Re:Starlink Is a Big Deal
by Robotbeat on Thursday January 30, 2020 @11:27AM
(#22192578)
> "On the other hand, it's far worse than "20G per satellite." Bandwidth is limited by available RF spectrum, and that's not magically gonna increase with satellite count."
That's not true. More satellites allows you to put them in lower orbits, increasing spatial multiplexing. Yes, even for the same spectrum.
This is not like mobile where the phones have fairly omnidirectional antenna (improving to a handful of elements under 5G). The user terminals will have dozens if not hundreds or thousands of phased array elements, allowing connections to multiple satellites simultaneously and very narrow beamwidths. The satellites also have phased arrays with lots of elements.
I agree that dense cities and optical fiber will still be able to beat out Starlink (and similar), but there is PLENTY of room for using the same amount of RF spectrum for vastly greater bandwidth using spatial multiplexing and phased arrays on both ends and multiple, cooperating satellites in view simultaneously.
That's not true. More satellites allows you to put them in lower orbits, increasing spatial multiplexing. Yes, even for the same spectrum.
This is not like mobile where the phones have fairly omnidirectional antenna (improving to a handful of elements under 5G). The user terminals will have dozens if not hundreds or thousands of phased array elements, allowing connections to multiple satellites simultaneously and very narrow beamwidths. The satellites also have phased arrays with lots of elements.
I agree that dense cities and optical fiber will still be able to beat out Starlink (and similar), but there is PLENTY of room for using the same amount of RF spectrum for vastly greater bandwidth using spatial multiplexing and phased arrays on both ends and multiple, cooperating satellites in view simultaneously.