SpaceX starlink in South Africa

Inn3rs3lf

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
2,180
I watch a streamer that is in rural Canada, he just got Starlink. Constant drops. He returned to LTE to stream. So who knows.
 

Crusader

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,305
I watch a streamer that is in rural Canada, he just got Starlink. Constant drops. He returned to LTE to stream. So who knows.
I think that's due to the brief moments where no satellites are available for handover. It seems to be enough time to give problems for video calls/calls/live streaming, but if you do something that uses a buffer you won't notice it. Should be fixed when more satellites are up. And I think the current performance will greatly depend on your location and the density of the satellites over the area.
 

TipCy

Active Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2013
Messages
74
The GS communicate with the SATs in the bog standard Ku band already used by sat systems.
If the Ku band is already being used by other sat systems will GSs ever happen in SA?

GS approvals are not that difficult for those holding the correct service licences and after paying the spectrum fees.
The issue in SA is the use of the sat-to-terminal frequency band

is that sat-to-terminal frequency band currently saturated in SA? or is the real issue here that the right hands would need to be rubbed to get approval for use of that band?

I've been reading up that starlink sats are to operate in the Ku and Ka bands? i'm not too clued up on all of this but I'm sure that's a lot of Bandwidth to have multiple operators in the same bands?
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,361
If the Ku band is already being used by other sat systems will GSs ever happen in SA?



is that sat-to-terminal frequency band currently saturated in SA? or is the real issue here that the right hands would need to be rubbed to get approval for use of that band?

I've been reading up that starlink sats are to operate in the Ku and Ka bands? i'm not too clued up on all of this but I'm sure that's a lot of Bandwidth to have multiple operators in the same bands?
The Ku band GS to Sat is a coordinated band so generally, not an issue for interference.
It is the blanket use of the band from uncoordinated stations that may be a problem.
The Ka band is not saturated anywhere in the World.
 
Last edited:

JakodSA

New Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
5
Highest speed and lowest latency globally. Enough said.

PS: Not even all the satellites are launched yet, and still out performs anything currently available.
 

netstrider

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
2,222
30ms is local speedtest currently. Local meaning US user to US server or Canada user to Canadian server or UK user to UK server.

We are connected via fibre optic on the planet itself and we get 160ms, maybe 140ms is possible from CPT to EU if very very lucky.

I don't see how bouncing packets into LEO and then transmitting that via lazer higher up and back down to ground stations will improve much, if anything, over what we currently have.

The ONLY advantage Starlink and similar services aim to have is ubiquitous service all over. Giving fibre-like experience at best, but likely with slightly higher latency than terrestrial fibre.

That simply means we will have many more farm boys and so on potentially playing on EU servers - or even just joining local servers because rural areas or not well served.

Even then, most of those folk are too busy to be playing around on computers. Most of them use it for business.
 
Last edited:

netstrider

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
2,222
Highest speed and lowest latency globally. Enough said.

PS: Not even all the satellites are launched yet, and still out performs anything currently available.
Not sure what you're on about.

40Gbps is mainstream - yeah you won't see it on speedtests, but it is. In fact, that's not even the fastest we can go.

Also not sure how Starlink is the fastest speed? There 10Gbps speedtests out there, let alone 1Gbps which is already decent for the average home user.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Yuu

ronald911

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2007
Messages
2,583
Not sure what you're on about.

40Gbps is mainstream - yeah you won't see it on speedtests, but it is. In fact, that's not even the fastest we can go.

Also not sure how Starlink is the fastest speed? There 10Gbps speedtests out there, let alone 1Gbps which is already decent for the average home user.

I think he meant it as, "It out performs all other commercial satellite internet services".
 

Magnum

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
4,682
that 2600 Mi and 95ms lat really makes me sad.
not acceptable.JPG

Rain Really Sucks Airwaves!

that speed indicator. 12K ms Lat
 
Last edited:

itareanlnotani

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
3,773
Those of you with fibre, can basically ignore starlink.
Those of us with no other options other than LTE or Fixed Wifi will be happy.
There are a lot of us in the latter segment.
 

BlackStatic

Active Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2018
Messages
60
30ms is local speedtest currently. Local meaning US user to US server or Canada user to Canadian server or UK user to UK server.

We are connected via fibre optic on the planet itself and we get 160ms, maybe 140ms is possible from CPT to EU if very very lucky.

I don't see how bouncing packets into LEO and then transmitting that via lazer higher up and back down to ground stations will improve much, if anything, over what we currently have.

The ONLY advantage Starlink and similar services aim to have is ubiquitous service all over. Giving fibre-like experience at best, but likely with slightly higher latency than terrestrial fibre.

That simply means we will have many more farm boys and so on potentially playing on EU servers - or even just joining local servers because rural areas or not well served.

Even then, most of those folk are too busy to be playing around on computers. Most of them use it for business.
Until there are actual physical tests done it's all just pissing in the wind.
 

Crusader

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,305
Physical tests done IN South Africa with no local GSs available.
I'm sure by the time they launch here they will have some local ground stations in operation. When they started offering services in Australia ground stations seemed to be established quickly.

Read interesting article where Shotwell said that the dish cost started out at $3000 and apparently is at around $1500 at the moment, with prices to drop to 'a few hundred dollars' when production ramps up. So Starlink is currently subsidizing the hardware for users.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,361
The terminal costs are by no means cheap. This system is hi-tech. It will take a while before terminal costs will drop.
 

ToxicBunny

Oi! Leave me out of this...
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
94,450
Those of you with fibre, can basically ignore starlink.
Those of us with no other options other than LTE or Fixed Wifi will be happy.
There are a lot of us in the latter segment.

I think even those with fibre should pay attention to Starlink... there may be use cases where Starlink could provide a better experience for their uses for a price point.

But in general at a broad stroke, I would think you are largely right.
 

Crusader

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,305
Another thing I missed was that they are 5 launches away from full global coverage in phase 1. Any launches after that will be to increase reliability and eventually to launch version 2 of the satellites with the 'space lasers'.

Really an interesting development to keep an eye on.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,361
Another thing I missed was that they are 5 launches away from full global coverage in phase 1. Any launches after that will be to increase reliability and eventually to launch version 2 of the satellites with the 'space lasers'.

Really an interesting development to keep an eye on.
Not reliability but availability of capacity. Starlink is just another last mile technology offering that ensures ubiquitous coverage unfettered by geographical constraints.
Its success depends on the availability of sufficient capacity just like any other last mile technology. Because the satellites move, there must be enough of them out there to ensure continuous coverage. Then, there must be enough of them out there to ensure that there is always enough capacity available for the services trying to use the network.
It is really very simple.
 
Last edited:
Top