From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (045-059-245-186.biz.spectrum.com [45.59.245.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0817C3B2A4 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:55:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (syslog [10.0.0.100]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B811C83AD; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 19:55:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 19:55:31 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: the keyboard of geoff goodfellow cc: Starlink In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="680960-229914742-1710384931=:20294" Subject: Re: [Starlink] FCC Denies Starlink Low-Orbit Bid for Lower Latency (Mark Harris) 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: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 02:55:33 -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. --680960-229914742-1710384931=:20294 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT this doesn't make sense to me. The ISS can go as low as 360km before they get a boost back to a higher orbit, but the starlink satellites they are denying will all be lower than that (and worst case, they can force SpaceX to pay for a few additional reboost missions over the next 6 years before they deorbit it) but they would avoid the thousands of satellites going up and down through the ISS orbit range to get to their ~550km orbit/ David Lang On Wed, 13 Mar 2024, the keyboard of geoff goodfellow via Starlink wrote: > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 18:59:59 -0700 > From: the keyboard of geoff goodfellow via Starlink > > Reply-To: the keyboard of geoff goodfellow > To: Starlink > Subject: [Starlink] FCC Denies Starlink Low-Orbit Bid for Lower Latency (Mark > Harris) > > *Agency says SpaceX craft could hinder International Space Station* > EXCERPT: > > The FCC has once again rejected a Starlink plan to deploy thousands of > internet satellites in very low earth orbits (VLEO) ranging from 340 to 360 > kilometers. In an order published last week, the FCC wrote: “SpaceX may not > deploy any satellites designed for operational altitudes below the > International Space Station,” whose orbit can range as low as 370 > kilometers. > > Starlink currently has nearly 6000 satellites orbiting at around 550 > kilometers that provide internet access to over 2.5 million customers > around the world. But its service is currently slower than most terrestrial > fiber networks, with average latencies (the time for data to travel between > origin and destination) over 30 milliseconds at best, and double that at > peak times. > > *“If you fill that region with tens of thousands of satellites, it would > put an even bigger squeeze on them and really compromise your ability to > service the space station.”* > > —HUGH LEWIS, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON, U.K. > > > “The biggest single goal for Starlink from a technical standpoint is to get > the mean latency below 20 milliseconds,” said Elon Musk at a SpaceX event > in January. “For the quality of internet experience, this is actually a > really big deal. If you play video games like I sometimes do, this is also > important, otherwise you lose.” > > The easiest way to reduce latency is to simply shorten the distance the > data have to travel. So in a February letter, SpaceX pleaded with the FCC > to allow its VLEO constellation: “Operating at these lower altitudes will > enable SpaceX to provide higher-quality, lower-latency satellite service > for consumers, keeping pace with growing demand for real-time > applications.” These now include the military use of Starlink for > communications in warzones such as Ukraine. > > Starlink also argued that its VLEO satellites would have collision > probabilities ten times lower than those in higher orbits, and be easier to > deorbit at the end of their functional lives. > > But the FCC was having none of it. The agency had already deferred VLEO > operations when it licensed Starlink operations in December 2022, and used > very similar languages in its order last week: “SpaceX must communicate and > collaborate with NASA to ensure that deployment and operation of its > satellites does not unduly constrain deployment and operation of NASA > assets and missions, supports safety of both SpaceX and NASA assets and > missions, and preserves long-term sustainable space-based communications > services.” > > Neither the FCC nor SpaceX replied to requests for comment, but the > agency’s reasoning is probably quite simple, according to Hugh Lewis, > professor of astronautics at the University of Southampton in the U.K. “We > don’t understand enough about what the risks actually are, especially > because the number of satellites that SpaceX is proposing is greater than > the number they’ve already launched,” he says... > > [...] > https://spectrum.ieee.org/starlink-vleo-below-iss > > --680960-229914742-1710384931=:20294--