On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:57 AM Nathan Owens via Starlink
<[email protected]> wrote:
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.
You really don't need much data for C&C traffic. You do need a fairly
reliable uplink, but the observed jitter on an otherwise idle link was
in the few ms range.
GPSD has a udp output mode, too.
(btw, to my knowledge, starlink has not enabled any network interfaces
to the outside to their internal on-dish gps chip, which
when I was whinging about it, would provide perfect time to
downstream clients, either natively or via ntp)
It's one very short message, per second.
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:50 AM Steve Stroh via Starlink <
[email protected]> 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 <
[email protected]> 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, [email protected] 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 <[email protected]> On Behalf
Of David Lang via Starlink
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2022 1:28 PM
To: Kurtis Heimerl <[email protected]>
Cc: Starlink list <[email protected]>
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
<[email protected]> 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
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
--
Steve Stroh N8GNJ (he / him / his)
Editor
Zero Retries Newsletter - https://zeroretries.substack.com
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
--
This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work:
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-6981366665607352320-FXtz
Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
