StarLink Maritime Way Over Price

[wholybee]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

Good point, Anders, & I should have addressed that.

Big ships generally have to use specially approved SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) equipment. Cruisers (& even some smaller ships) don't.

So one potential solution is to only get the expensive "Maritime" equipment SOLAS certified. Boats that can't afford the Maritime package might still subscribe to the Roaming (or whatever other marine-ish offer Starlink comes up with) package. It behooves Starlink to offer SOMEthing for us small-fry, especially if their alternative is no revenue at all. They're certainly not altruistic, but they're very interested in maximizing revenue (customers) to make back the costs of putting the system together in the first place.

I still submit that the incremental cost to Starlink of an additional offshore customer is essentially zero. And while us cruisers aren't a large group, there are a LOT of tramp-freighters & other smaller ships that would like even minimal Starlink service but can't afford (& don't need) the Maritime package.

As has been pointed out, SpaceX isn't stupid, so they'll come up with something, even if it's just letting the RV package work at sea but not warranting it for that purpose. This seems to be what's happening now, & would save them from having to come up with a different package for us, which might involve tooling costs.

It's going to be interesting to watch this space unfold.

Isn't the SOLAS requirement only for safety equipment that is required to be carried? And that equipment above and beyond that doesn't? I don't believe high bandwidth Internet qualifies. I could be wrong. As long as there is the required SOLAS and GMDSS equipment on board, Starlink can supplement that. Royal Caribbean was installing Starlink, and even had it available for passenger use, before the marine package was widely available. So certainly it doesn't always need to be SOLAS certified.

Yes, it will(is) be interesting to watch. Certainly Starlink has done it's homework, and will make available whatever plans priced however will make them the most money.

[goboatingnow]

Internet links per se are not part of solas or GMDSS compulsory carraige , Inmarsat C or B is somewhat different

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

... Inmarsat C or B is somewhat different

How is Inmarsat different from Starlink? They're both satellite-based internet.

[wagsea6b]

So, I’m no rocket scientist, but I do have Starlink at home.

If I understand correctly, all land based service (including the 12 miles offshore and RV crowd) must go through a Starlink ground station near their cell.

The far offshore version will use lasers to beam data between satellites then down to a ground station. I can only assume that space lasers ain’t cheap.

[more]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Starlink can only support a limited number of users in any given area, so, even once Starlink has all 12,000 of its planned satellites in operation, the combined bandwidth, of all these satellites, won't support more than 2.8 million users utilizing the service, at advertised minimum rates of 100Mbps of download speed.
Still, not all users will be online simultaneously, 24/7, so SpaceX can probably "juggle" its users and stretch out its available bandwidth somewhat beyond 2.8 million. But even so, it's not clear the company will be able to make the math work, without greatly upgrading the throughput of its satellites, and/or launching a lot more than the originally planned 12,000 satellites. Plans have been floated, for example, to launch as many as 42,000 satellites to help with this, and that might be enough to do the trick.
But, the first satellites [2022 and before] start dropping out in 2025, or 2026.
Of course, the other option, to increase revenue, is to raise [or maintain high] prices.

your math is totally wrong, 100 mbps continius is 8640 gb data daily ,fer use is always and limited +- 10 gb day 200-300 gb data month. on end over 2000 milion user can be served or less normal user and couple commercial where is charged by data

[mark_morwood]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

How is Inmarsat different from Starlink? They're both satellite-based internet.

They are very different. Briefly skipping over a lot of details - Inmarsat was built on 1980's technology to provide Telex service to ships at sea. It now also provides very low speed data connectivity worldwide. Starlink is built to provide mobile internet worldwide.

Inmarsat uses 14 geostationary satellites, whereas Starlink currently has 2,500 low earth orbit satellites and is aiming for 10's of thousands. The bandwidth available is hugely different. Geosationary satellites are in very high orbits so the latency is very high, a minimum of 250ms versus a current average of around 40ms for Starlink LEO satellites.

Starlink at home for $110/month will give you 50 to 150Mbps, whereas Inmarsat's Fleet products give you data from 2.4 to 64kbps, so about 1000 times slower. I believe the Fleet rate is around $10/MB plus monthly fees.

Inmarsat C is the telex like service that has approved terminals for GMDSS which is the one ships can use to meet their communication responsibilities under international agreements.

[NaClyDog]

Originally Posted by more

your math is totally wrong, 100 mbps continius is 8640 gb data daily ,fer use is always and limited +- 10 gb day 200-300 gb data month. on end over 2000 milion user can be served or less normal user and couple commercial where is charged by data

How did you arrive at this number??? (keep in mind, 8bits in a byte)



100 mbps = 12.50 MB per second


= 750 MB per minute
= 45000 MB per hour
= 1080000 MB per day = 1080 GB per day

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by mark_morwood

They are very different.<snip>

I'm sorry, Mark. Perhaps I wasn't very clear. I already know most of what you posted, as I've been following this whole industry for a while (do you remember Teledesic?). What I meant to ask is:

"Why does Inmarsat require SOLAS & Starlink Maritime doesn't?"

I was having a discussion previous to that post. If you read through that little sub-thread, I was trying to work out a way that Starlink could let us cruisers use the system relatively cheaply, while not undercutting its potentially lucrative big-ship (Maritime) offering, which presumably needs to use SOLAS equipment. GoBoatingNow implied that Inmarsat was "different" from Starlink in that it would not need or want SOLAS certification, but didn't elaborate on why Inmarsat should require SOLAS certification while Starlink Maritime would not.

While you go through some of the mechanical & technological differences (which, I agree, are huge), there's nothing in your post that really addresses this question.

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by wagsea6b

So, I’m no rocket scientist, but I do have Starlink at home.

If I understand correctly, all land based service (including the 12 miles offshore and RV crowd) must go through a Starlink ground station near their cell.

The far offshore version will use lasers to beam data between satellites then down to a ground station. I can only assume that space lasers ain’t cheap.

Wagsea, you're not quite correct, although this is how the system has been running up to now, so you can be forgiven your confusion.

Yes, without the lasers, the bird you're talking to has to, itself, be able to talk to a ground station. Since the birds are up ~300nm, & their phased arrays can direct their beams out ~45-deg from the direction they're pointing (which is always straight down) they can span a max-distance hop of ~600nm, but practically, you have to be within about 400nm of a ground station for that system to work reliably.

The laser system apparently took some time to work out, as the v1.0 birds didn't have them. They've been launching the v1.5 birds (that DO have 4 laser interconnects) since late last year. Of the ~2,600 operational birds up now, about 1,000 of them don't have the lasers, but they're expected to be deorbited until the whole constellation will be laser equipped.

The v2 birds are too big to be launched with Falcon9 & will be launched with Starship, & they'll apparently be "about 10x as capable", although Musk didn't elaborate on that point.

But part of Musk's stated goal is to beat the speed of the undersea fiber from NY to London, by using the lasers. It may be expensive to equip those birds with lasers, but once they're installed, it doesn't cost much to use them.

Musk apparently intends Starlink to use them extensively, & to not use the ground-based internet until it has to. So the birds will actually examine the data to find out where it needs to go (as all ground-based routers do today) & then send it (by laser) to the bird servicing the closest ground-station to that destination. That is, he's going to create an entire new internet connectivity grid in space.

So yes, boats in mid-ocean will HAVE to use laser-equipped birds, but eventually, it appears that most of the Starlink traffic will use the laser-mesh.

[VWKDF]

Originally Posted by wagsea6b

The far offshore version will use lasers to beam data between satellites then down to a ground station. I can only assume that space lasers ain’t cheap.

Well if space lasers drive the price up to much maybe we can come up with something else.





Joking aside, I hope they come up with a version for lighter private use at a price point under 300 a month. preferably under 200.

[NPCampbell]

Originally Posted by NaClyDog

How did you arrive at this number??? (keep in mind, 8bits in a byte)



100 mbps = 12.50 MB per second


= 750 MB per minute
= 45000 MB per hour
= 1080000 MB per day = 1080 GB per day

You are both right. B = bytes, b = bits. 8640 Gb = 1080 GB

[Llarian]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

But part of Musk's stated goal is to beat the speed of the undersea fiber from NY to London, by using the lasers. It may be expensive to equip those birds with lasers, but once they're installed, it doesn't cost much to use them.

I'm curious, has he said this recently? That was definitely a stated goal early on.

I mostly ask because they have stated that they originally intended/hoped to have laser links between shells, but they determined that keeping them aligned wasn't feasible, so they have dialed the laser interconnects back to only linking within a given shell where the direction to the next satellite over is more or less constant.

However, I imagine losing inter-shell capability means the laser mesh will be more reliant on terrestrial services for routing than it would be otherwise.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

I'm sorry, Mark. Perhaps I wasn't very clear. I already know most of what you posted, as I've been following this whole industry for a while (do you remember Teledesic?). What I meant to ask is:

"Why does Inmarsat require SOLAS & Starlink Maritime doesn't?"

I was having a discussion previous to that post. If you read through that little sub-thread, I was trying to work out a way that Starlink could let us cruisers use the system relatively cheaply, while not undercutting its potentially lucrative big-ship (Maritime) offering, which presumably needs to use SOLAS equipment. GoBoatingNow implied that Inmarsat was "different" from Starlink in that it would not need or want SOLAS certification, but didn't elaborate on why Inmarsat should require SOLAS certification while Starlink Maritime would not.

While you go through some of the mechanical & technological differences (which, I agree, are huge), there's nothing in your post that really addresses this question.

It’s the other way around.

aspects of SOLAS and GMDSS incorporated Inmarsat A,B and C including safely alerts and ship tracking ( because those were the systems in place at the time )

Inmarsat was set up by the IMO so that’s why it’s systems are incorporated in GMDSS and SOLAS

Inmarsat was designed to bring safety , voice and sat telex services to ocean going vessels. It’s not primarily designed to supply IP communications like starlink

This makes Inmarsat a compulsory fit requirement on certain size commercial vessels .

Starlink is not currently compatible with GMDSS or SOLAS hence even if fitted to vessels , those vessels may still have to fit Inmarsat terminals.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by VWKDF

Well if space lasers drive the price up to much maybe we can come up with something else.





Joking aside, I hope they come up with a version for lighter private use at a price point under 300 a month. preferably under 200.

Why , who is the intended mass market for this sort of in motion service.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Llarian

I'm curious, has he said this recently? That was definitely a stated goal early on.



I mostly ask because they have stated that they originally intended/hoped to have laser links between shells, but they determined that keeping them aligned wasn't feasible, so they have dialed the laser interconnects back to only linking within a given shell where the direction to the next satellite over is more or less constant.



However, I imagine losing inter-shell capability means the laser mesh will be more reliant on terrestrial services for routing than it would be otherwise.

Laser interconnect reduces reliance on ground stations. It’s primarily designed to handle latency issues. It doesn’t remove reliance on ground stations merely reduces it.