Amazon Has Enough Satellites To Launch Its Starlink Competitor (theverge.com) 42
Amazon says its Leo satellite network now has enough spacecraft in orbit to begin limited commercial internet service, with 396 satellites providing "continuous service across initial latitudes." Early performance will likely be uneven, however, and well behind Starlink. "It'll be years before Amazon can boast similar performance numbers as it continues to launch a planned 3,232 Leo satellites," reports The Verge. From the report: SpaceX went live with its "Better than nothing beta" back in 2020 when it had almost 900 satellites operating in low-Earth orbit. It initially served a narrow band of users in the upper US and Canada, who complained about frequent service interruptions and high sensitivity to obstructions, with speeds between 50Mbps and 150Mbps, and latency from 20ms to 40ms. By 2022, the service and coverage areas had already dramatically improved. [...]
SpaceX currently has over 10,000 Starlink satellites in operation, providing robust internet connectivity on land, sea, and air in over 160 countries. Performance varies by the dish, service level paid for, time of day, and location of the user, but we're now talking 200Mbps median download speeds, 10Mbps to 40Mbps uploads, and latency hovering around 25ms.
SpaceX currently has over 10,000 Starlink satellites in operation, providing robust internet connectivity on land, sea, and air in over 160 countries. Performance varies by the dish, service level paid for, time of day, and location of the user, but we're now talking 200Mbps median download speeds, 10Mbps to 40Mbps uploads, and latency hovering around 25ms.
almost right (Score:5, Funny)
You are correct LEO != Leo, one is an acronym for low-Earth orbit. The other is the name of Amazon's satellite network. RTFA
Re: (Score:3)
In your defense, Amazon Leo is a stupid name for it. They originally called it Project Kuiper but that was always place holder until the marketing team could think of a better name. A room full of MBAs never fails to disappoint.
That's what it's called (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough. Feel free to mod down my post, it is incorrect and unfair
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
LEO not Leo, moron.
Yeah, get a brains! Morans.
Re:illiterate (Score:5, Funny)
It's spelled "maroon" - just ask Bugs.
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't that a Thai girls name? Well, I hope it was a girl.
Re: (Score:2)
I just wish that Slashdot would stop posting paywalled articles from sites like the New York Times or The Verge in their "news" stories.
They're so prevalent now that it makes me wonder if Slashdot is trying to run some sort of referral kickback scheme. Slashdot probably doesn't have enough readers left to make that profitable, though, so I'll just blame excessive laziness instead of malice.
Re: (Score:3)
Good luck with that (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Unless the Internet is lying to me, Leo orbits around 600km and Starlink around 350-600km. So it doesn't appear that will make a lot of difference.
Most of the latency in my Starlink connection is because the signal comes down in the US and has to route back from there to Canada if I ping my office from home instead of going direct through a cable. So I wouldn't expect to see much difference if I was using Leo instead.
Re: (Score:3)
600km is 0.0020014 seconds at the speed of light.
Or 2 milliseconds.
Re: (Score:2)
You're off by a factor of 10x.
Starlink is at 480-550 km
Amazon Leo is at 590-630km
At most that's about 30% the distance or about 30% more latency. Also an extra round trip of 300km is about 1ms extra latency.
Re: (Score:2)
The satellite bounce(s?) is not the only source of latency. Consider also all the ground links between the subscriber and the servers.
Altogether, the slightly higher orbits for Amazon Leo won't matter that much.
Re: (Score:2)
"They're 3x higher than Starlink's satellites so you can expect (a minimum of) 3x latency."
Even without knowing the specific values, you can reason that 3x orbital radius would mean a *maximum* of 3x latency because both a) the baseline from each ground station to the point under the satellite contacted by the base station* and b) the delay through the processing circuitry are not zero.
*: any satellite to satellite latency would increase with a higher orbit.
How Will They Get Them Up? (Score:2)
Will they use SpaceX to get all those satellites into orbit. Blue Origin seems to be a bit... lacking.
Re: (Score:3)
They purchased 18 Ariane-6 flights. The third contracted Ariane-6 flew on June 17, delivering 36 satellites https://www.arianespace.com/fo... [arianespace.com]
Re: (Score:3)
They've used 3 Falcon 9 launches so far and contracted for 10 more. SpaceX is happy to launch them. Remember, SpaceX developed Starlink in large part because they were short on customers for Falcon 9, because it can launch so often. This way, they became their own best customer by monetising a huge constellation. Having Starlink competitors launching with them too is icing on the cake.
Re: (Score:2)
The satellites are already in orbit.
Amazon says its Leo satellite network now has enough spacecraft in orbit to begin limited commercial internet service
FCC License in Jeopardy (Score:3)
On the other hand, Amazon's FCC license required them to have 1616 satellites operating by July 30th, or risk losing their spectrum. Amazon has been granted an extension [google.com] because...reasons. Some of the stated reasons may be genuine, like ensuring consumers (including the US gov't or military) have a competitor to Starlink, or having a US company secure a spot in a global land rush.
But there are probably unspoken reasons, too, having to do with Bezos' extraordinary wealth and Silicon Valley's cozy relationship to the White House. I expect that if some scrappy startup were in a similar situation, their spectrum would have been revoked, so that a bigger player could snatch it up. We all need to adjust to the fact that, since Trump v Slaughter [wikipedia.org], the FCC is no longer an independent commission - every member has their job at the pleasure of the President, who can fire them at will if he doesn't get the outcome he wants.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, Amazon's FCC license required them to have 1616 satellites operating by July 30th, or risk losing their spectrum. Amazon has been granted an extension [google.com] because...reasons.
Space is hard. Many of the delays were due to launch platform availability that was mostly outside of the control of Amazon itself (Ariane is late, Vulkan is late, Starship is late, Blue Origin is late, and Soyuz was taken off the table in 2022). And the pandemic delayed many projects. It was highly expected the FCC would grant Amazon an extension of some sort, but, of course, there had to be a formal request, evaluation, and finally a decision.
Musk vs Bezos (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or the incumbent telecom/broadband companies. Difference is that with Bezos/Musk, at least you'll get service for it.
It's hilarious because there's no money in it (Score:2)
Really no money? (Score:2)
Most rich people pay a stupid amount for cellular and home internet. There are probably 500M people who will pay over $100/month, another 500M who pay at least $50 and another 5B who pay $15 or more. So 150B/month = 1.8T per year. Assuming Starlink only gains 20% of the world market and their capital is obsolete in 5 years. They need to spend less than 1.8T every 5 years to be profitable. Space is expensive but not that expensive. I've
You can't short the shares (Score:1)
After 120 days SpaceX gets dumped into the NASDAQ index funds by force whether you want to have it or not. This will pump up the value of the stock making shorting it basically impossible until right before the collapse. Unless you have insider information then you will not be able to catch that and deal with it. You will just lose your money.
Y
196 million shares are already shorted (Score:2)
So basically you have no idea what you were talking about
Re:Really no money? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
There are only so many people on planet Earth that can spare $100 a month for internet and can't just get wired internet which is cheaper and faster and better. Never mind competition from cellular internet.
I checked his videos, that argument is somewhat flawed. The Starlink market isn't limited to the home consumer market. It includes commercial, government, and military contracts. Ships at sea and planes in the air are using it. Drone aircraft can use it. It can be the backhaul for a cell network in rural areas. A town/village can share a Starlink connection, so it's not just individuals paying for a connection. There's also Starlink Roam for people on trips.
Some cell phones now have emergency SOS satell
More space junk! (Score:2)
If this keeps up then Elmo may NEVER get to Mars. At some point it may become impossible to chart a safe path through all the satellites. Go Amazon!