Elon posted a graph, it showed a peak of 7000GB per unit time, the only one that makes sense to me is per hour, which is 15Gbps peak -- not a huge amount. On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:50 AM Steve Stroh via Starlink < starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > I’m speculating, but given that Starlink is THE communications > infrastructure for much of Ukraine, then the scaling of the ground stations > to provide that level of service must be a significant expense. To provide > that much bandwidth would require deploying a lot of ground stations, each > with expensive hardware, power infrastructure (including backup), fiber > backhaul, skilled labor, and no small amount of fiber bandwidth that SpaceX > has to pay SOMEONE to provide. > > Not to mention that anything SpaceX deploys to support Ukraine is a > resource that it could have used for speeding up revenue generation in > lucrative markets like the US. > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 12:41 David Lang via Starlink < > starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > >> If spacex is providing the high-end/business grade service to all >> terminals >> that they normally charge $4500/month for, reimbursement should be based >> on >> that. >> >> Base it on the normal service pricing, not on cost-plus (if it were based >> on >> cost-plus it would be an utter windfall for SpaceX as they are still in >> the >> stage of building the service, and so there is a much higher spend rate >> to >> expand the service at this point than the ongoing maintinance of it) >> >> while the satellites do support that area, they also support the rest of >> the >> service, and if they weren't supporting Ukraine, there wouldn't be any >> fewer >> satellites launched. >> >> I've seen too many games played with 'fully loaded costs' (sometimes >> backfiring >> on the people tinkering with the numbers), and so it's something I watch >> out >> for. >> >> lies, damn lies, and statistics, 'fully loaded costs' tend to be heavy on >> statistics ;-) >> >> David Lang >> >> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022, tom@evslin.com wrote: >> >> > Putting aside the timing of Elon's complaint about cost right after the >> spat over his Ukrainian "peace plan", It is certainly reasonable for >> Starlink to get paid like other weapon suppliers who didn't give out free >> samples to prove their usefulness, Given that they should be reimbursed >> based on loaded cost plus profit like anyone else. I'm sure the other >> suppliers allocate their overhead costs when pricing weapon systems. They'd >> be out of business otherwise. The satellites are part of Starlink's fixed >> overhead so a portion of their costs should be allocated to service >> provided in Ukraine. >> > >> > All that being said, it would be terrible if Ukraine got less than the >> best support that can be provided. >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Starlink On Behalf Of >> David Lang via Starlink >> > Sent: Friday, October 14, 2022 1:28 PM >> > 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://twitter.com/dim0kq/status/1580827171903635456) >> >> 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://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Starlink mailing list >> >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >> > -- > Steve Stroh N8GNJ (he / him / his) > Editor > Zero Retries Newsletter - https://zeroretries.substack.com > > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >