From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (unknown [66.167.227.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D18D3B2A4 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:35:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dlang-mobile (unknown [10.2.2.70]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3509F14FC0A; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:35:20 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang To: Larry Press cc: Kurtis Heimerl , David Lang , Starlink list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4rn1o59p-36nq-87q9-3n78-828r0qppp221@ynat.uz> References: <8735bqpq1r.wl-jch@irif.fr> <38522124-6d3b-4ac8-bb20-92bfa35dc9fe@Spark> <87tu46o8e3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <3ea89257-d5f8-4fa9-a90a-c73d49d2a9e2@Spark> <87r0zao0f0.wl-jch@irif.fr> <398208s8-6080-r8q7-s6rs-q9np11428n3o@ynat.uz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="228850167-894851293-1665776120=:10708" Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink no longer available to the Ukrainian army? X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 19:35:21 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --228850167-894851293-1665776120=:10708 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT some interesting tidbits in that article 1. 25k dishes rather than the 15k I had heard befor 2. they are providing full business rates rather than consumer rates 2a. it's interesting that they can do this with the consumer dishes, although a lot of what I saw shipped were the gen1 (round) dishes, which may be better than the gen 2 consumer dishes. yes, the companies who manufacture the weapons have been paid in full. I think it's worth pointing out that Starlink was never intended to be the entire communications infrastructure for a country. I think it would be a very interesting thing to investigate what the actual density of users and data usage is (there is a graph posted, but I haven't tried to get a good enough copy of it to see the units). It could confirm/refute the "starlink can't scale" argument David Lang On Fri, 14 Oct 2022, Larry Press wrote: > SpaceX has given a more detailed statement of expenses to the Pentagon: > https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/elon-musk-spacex-starlink-ukraine/index.html > > They have been "paid" in favorable publicity and have tested/refined things like mobile connectivity. > > Aren't the companies that supply weapons, ammunition, etc. paid? > > Larry > > > ________________________________ > From: Starlink on behalf of David Lang via Starlink > Sent: Friday, October 14, 2022 10:28 AM > To: Kurtis Heimerl > Cc: Starlink list > Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink no longer available to the Ukrainian army? > > Having now read more info on this, less significant than the $80m total figure > is the $20m/month figure he quoted. With 15k dishes as the figure that they sent > (separate from whatever has been purchased on the commercial side), that works > out to 1.3k/dish/month, which is very high. > > now, not being able to deploy reliable ground stations inside Ukraine could be > driving up costs, plus the ongoing battle against jamming. But in his tweet he > also cites satellite costs, which should not be allocated as "Ukraine related" > costs (and I don't think the cyberdefense and jamming defense work should be > either) > > David Lang > > On Fri, 14 Oct 2022, Kurtis Heimerl via Starlink wrote: > >> This thread (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://twitter.com/dim0kq/status/1580827171903635456__;!!P7nkOOY!reUDfoQpkbJ6YAQ6h436UHdL9D0lnxDeqlc29JPUsrl8V_02dlWYYFi4zfQ-CCRLKetEGxza7FjOyJDcUURE6WtPnA$ ) >> strongly argues that Starlink is largely paid for their service, at >> least on the consumer side. I imagine there are significant >> operational expenses in dealing with the various actors involved but >> not on the basic model. >> >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:06 AM Juliusz Chroboczek via Starlink >> wrote: >>> >>>> In essence, once you give something away for free, not even setting the >>>> expectation that it’s a “freemium” model, it’s very hard to get out of it. If >>>> you then claim your costs are way higher than what analysis work out, eyebrows >>>> raise way above the hairline. >>> >>> Uh. Hmm. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Starlink mailing list >>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink__;!!P7nkOOY!reUDfoQpkbJ6YAQ6h436UHdL9D0lnxDeqlc29JPUsrl8V_02dlWYYFi4zfQ-CCRLKetEGxza7FjOyJDcUUSVCxIH-w$ >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink__;!!P7nkOOY!reUDfoQpkbJ6YAQ6h436UHdL9D0lnxDeqlc29JPUsrl8V_02dlWYYFi4zfQ-CCRLKetEGxza7FjOyJDcUUSVCxIH-w$ > --228850167-894851293-1665776120=:10708--