News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites. Parent comment

Re:SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites by buboard on Thursday November 15, 2018 @08:27PM (#18465389)
80msec is not a good outcome considering the cost and complexity of the investment. Aren't there alternative technologies to achieve this connectivity?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites by elteto on Thursday November 15, 2018 @10:43PM (#18466204)
I think you might be underestimating latencies in the real world.

These [0] are statistics from Verizon showing 90ms RTT for trans-atlantic connections. Trans-pacific is > 100ms. 80ms seems highly competitive for me in this context.

[0] https://enterprise.verizon.com/terms/latency/

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites by buboard on Friday November 16, 2018 @05:45AM (#18467886)
there is a video posted in the comments that compares latencies to cables. spacex advertises latencies from 50-80 , but cable is in all cases fasters (rather obvious i think).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites by icelancer on Thursday November 15, 2018 @11:07PM (#18466312)
It is a good outcome considering the speed of light and existing technologies. I don't know what you rightfully expected if you were hoping for serious improvement on that number, other than breaking the laws of physics.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites by buboard on Friday November 16, 2018 @03:50AM (#18467470)
my question is if the slight improvement in latencies makes the investment worthwhile
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites by gsich on Friday November 16, 2018 @01:38AM (#18466960)
It's still a somewhat good value, compared to GEO satellites. It's no fun to use those.
[ Parent | on HN ]