Starlink

[ponytug]

Steps for larger deployment as I understand it stand at;

• The orbital planes are supposed to be full toward the end of next month.
  • But who knows if the new satellites will all make it to "their" target orbits
• Availability of the "Lower cost" antenna, perhaps the rectangular one filed with the FCC
  • This may also be dependent on chip supplies opening up
• "Optimized" network for stability and speed

When these will occur is anyone's guess at this point... I'm still waiting...

All the best,

Peter

 

[ernemats]

Where do you find the information?

 

[ponytug]

The internet... I check google news for Starlink news, space.com, wccftech, Reddit,.... pretty much anywhere I can find an item. There is a lot of pure speculation out there.
Starlink isn't exactly pushing information out.
This astronomer has a nice site for information on satellite health and orbits;


Can you tell that I can't wait to get out from under AT&T?
Two and half weeks of DSL going up and down, and they can't seem to find something to fix, but I get nice calls from their customer service group daily confirming that they see the issue, too, (but no progress or action). Sigh. I am hoping that DSL plus Starlink might yield reliable service.

All the best,

Peter

 

[mikester]

Has anyone else noticed a drop in Elon's "better than nothing" internet service lately? When I first signed on it was 6 hops to the internet. I'm now 11+ hops and connections are starting to resemble xplornet quality service.

I've seen downloads up to the 200Mbit range but uploads are struggling to break 5Mbit. Typically I am seeing under 50Mbit downloads with frequent drop outs, VOIP and video chat is a struggle at times.

At least starlink doesn't blame the end user's network for service problems the way xplornet does.

 

[BigBlue1]

No, my service has only improved since I started in March. I can't speak to the hops because I haven't checked that. But I use it all day every day for working from home over a VPN with many hours worth of WebEx/Zoom/Teams and VOIP. Been quite solid for me. Also, my earlier video streaming issues for things like Netflix, Hulu, Prime Video, YoutubeTV are no longer problems.

The only thing I can speak to as a negative is the speed fluctuation. My speeds vary greatly, from 30-ish Mb/s to over 200 (averages in the lower 100's). Unsure whether this is expected because of inconsistencies in connections as sats move past or if this will improve as the full constellation comes into service. That said, it has never been 'slow' in a way that has impacted my use. I only notice because I do speed tests a lot to keep tabs on things.

Rob

 

[plowhog]

uploads are struggling to break 5Mbit. Typically I am seeing under 50Mbit downloads with frequent drop outs, VOIP and video chat is a struggle at times.

Sub-50Mbit download and 5Mbit upload is 10x my existing Hughes service. At least.

I don't struggle with VOIP or video chat-- since it would be ridiculous to even try.

I need a substantial upgrade just to get to your level of problems.

 

[grsthegreat]

As more people sign on, will speeds stay the same, or will they drop like a rock like they did on my old satellite internet. When I first signed up speeds were great, but kept steadily falling. Up to the point it was too slow to use. I’m wondering with this system once beta stops, along with its limited number of users, and goes whole hog into use, will speeds equil hughesnet.

 

[rekees4300]

As more people sign on, will speeds stay the same, or will they drop like a rock like they did on my old satellite internet. When I first signed up speeds were great, but kept steadily falling. Up to the point it was too slow to use. I’m wondering with this system once beta stops, along with its limited number of users, and goes whole hog into use, will speeds equil hughesnet.

According to Elon Musk, Starlink's goal is 1tbs when the whole system is up and running. One can't really use current Beta testing as a indicator of future operational performance. There are currently 1,800 satellites but 30,000 will obviously have a huge impact on speed.

 

[plowhog]

will they drop like a rock like they did on my old satellite internet.

I'm guessing speed might degrade as volume increases, but maybe not as bad as Hughes.

The Starlink sats are much lower orbit; therefore, less distance faster speed. More sats = less saturation but I don't know the "capacity" of each Starlink node compared to a Hughes satellite. Seems Starlink is much more distributed across lots of smaller units.

Apparently Starlink uses a lot of satellite-to-satellite comms which are near instantaneous, whereas Hughes (and similar providers) do a lot of comms from ground-to-space-to-ground, which is one factor causing the poor latency.

If I could get 50MB down and 10MB up I'd be very satisfied ...... even half of that is much more than what I have now ....

 

[BigBlue1]

There certainly will be more sats and ground stations coming on line in the next year or so. As mentioned, who knows where things will end up with performance, but from everything I've seen they are serious about offering a quality product so I'm hopeful. The fact that they are already producing well over 200 Mb/s right now during beta with a bare minimum of infrastructure is a positive thing. And for the target customer base - those rural customers with very few other options, most of which are SUPER SLOW - this is a game changer. Even if speeds dropped some it would still be leaps and bounds better than most.

Remember, Starlink's infrastructure is nothing like traditional satellite internet. They will have WAY more satellites in orbit and far more ground stations. Plus, the sats are in orbits around 340 miles up, versus 22,000 miles for Hughesnet. That shorter round-trip distance is what improves latency. The receiver is also not a single antenna, but rather an array of dozens of modules that can track different sats and seamlessly transition connections as the sats move overhead. Hughesnet connects you to a single sat that you always communicate with. I think this makes Starlink less susceptible to weather disruptions.

One correction, rekees: I think you meant 1Gb/s. Even hard wired datacenter connections on fiber don't approach a Tb/s.

 

[grsthegreat]

Viasat wants FCC to review Starlink’s government funding - SpaceNews

Satellite operator Viasat is stepping up efforts to stop Starlink’s growing constellation, taking aim at the nearly $900 million of rural broadband subsidies that SpaceX won in December.

spacenews.com

i see someone is trying to prevent more satellite launches on environmental grounds....from another satellite provider. so it starts

 

[ponytug]

Viasat wants FCC to review Starlink’s government funding - SpaceNews

Satellite operator Viasat is stepping up efforts to stop Starlink’s growing constellation, taking aim at the nearly $900 million of rural broadband subsidies that SpaceX won in December.

spacenews.com

i see someone is trying to prevent more satellite launches on environmental grounds....from another satellite provider. so it starts

ViaSat has been throwing up roadblocks for years. As you point out, remember the source. So far, I haven't seen them prevail, or even bring up anything very sensible, so I am not sure that there is anything of concern for Starlink.

I mean, I am sure that ViaSat has great faith in their customers and ViaSat knows that there are lots of happy ViaSat customers out there who treasure their ViaSat connection so highly that they would never switch.

Right...

All the best,

Peter

 

[John_Mc]

Has anyone else noticed a drop in Elon's "better than nothing" internet service lately? When I first signed on it was 6 hops to the internet. I'm now 11+ hops and connections are starting to resemble xplornet quality service.

I've seen downloads up to the 200Mbit range but uploads are struggling to break 5Mbit. Typically I am seeing under 50Mbit downloads with frequent drop outs, VOIP and video chat is a struggle at times.

At least starlink doesn't blame the end user's network for service problems the way xplornet does.

I can generally count on 140 - 220 Mbps down and 15-25 up. I did see a notification recently that they were having problems in my area, but they fixed whatever it was and I'm back to normal now.

 

[mikester]

Sub-50Mbit download and 5Mbit upload is 10x my existing Hughes service. At least.

I don't struggle with VOIP or video chat-- since it would be ridiculous to even try.

I need a substantial upgrade just to get to your level of problems.

I was paying for 25Mbit service at xplornet...my starlink upload speeds are better than xplornet's actual download speeds

 

[rekees4300]

One correction, rekees: I think you meant 1Gb/s. Even hard wired datacenter connections on fiber don't approach a Tb/s.

Yes, thanks for the correction.

 

[plowhog]

The dish does require power, which it gets from a power supply "brick". The dish has a 100' Ethernet cable built in. (Not RG-6) So, yes, you need to find power within 100'. You need to use the Starlink brick; it is a POE (PowerOver Ethernet) power supply, and Starlink has done some unusual things to get enough power to the dish.

Does anyone know if the 100' Ethernet cable to the dish is "plain vanilla" or if it includes any special wiring to achieve their 56V setup? And, can it be unplugged and removed from both ends, or is either end of it hard wired?

I ask because I found a good location on my property for a Starlink dish-- But it's a little beyond 100' to available power. If I could supply my own (longer) Ethernet cable this would be ideal. A typical Ethernet segment can go 300+ feet but I don't know what special things Starlink may have done ...

 

[ponytug]

Based on a recent tear down by some Belgian security researchers, no, the connector at the antenna is not your standard connector, and requires opening up "Dishy McFlatFace" to get to the ethernet connector. Currently, pun intended, Starlink is pushing a nonstandard amount of power down the cable from their PoE adapter, so making the cable longer is not likely to be successful due to power losses.

By the way, the same researchers noted that their current antenna hardware differs from prior tear downs, so the answer may change, but I don't see much upside to Starlink putting a user accessible RJ45 connector on the antenna as there are so many ways for water and dust to get in and for the cable to get yanked on by wind.

My suggestion would be to run power to wherever the 100' Starlink cable ends, put a weatherproof box with cooling there so you can have the Starlink PoE adapter happy, and run power plus a second Ethernet cable to the box from your house.

Here on the ranch, we have two potential sites for a Starlink antenna; plan A is wireless back to the house, plan B needs the power and ethernet run out to a box for the Starlink PoE adapter. Plan A increases ping times, plan B for me involves some ugly hand trenching. As in really ugly. My plan is to start with the wireless and then go from there. Of course this assumes that I ever get a system...

All the best,

Peter

 

[Pks]

What's the cost for a StarLink system installed and monthly?

 

[ponytug]

Currently $499, plus antenna options and shipping to buy, $99/mo for service. Availability is limited in most areas. You do the installaction.

Saline, MI looks to be mid to late 2021 availability at the moment.

All the best,

Peter

 

[BigBlue1]

Does anyone know if the 100' Ethernet cable to the dish is "plain vanilla" or if it includes any special wiring to achieve their 56V setup? And, can it be unplugged and removed from both ends, or is either end of it hard wired?

I ask because I found a good location on my property for a Starlink dish-- But it's a little beyond 100' to available power. If I could supply my own (longer) Ethernet cable this would be ideal. A typical Ethernet segment can go 300+ feet but I don't know what special things Starlink may have done ...

As mentioned, no the cable cannot be disconnected from the dish. And it is suspected that it is not a standard Cat 6e cable due to the power requirements. The suggested option if you need the dish further then 100' (of cable) from your indoor location is to have a weather-protected place with power to house the controller, then use a longer standard Cat 6e cable to connect the controller to the Starlink router (or you own router).

Rob