Space X, Elon Musk and Rural Broadband

25-05-2019 6:38am

listermint, can you maybe explain why this is doomed to fail?

My understanding is the satellites are low enough for something like 30ms and then once the constellation is complete, and the satellites are communicating with each other, your bits will be sent to the satellite above the sever you're connecting to.

There are at least two other companies also doing this. I'm excited about all of them. Hardly means I've got Elon Musk's dick wedged down my throat, does it?

KildareP · 25-05-2019 7:53am

Personally I wouldn't say that its doomed to fail, rather its completely unproven technology in a real world scenario. There's no guarantee it will work. And Starlink even admit that themselves. We'll wait 7-8 years waiting for it to be rolled out and it could be scrapped at any stage during or after. They've no real idea as to the lifetime of these craft, how much they will need to spend on repairs/replacements each year, how many will fail in transit or end up dead on arrival, so no way of knowing how much they will have to charge per user per month to both cover costs and turn a profit. It will naturally evolve and be upgraded, so new satellites, new modems, new antennae, ongoing R&D. And you can't retrofit an existing satellite so if you get something wrong, its scrap and start again. It's all essentially just one massive expensive experiment right now.

On latency, the whole internet is not going to move onto Starlink so most of the "actual" routing will still happen on land over fibre/copper. Many companies (including Microsoft, Google, Apple, Facebook) serve the entire EU from datacentres here in Ireland so you're adding several thousand KM's of round trip for most Irish traffic via Starlink compared to fibre. And because they plan on using their own protocols add more latency to translate Starlink <-- --> IPv6. A copper ended connection can do most anywhere in Ireland comfortably within 25mS and end-to-end fibre even lower again.
The argument against latency might make more sense in large continents like America or Africa where coast to coast communications can be 100mS or more due to sheer distances and because of the way traffic is routed through arteries located in large cities rather than "as the crow flies".

We tried to be early adopters with our last NBS using 3G - Hutchison got a subsidized network rollout and the end user was ultimately left with a piss-poor trickle of internet at peak times. Then 4G came along and we were promised speeds of 200Mb+, yet peak data speed on all three Irish networks is still <20Mb best case - and that's not bad compared to elsewhere in the world! Funny how no-one brings up this when trying to say 5G or LEO or some other as-yet-unproven wireless solution is the way forward and not fibre, which has been the reliable, high capacity and highly adaptable backbone of the internet for 30+ years now.

Maybe when I see these companies ripping out their fibre based circuits and routing most or all of their traffic out over their own pioneering technology I might be more inclined to listen. Lead by example not do as I say... Until then, its just research and experiments by groups who ultimately hope to make lots of money at the end of it.

Fibre isn't the cheapest but it is proven technology.

rivegauche · 25-05-2019 11:16am

M5 wrote: »

I pay for my well and subsidise your water
I pay for my septic tank and subsitise your sewage treatment

100s of things you pay for through general taxation that you dont get direct use/value of

There is the world of a difference between paying for excessive high speed broadband infrastructure and preventing the spread of Cholera.

What's more, while there may be very basic group water schemes across the length and breadth of the country there are not group sewage scheme because people are sensible enough to know they are unworkable. It is easier to push potable water out through leaky pipes only thanks to bountiful precipitation in Ireland.

On top of this you then wouldn't hand the water, its patterns of usage and pipes over to a private monopoly(which thankfully still hasn't happened in Ireland yet).

The Family home I grew up in has both its own well and septic tank. M5, You are not speaking to someone who has a completely different life experience to you and I can see this broadband scheme as absolutely idiotic.

Vested interests are pushing the idea that there is an inalienable right to a highspeed broadband irrespective of how remote and inaccessible the recipients chose to make themselves.

Capt'n Midnight · 25-05-2019 11:43pm

listermint wrote: »

No this plan is stupid for our requirements. It won't have the speeds a fibre network will it's actually a silly comparison for anyone with any semblance of cop on.

Run fibre to the villages and hamlets and crossroads with half a dozen houses and a pub.

Use this for fill in for people over a mile away from a group of houses.

They will be offering gigabit speeds, eventually, at a price.

Innismean and other islands have RF links with 100mbs , at a price.

You only need good DSL speeds to get netflix and videoconferencing. FTTH is overkill for most users when there are cheaper alternative solutions. Maybe later on when it's very cheap or the one-off's contribute to the cost rollout FTTH.

Even under the USO you don't always get a copper line if you want voice. And you could argue it's essential for safety.

Space X, Elon Musk and Rural Broadband

Comments