low orbit mesh can talk from satellite to satellite in a low distance, low latency mesh in the sky.
-
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Each won't cover very much ground, but if there is a little bit of overlap between a couple of satellites, the switching between satellites should almost be seamless.
1000km radius circle moving fast.
https://cnet1.cbsistatic.com/img/dWfu0_TRhMUFahSmT4E4BUYpciI=/2018/02/20/edda983e-e105-4d5c-92e3-7110a1fe3e2f/starlink.jpg -
-
-
@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Each won't cover very much ground, but if there is a little bit of overlap between a couple of satellites, the switching between satellites should almost be seamless.
1000km radius circle moving fast.
https://cnet1.cbsistatic.com/img/dWfu0_TRhMUFahSmT4E4BUYpciI=/2018/02/20/edda983e-e105-4d5c-92e3-7110a1fe3e2f/starlink.jpgQuestion just occurred to me. Current TV satellite fairs pretty well except for intense t-storms. Current Internet satellite, doesn't fair as well. How would SpaceX ISP fair with Intense T-Storms?
-
We won't really know for a while, you have to test it in real world to know. But Ku-band is traditional television satellite band, and low orbit means easier to see. So might do pretty well.
-
-
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Each won't cover very much ground, but if there is a little bit of overlap between a couple of satellites, the switching between satellites should almost be seamless.
1000km radius circle moving fast.
https://cnet1.cbsistatic.com/img/dWfu0_TRhMUFahSmT4E4BUYpciI=/2018/02/20/edda983e-e105-4d5c-92e3-7110a1fe3e2f/starlink.jpgQuestion just occurred to me. Current TV satellite fairs pretty well except for intense t-storms. Current Internet satellite, doesn't fair as well. How would SpaceX ISP fair with Intense T-Storms?
Totally different technologies and distances involved.
You have to stop comparing.
-
@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Each won't cover very much ground, but if there is a little bit of overlap between a couple of satellites, the switching between satellites should almost be seamless.
1000km radius circle moving fast.
https://cnet1.cbsistatic.com/img/dWfu0_TRhMUFahSmT4E4BUYpciI=/2018/02/20/edda983e-e105-4d5c-92e3-7110a1fe3e2f/starlink.jpgQuestion just occurred to me. Current TV satellite fairs pretty well except for intense t-storms. Current Internet satellite, doesn't fair as well. How would SpaceX ISP fair with Intense T-Storms?
Totally different technologies and distances involved.
You have to stop comparing.
Well then, like Scott said, lets just wait and see how they perform on their own, with no comparison.
-
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Each won't cover very much ground, but if there is a little bit of overlap between a couple of satellites, the switching between satellites should almost be seamless.
1000km radius circle moving fast.
https://cnet1.cbsistatic.com/img/dWfu0_TRhMUFahSmT4E4BUYpciI=/2018/02/20/edda983e-e105-4d5c-92e3-7110a1fe3e2f/starlink.jpgQuestion just occurred to me. Current TV satellite fairs pretty well except for intense t-storms. Current Internet satellite, doesn't fair as well. How would SpaceX ISP fair with Intense T-Storms?
Totally different technologies and distances involved.
You have to stop comparing.
Well then, like Scott said, lets just wait and see how they perform on their own, with no comparison.
You could possibly compare to Iridium (generation 2 not the current system). Those are in the same general LEO range as SpaceX.
But they were only planning to offer up to 8mbps with K band. -
@nerdydad Current Satellite ISPs are operating at distances of tens of thousadns KM from Earth, these SpaceX sats are only a fraction of that distance away and should provide better latency at least.
-
"SpaceX has said it will offer speeds of up to a gigabit per second, with latencies between 25ms and 35ms. Those latencies would make SpaceX's service comparable to cable and fiber. Today's satellite broadband services use satellites in much higher orbits and thus have latencies of 600ms or more, according to FCC measurements."
-
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
"SpaceX has said it will offer speeds of up to a gigabit per second, with latencies between 25ms and 35ms. Those latencies would make SpaceX's service comparable to cable and fiber. Today's satellite broadband services use satellites in much higher orbits and thus have latencies of 600ms or more, according to FCC measurements."
I was seeing 3000ms response time on HughesNet back in 2007-2009. Thankfully DSL became available, even at 512k/384k it was so much faster!
-
@travisdh1 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
"SpaceX has said it will offer speeds of up to a gigabit per second, with latencies between 25ms and 35ms. Those latencies would make SpaceX's service comparable to cable and fiber. Today's satellite broadband services use satellites in much higher orbits and thus have latencies of 600ms or more, according to FCC measurements."
I was seeing 3000ms response time on HughesNet back in 2007-2009. Thankfully DSL became available, even at 512k/384k it was so much faster!
That's not far off from what we saw in the Congo on Hughes a year or two later.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
the Congo
Huh? Okay, where in the world has Scott NOT been? That might be an easier question to answer.
-
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
the Congo
Huh? Okay, where in the world has Scott NOT been? That might be an easier question to answer.
Better to ask Carmen Sandiego
-
@scotth said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
the Congo
Huh? Okay, where in the world has Scott NOT been? That might be an easier question to answer.
Better to ask Carmen Sandiego
Or Waldo.
-
@scotth said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
the Congo
Huh? Okay, where in the world has Scott NOT been? That might be an easier question to answer.
Better to ask Carmen Sandiego
Lol I used to watch that way back in the day
