Starlink

[plowhog]

The monthly cost is 3X what I'm currently paying for HughesNet.

I'm envious of your HughesNet deal.

My HughesNet bill is $89/mo (residential.) Regarding service, my best description is ... that it is better than nothing. Speed is slow, upload speed so slow that I don't even bother to try, and the modem seems to "disconnect" or go into deep sleep after a period of non-use. Takes a minute or two for it to wake back up.

Starlink quoted me $99/mo for service. So if your HughesNet is 1/3 of that you are getting a deal!!

 

[oosik]

Thanks so much, Rob. My only choice, at the time, was Hughes Net. I've had it for thirteen years. It's not the fastest and, at times, can be very frustrating. Now there are others moving into this arena. They all boast superior performance. They are all using the old satellites and basically have the same limitations.

I see that Starlink uses an all new satellite grouping. It could be a definite advantage for those needing better service.

Again - thanks for your time and information.

 

[BigBlue1]

I see that Starlink uses an all new satellite grouping. It could be a definite advantage for those needing better service.

Yeah, the technologies are very much different. Hughesnet uses geosynchronous sats at 22,000 miles altitude. When you get your initial setup the receiver dish is pointed at one sat and that's the one you communicate with all the time. Starlink uses non-geosynchronous sats moving around the earth at 340 miles altitude and has TONS of them (I believe around 12,000 at full rollout). The receiver dish isn't a parabolic dish with a single receiver, it is a flat panel array of dozens of individual receivers (see pic below). As the sats pass overhead the dish is finding the strongest signal continually and dynamically switching to the best path. The 340 miles vs 22,000 miles is what lets Starlink have much lower latency (the time delay between the initiation of a sent packet and the reception of it). Latency is what kills services like video streaming (WebEx, Teams, Zoom), VPN connections, gameplay, etc. Beyond that difference, Starlink uses much better backhaul infrastructure which helps the total bandwidth (speed) be fast. SpaceX believes they will be able to approach or exceed 1Gb/s throughput at full build-out of sats and ground station network.

Rob

 

[lman]

I was on the fence about getting starlink. I've absolutely terrible DSL, ~7 down, .7 up with frequent outages. I've also got the Mobley which usually get's about 10 down and 2 or 3 up, but I reserve that for taking with me, to my workshops, to town, wherever.

BUT

Within a year the Electric Company is supposed to put in Fiber with 100Mbps both ways for $55 with a modem. Or 1Gbps for $85.

And the phone company is coming along behind them for about the same price.

Can't figure out WHY they are both doing it in the same areas, govt grants probably.

And now Musk wants $500 upfront for hardware and

I can see myself sitting with $500 of hardware and no connection while fiber goes by.

Our electric company buried our fiber last year and I was connected the first of this year. I got the 120/30 plan for $79. Latency is 5.

 

[LouNY]

"Iman;
Our electric company buried our fiber last year and I was connected the first of this year. I got the 120/30 plan for $79. Latency is 5."


I am on the wait list for star link it's still showing me as mid to late 2021.
I presently pay $70 for a wireless connection which run 12-20 meg/sec down and 2-4 up with 30-50 msec ping times.
I would gladly pay twice that for a fiber optic link such as you have.

 

[plowhog]

I presently pay $70 for a wireless connection which run 12-20 meg/sec down and 2-4 up with 30-50 msec ping times.
I would gladly pay twice that for a fiber optic link such as you have.

I'd pay twice to have what you have.

 

[LouNY]

Always greener in the next pasture over

 

[BigBlue1]

It's nice to be in the green pasture instead of the dirt like we've been for years.

 

[plowhog]

Always greener in the next pasture over

One thing I am looking forward to with Starlink is the challenge of solving new infuriating problems.

I'm tired of solving the old infuriating problems .... need a change!

 

[Oaktree]

The receiver dish isn't a parabolic dish with a single receiver, it is a flat panel array of dozens of individual receivers (see pic below). As the sats pass overhead the dish is finding the strongest signal continually and dynamically switching to the best path. The 340 miles vs 22,000 miles is what lets Starlink have much lower latency (the time delay between the initiation of a sent packet and the reception of it). Latency is what kills services like video streaming (WebEx, Teams, Zoom), VPN connections, gameplay, etc. Beyond that difference, Starlink uses much better backhaul infrastructure which helps the total bandwidth (speed) be fast. SpaceX believes they will be able to approach or exceed 1Gb/s throughput at full build-out of sats and ground station network.

I know there are multiple (probably lots of) ground stations with fiber interconnectivity. Is the system smart enough to switch to an alternate uplink site should the one nearest you go down?

Also, how do these receivers mount? One would think that to be able to select between multiple birds it would need to face up...is there some sort of radome to shed snow (I would hope)?