> > Starlink however forgets that Russia does have anti satellite weapons and > they probably will not hesitate to use them which will make low earth orbit > a very dangerous place when Russia starts blowing up the Starlink birds. > I applaud the humanitarian aspect of providing Starlink service, > unfortunately there are geopolitical realities like access to space which > is likely to be negatively impacted if and when Russia starts shooting down > these birds. Fortunately if they start shooting down the birds the > debris will burn up in a year or so unlike geosync orbit where it would > stay forever. >
Russia is not going to be using up it's anti-sat weapons to take down commercial internet birds. Let's use a little common sense here. On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 2:57 PM Scott McGrath <smcgr...@starry.com> wrote: > Starlink however forgets that Russia does have anti satellite weapons and > they probably will not hesitate to use them which will make low earth orbit > a very dangerous place when Russia starts blowing up the Starlink birds. > I applaud the humanitarian aspect of providing Starlink service, > unfortunately there are geopolitical realities like access to space which > is likely to be negatively impacted if and when Russia starts shooting down > these birds. Fortunately if they start shooting down the birds the > debris will burn up in a year or so unlike geosync orbit where it would > stay forever. > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 1:44 PM Phineas Walton <p...@phineas.io> wrote: > >> This is more of a brand image / marketing stunt for Starlink. A pretty >> ingenious way to market which will heavily pay off long term. To them, this >> is cheap for how much attention it’s getting them. >> >> Phin >> >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 6:36 PM Crist Clark <cjc+na...@pumpky.net> wrote: >> >>> So they’re going to offer the service to anyone in a denied area for >>> free somehow? How do you send someone a bill or how do they pay it if you >>> can’t do business in the country? >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:39 PM Jay Hennigan <j...@west.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2/28/22 16:17, Michael Thomas wrote: >>>> >>>> > As a practical matter how does this help? You need to have base >>>> > stations/dishes, right? Can they be beefy ones that can pump out >>>> > gigabytes that would be capable of backfilling the load? Or would it >>>> > need to be multiple in parallel? Wouldn't that bandwidth be >>>> constrained >>>> > by the number of visible satellites in the constellation? I wonder if >>>> > they've ever even tested it with feeding into an internet facing >>>> router. >>>> > Could tables on the satellites explode? >>>> >>>> If there aren't fixed Internet-connected earth stations line-of-sight >>>> to >>>> the satellite that's serving the remote terminal, Starlink will relay >>>> satellite-to-satellite until a path to an Internet-connected earth >>>> station is in reach. >>>> >>>> From the linked article: >>>> >>>> "Musk has previously stressed Starlink’s flexibility of Starlink in >>>> providing internet service. In September, Musk talked about how the >>>> company would use links between the satellites to create a network that >>>> could provide service even in countries that prohibit SpaceX from >>>> installing ground infrastructure for distribution. >>>> >>>> As for government regulators who want to block Starlink from using that >>>> capability, Musk had a simple answer. >>>> >>>> “They can shake their fist at the sky,” Musk said." >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net >>>> Network Engineering - CCIE #7880 >>>> 503 897-8550 - WB6RDV >>>> >>>>
