
SpaceX just launched two of its space internet satellites - awiesenhofer
https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/15/17016208/spacex-falcon-9-launch-starlink-microsat-2a-2b-paz-watch-live
======
gpickett00
The article doesn't mention what I find to be the most interesting part of
this mission:

From Ars Technica:

There is heightened interest in this launch because, for the first time,
SpaceX will attempt to "catch" one of the two payload fairings that enclose
the satellite at the top of the rocket. The value of these fairings is about
$6 million, and recovering and reusing them would both save SpaceX money and
remove another roadblock on their production line for Falcon 9 rockets. These
fairings will separate from the rocket at about three minutes after launch and
are "steerable" in the sense that SpaceX hopes to guide them back to a target
located in the ocean.

"Going to try to catch the giant fairing (nosecone) of Falcon 9 as it falls
back from space at about eight times the speed of sound," SpaceX founder Elon
Musk said on Instagram Thursday morning. "It has onboard thrusters and a
guidance system to bring it through the atmosphere intact, then releases a
parafoil and our ship with basically a giant catcher’s mitt welded on tries to
catch it."

[https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/02/spacex-to-try-
again-...](https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/02/spacex-to-try-again-to-
launch-a-rocket-and-catch-a-payload-fairing/)

They didn't 100% succeeed in their first attempt at this, but got really
close!

[https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/966692641533390848](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/966692641533390848)

~~~
aphextron
I love this so much. The way Musk described it makes perfect sense. It's as if
you had big bag of cash with a million dollars just falling from the sky,
you'd probably go out there and try to catch it. It's the same thing.

~~~
larrydag
Privatization of the space industry is going to lead to all sorts of
efficiencies. I believe its also going to lead to some new areas of innovation
that would never have been considered. For instance, this flight is putting 2
satellites in very LEO for internet service testing. Currently satellite
internet service is at a much higher orbit which results in greater latencies.

~~~
SEJeff
ULA is a merger of boeing and lockheed martin. All three are private
companies. This didn't lead to any efficiency in price. Multiple launch
providers are what is leading to better price.

~~~
astrodust
Exactly. Launch prices went down when countries other than the US started to
offer payload services. They're going down even more sharply now because of
increased competition, not necessarily privatization, though that has been a
factor in increasing competition.

------
alphydan
> 40 million subscribers to the service by 2025, amounting to $30 billion in
> revenue that year.

$30,000/40/12 ≈ $63/mo

For internet in a remote location of the world? Where do I sign up?

~~~
shmerl
More interestingly, how will Internet work on Mars?

~~~
tntn
It will probably have its own satellite network that serves as the Mars
internet, with a high-latency intermittent bridge to the Earth internet.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_Internet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_Internet)

~~~
robin_reala
Where high-latency is a ping of somewhere between 364,000ms and 2,684,000ms
depending on the date.

~~~
mixmax
Tcp seems like a really bad protocol for this.

~~~
aaomidi
There already is a bunch of RFCs in place for high latency protocols.

~~~
robin_reala
Famously RFC1149:
[https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1149](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1149) . I
suspect that wouldn’t fly in an interplanetary scenario though.

~~~
shabble
I think
[https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1217](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1217)
might be more appropriate, and even touches on the relevant topic in section
5(e).

------
barbegal
I don't understand how this network will work in practise. I can broadly
understand the physical layer. There will be a big increase in bandwidth over
other systems. More satellites and higher frequencies means more data in the
system overall.

The link layer and the routing layer however are going to be key to how this
system will deliver at such a large scale and with low latency. Negotiating
links and routing is currently done with huge, power hungry switches in giant
data centres. And those only have to deal with relatively static routes, with
a satellite constellation, routes and constantly changing.

My best guess is that for the most part, traffic will go via intermediaries
rather than from handheld devices. Having fixed base stations that communicate
with the satellites means fewer links to maintain and easier negotiation if
they maintain a fixed location.

Does anyone have any more technical information beyond what is provided by a
paper by Samsung [1] on a similar space network?

[1]
[https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1508/1508.02383.pdf](https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1508/1508.02383.pdf)

~~~
doikor
This isn't meant for handheld devices. Musk has mostly been talking about
pizza box sized dish.

~~~
stcredzero
How practical would it be for radar stealthed balloons to act as floating cell
towers? I wonder if such devices could be used to provide internet to regions
under totalitarian control?

~~~
hobofan
I think a receiver the size of a pizza box can still use the traditional
pragmatic approach of hiding it on a rooftop.

~~~
aaomidi
You can still track signals originating from rooftops using drones and then
prosecuting the people doing that for spying.

Iran is one of those countries that really don't like two way satellite
internet.

~~~
hobofan
Predator drones, or quadrocopter drones?

I thought that this could be a possibility, but has any government actually
gone that far yet? This sounds a level too dystopian for the current time.

------
jimnotgym
> but the vehicle won’t be attempting a landing after takeoff. (SpaceX has not
> given a reason for that.)

From watching the stream of the launch it seems it was an old model rocket
that they don't need any more. I guess there is a cost to recovery

~~~
foxyv
I think it was mainly because they were going for a polar orbit.

~~~
syncsynchalt
They've landed cores out of Vandenberg before (ie. polar orbits). These
landings were all on ships, as I guess their landing pad is not complete or
not approved.

------
the_grue
I wonder what the latency is going to be, in particular for intercontinental
traffic. Will it be better or worse than with the submarine cables we use
today?

~~~
corrigible
Probably around ~50ms (see [https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2016/11/space...](https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2016/11/spacex-plans-worldwide-satellite-internet-with-low-latency-
gigabit-speed/))

~~~
the_grue
50ms sounds fantastic even for fast-paced multiplayer games.

~~~
astrodust
That depends if it's average or median or 95th percentile, plus how much
variability there is.

~~~
the_grue
That's also true.

------
pjkundert
Of course, they did no such thing. Side note: will we ever have real
journalists again?

They launched a pair of temporary test satellites to prove some of the
concepts they plan to use. These will remain on orbit only for a short time.

I was at Vandenberg on Wednesday morning for the scrubbed launch - drat!!

~~~
eganist
> These will remain on orbit only for a short time.

This statement is directly contradicted by the FCC filing:

[https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=185534&x](https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=185534&x)

> The designed lifetime of each satellite is six months. If this lifetime is
> exceeded, _SpaceX plans to continue operation until such time as the primary
> mission goals can no longer be met,_ at which point the spacecraft will be
> deorbited.

The text in this particular filing, if read plainly, would indicate that
SpaceX could easily let Microsat-2a and 2b stay in the air potentially through
production deployment of Starlink if feasible.

~~~
pjkundert
Nowhere near the target design lifetime of the actual system satellites. No
production functionality beyond test-bed.

Of course they will use them as long as they can; that’s consistent with what
the FCC was told.

------
kodablah
I've seen numbers on proposed download speed (~1gbps) and latency (~35ms) [0],
but I can't find anything on proposed upload speed. Any ideas? I know
offerings like Hughes net have claimed 3mbps.

0 - [https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2016/11/space...](https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2016/11/spacex-plans-worldwide-satellite-internet-with-low-latency-
gigabit-speed/)

~~~
dawnerd
Isn't it similar to existing tech being rolled out on airplanes?

Edit: Just read that it is using the same bands. Maybe it'll mean gogo will
finally have some solid competition.

------
dzhiurgis
Launched with so much success, Elon is giving away thousands of dollars in
ethereum /s

[https://twitter.com/eiiilonmusk/status/966844047032832000](https://twitter.com/eiiilonmusk/status/966844047032832000)

backup: [https://imgur.com/a/8OsbX](https://imgur.com/a/8OsbX)

(this is a third or fourth one I've noticed so far)

------
thebigspacefuck
11,941 to go!

------
madamelic
It's actually surprising Ajit Pai would publicly support competition when his
entire schtick seems to be locking down on it.

~~~
shmerl
It probably indicates he thinks the project is a pipe dream. Since otherwise,
it's a major threat to his monopolistic bosses.

~~~
Tuna-Fish
It isn't, really. It's actually going to save them money. The system will not
have enough aggregate bandwidth to really compete for any dense areas. Right
now, for the major ISPs the dense areas are profit centers that are used to
subsidize the rural areas in the states and counties that require an ISP to
serve both if it wants to serve the cities. Starlink will not be able to
meaningfully compete in the cities, while it will ease the burden of the rural
net-negative customers.

~~~
nerpderp83
Right, and it takes off the monopoly burden from those telcos so they are then
free under the same Pai to ratchet up their underhanded techniques. If I were
ATT and Verizon, I would fund Starlink.

