From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cmail.nextlayer.at (cmail.nextlayer.at [109.70.102.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2A993B29E for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 22:37:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 73891403E4 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2025 04:37:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 20:40:05 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net References: Content-Language: en-CA, de-AT From: Daniel AJ Sokolov In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink in Northern Europe: A New Look at Stationary and In-motion Performance 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, 28 Feb 2025 03:37:11 -0000 I live North of 60, in Whitehorse in the Yukon. With about 35,000 inhabitants, We are the largest Canadian city in the North. Here, we could get Starlink for a while. But last year, they introduced a waiting list. There is no more capacity to go around. I assume this will remain so for a couple more years, until we get new satellites. In other parts of the Yukon, I am not aware of waiting lists. Cheers Daniel AJ On 2025-02-27 at 14:02, Ulrich Speidel via Starlink wrote: > I had a quick look. > > The most important bit of information I was looking for is on page 7, > and it's not explicitly mentioned despite its importance - rather it's > delivered on the side of the figures: the latitude of the measurements. > Ballpark 65 deg north. That puts the measurements beyond the range of > the bulk of the Starlink shells at 43, 53, and 53.2 degrees inclination, > leaving only the 70 and 97.6 deg inclination shells within view. > > Why does this matter? Two reasons: > > 1. A location at 65 deg north sees on average around 8 qualifying >    satellites at any time - those are satellites that are at least 25 >    deg above the horizon (so their beams don't get into terrestrial >    microwave link receivers). That compares to over 40 qualifying >    satellites should you find yourself luck to live between 40 and 45 >    deg north, and over 20 at the Equator (even keeping GSO protection >    into account). > 2. The qualifying satellites you see north of about 60 deg are still >     >90% version 1.5's. They have lasers for backhaul but a >    comparatively small number of Ku band beams for downlink to Dishy. >    South of 40 degrees, almost half the qualifying satellites you're >    going to encounter are from the version 2 series, which have a lot >    more beams. These beams are also higher capacity ones. > > Why does the number of qualifying satellites and beams matter? > Basically, if you add up all beams on all satellites within view, you > get the pool of beams that Starlink can pick from to serve your Dishy. > More beams in total = more options = bigger cake = bigger slice of > capacity for your Dishy. > > Now how big a slice of the cake you can get depends not only on the > satellite mix in view, but also on how many other user terminals in your > immediate (cell) and wider (nearby cells) in your neighbourhood want to > access that capacity cake. This depends a lot on population density and > on what the competing terrestrial connectivity options are. In a place > with low population density, fibre to almost everywhere and a good 4G > and 5G coverage, all at good prices, there won't be a lot of competing > users for the cake. The Oulu area in Finland, where they took the > measurements, appears to be in that category, mostly. The paper doesn't > discuss these determinants of performance, however. > > On 28/02/2025 4:04 am, Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink wrote: >> Hi Craig, >> No it is not my paper. >> It has interesting results that I would like others to see and provide >> feedback on. >> >> Hesham >> >> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025, 6:36 AM Craig Polk wrote: >> >>     Hesham, >> >>     Is this your paper? Are you submitting it for the WG to review as >>     a possible INGR Topic article? >> >>     Best regards, >>     Craig >> >>     ---- >>     Craig Polk, MSEE, MBA >>     Program Manager >>     Future Networks Tech Community | futurenetworks.ieee.org >>     >>     3 Park Avenue, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10016 >>     > +New+York,+NY+10016%C2%A0++Office:+%2B1?entry=gmail&source=g> >>     Office: +1 >>     > +New+York,+NY+10016%C2%A0++Office:+%2B1?entry=gmail&source=g> >>     212-705-8926 | Mobile: +1 908-255-6568 >>     Email: c.polk@comsoc.org >>     Future Networks World Forum | https://fnwf.ieee.org/ >>     Connecting the Unconnected | https://ctu.ieee.org/ >> >>     On Thu, Feb 27, 2025, 12:01 AM Hesham ElBakoury >>     wrote: >> >>         This paper [1] This paper evaluates the Flat High Performance >>         (FHP) terminal's performance in Finland, Northern Europe. >> >>         *_Abstract_* >>         "Starlink has introduced the Flat High Performance (FHP) >>         terminal, specifically designed to support the vehicles and >>         the vessels in motion as well as the high-demand stationary >>         users. The research on FHP terminal throughput analysis >>         remains limited, only a few existing studies evaluate FHP, >>         focusing on the limited parameters and scenarios. This paper >>         evaluates the FHP terminal's performance in Finland, Northern >>         Europe. We examine round-trip time (RTT), uplink, and downlink >>         throughput for both stationary and in-motion use. We measure >>         network efficiency across six geographically diverse servers >>         and get insights of network routing strategies. Our results >>         show that Starlink provides high-speed, low-RTT connectivity, >>         however, the throughput experiences fluctuations with slight >>         degradation when in motion. Additionally, we compare Starlink >>         and terrestrial network RTT and possible routing paths." >> >>         Hesham >>         [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.15552 >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>         To unsubscribe from the 5GRM-SATELLITE list, click the >>         following link: >>         https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=5GRM-SATELLITE&A=1 >>         >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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