Internet on Sailboat

[captainKJ]

here is another one for you

Internet at Sea - Maritime


SeaTel 2406 Maritime VSAT - Satellite Internet at Sea
Regular Price: $37,500.00
Special Price: $31,500.00
The SeaTel 2406 Antenna is a 60 cm Ku-Band maritime VSAT antenna ideal for vessels in the 60 to 80 foot range. The 2406 system can be configured for SCPC, broadband or hybrid satellite networks.


you might want to consider a google search under MARINE INTERNET

[ka4wja]

Originally Posted by WhataWorld!

Does anyone have any thoughts on where the reliable [worldwide] internet options will be in a few years, based on the direction the industry is heading?

Yes.....but....

The "but" is that there are vast differences in how/where/when the future of internet access goes.....on land, in populated areas, etc. versus "at sea" and in very remote and unpopulated areas....

Satellite technology and processing advances, will generally mean the possibility of higher speeds (and somewhat lower user costs).....
BUT, in the world of "worldwide global coverage", this does not necessarily translate into the rapid advanaces that most users/consumers assume are "normal".....
While, on land / in highly populated areas, over a few year peroid you may find speeds increasing by an order of magnitude (or more), and costs falling by 50% (or more).......this does NOT happen in the very small niche market of global satellite coverage, and I hope you understand it is NOT a technology-limited issue, but rather a money / political issue.....
There are very few potential customers, therefore the fixed costs are not able to be "shared" by millions (actually 100's of millions) of users......but rather these costs are shouldered by the very few that require the services...

If you read thru the materials referenced you'll notice that internet access via satellite, while at sea and in very remote locales, is NOT new and has been around for many years.....

And, over those years, the advnaces of technology have made the equipment cheaper (and antennas samller) and also improved speeds, etc.....BUT, have not signifiacntly changed the operating costs.....just like in cell phones, where the cost of the equipment (the phone) is less (or free), the service costs are not much lower (and in many cases is higher), but there are more "features" and "services"........

This is the way of the world thesedays.....
Whether you like it or not, those are the facts-of-life......
(Sorry, if that is not the answer that your were hoping for....but, I'm not going to sugar-coat things....)

Furthermore, this simple "fact-of-life" is signifiacntly amplified in the world of truly "global worldwide coverage"....
Remember that about 70% of the Earth is covered by oceans, and once you discount Antarctica and the North Pole (unless you work with Santa Claus), you find about 20% of the Earth is land......and even less than that is where people live and work....
So, if you want worldwide coverage, it is there.....and has been there for years.....and advances have made it better, and future advances will make it even better, but the bottom line is: to cover the globe worldwide, it COSTS, and it will COST, even in the future.....

This doesn't mean all hope is lost......not at all....
Iridium is working on an entire new constellation / system (with a new generation of satellites), which by 2014 (????) should allow higher speeds (500kB - 1gB ???) than their current Iridium Open Port, but will the cost be much lower??? Probably not.....
INMARSAT has just this past year brought on-line their newest version of satellites (and the next generation is 10 years away, or more), so their advances (in global worlwide hi-speed internet access) in the next couple of years will probably be slight.....

Please understand I don't have a crystal ball (and I don't know anyone that does), so while nothing is set-in-stone here, all of the facts I'm posting about are available to anyone and you can read up on it and make your own predictions.....
However, I do caution you to not trust too highly in the press releases.....they are notoriously full of BS.....(you all remember the Terrastar / AT&T press release from more than a year ago???)

And, while I will NOT engage in a political discussion here, please don't forget that gov't regulators (in many countries) put their noses into these matters as well.....and anyone care to guess how many voters / lobbyists / contributors (or those offering bribes) there are sailing on the boats at sea, versus those on land?????
Do I need to say more???

So, combine the low number of users, with the lack of political support, and you get:
a) high costs
b) low speeds
c) slow advancement of technology

Nuff said????




Fair winds.

John
s/v Annie Laurie

[ka4wja]

Originally Posted by captainKJ

here is another one for you
SeaTel 2406 Maritime VSAT - Satellite Internet at Sea

captainKJ,
The reason I did not bring up VSAT services are because of the complexities (not just throwing a switch or clicking a mouse) of moving the services from satellite carrier to satellite carrier (when moving across the globe), if you elect to do it yourself.....or the costs involved if you elect to have SeaTel (or other value-added provider) to it for you....

Not to mention the reduced / limited Ku-Band coverages while out at sea.....usually necessitaing that most users also have INMARSAT terminals on board......
And, the electrical power needed for the larger VSAT's.....

Private VSAT internet access systems are a viable option for those on mega-yachts, and although there's no technical reason you couldn't install one on a "smaller" boat, the costs are pretty high....

If, the original poster was in that category, he'd have his "staff" handling all of this for him.....
So, I sort-of figured best not to cloud the issue with a VSAT system discussion.....but you DO point out that if you got the $$$$$$, you can do a lot....


Fair winds...

John
s/v Annie Laurie

[fishwife]

John, in your first post you provided all the information required, very succinctly. It took me the best part of a month to assemble the same information independently. I think someone is spinning his wheels.

P.

[daddle]

ka4wja: I had a Hughes satellite internet connection at the cabin for a while. It didn't work very well. The throughput was reasonable. But it seemed like the delay annoyed the WWW servers, or something like that. Very hard to keep sessions going.

Are these other services you mention low-orbit, or do they seem to work well with the delay?

[ka4wja]

Originally Posted by daddle

ka4wja: I had a Hughes satellite internet connection at the cabin for a while. It didn't work very well. The throughput was reasonable. But it seemed like the delay annoyed the WWW servers, or something like that. Very hard to keep sessions going.

Are these other services you mention low-orbit, or do they seem to work well with the delay?

daddle,
You ask a good question......but, I don't think this is the place for a satellite tiutorial......besides, I don't have that kind of time...

But, I'll give you the basics...
Setting aside the most common problem with HughesNet, etc....the poor installation, poor adjustment, poor commisioning, etc....as well as obstructions (trees, etc.) growing, etc...
Here are some BIG differences.....


1) There's nothing wrong with Hughes Net....but you should be aware of what the service is / does, versus what it isn't / doesn't do....
HughesNet is sold/marketed (and designed / operated) to a low consumer "price point".....with Wild Blue to a lesser extent, and Starband even further from the consumer "price point" end of the market....
(with Starband similar to the bottom-end of the commercial market)
So, just from the purely business end, Hughes Net is the "Dollar Store" version of satellite internet service....

Comparing this to INMARSAT (and/or Iridium Open Port) services, is like comparing a kid's CB walkie-talkie to a fully hardened civil defense radio comm system.....
Fact is INMARSAT Fleet Broadband isn't quite up to the Pentagon's standards, but it's an order of magnitude (or more) better than what most have experience with (HughesNet, etc.)


2) Secondly, you should be aware of Ku-Band (12 / 14 Ghz) "rain-fade", which affects your thru-put even if it's not raining.....yeah, doesn't make sense, but moisture-ladden clouds to your South, will affect your thru-put.... (as well as heavy rain at one of the HughesNet hubs, which could be on the other side of the country...)

I've written entire papers on "weather attenuation".....but I'm NOT going to do that here....
Suffice to say that satcoms on freqs below 4 - 5 Ghz are not affected much by rain....and freqs above 7 - 8 Ghz are affected......and the curve runs up very rapidly (non-linear) past 6 - 8 Ghz....
Anyone in the SE USA ever seen Directv or DISH network signals drop-out completely when it's raining.....raining somewhere in the path between their dish/antenna and the satellites.....primarily to the SW??? That's Ku-band (and some Ka-Band) rain-fade....
(For terrestrial systems, there are affects on anything aboved UHF, but they are minor until a few Ghz.....)
And, of course the X-band / 9Ghz marine radar that many here use.....ever used it to "see" rain squals, and steer around them.....well the reason you don't see that big ship in the middle of that squal, or on the other side of it, is rain-attenuation.....

Since INMARSAT and Iridium use L-band (1.5 / 1.6Ghz), there are no issues with rain-fade.....


3) You also need to be aware of "selective availability" or "selective loading"......(known comercially as "packet prioritization")
Hmmm???
You were never told about this part of the HughesNet system....
Not surprised.....

Well, what this means is that once you reach a certain level of bandwidth used per week, or per month, YOUR system is slowed-down.....
Yep, that's right, if you're a heavy user....once you get past a certain point, they penalized you.....and it's done automatically, and nobody ever tells....[shhh, don't tell anyone.... ]

They measure the amount of data you transfer...and at some point, the client's packets (your data) are given lower priority....resulting in an effective decrease in speed.....

(Wild Blue and Starband, also use the same selective packet prioritization, but to a lesser extent....and is based on the service that you subscribe to and/or modem you use...)


4) The biggest variable that you're not told about is that the number of users on the system at any particular time DOES have an affect on system performance.....
While this variable is BIG, they DO strive to maintain a decent level of performance.....

Yes, there is a certain minimum level of performance designed into the system, but that level can be reached and you're none-the-wiser.....not to mention that this "level" is a adjustable variable.....meaning that if they need more money, and sign up more customers, and do not add more satellite capacity, this "level" is then lowered.....


5) daddle, have a look at the info referenced (links posted) and you'll see INMARSAT uses geo-stationary satellites and Iridium use Low-Earth-Orbiting satellites.....
And, while you may think that Iridium Open Port has the advantage in that respect, neither system has many "www" troubles...
But, if this is a conern, PLEASE contact INMARSAT and Iridium (and their vendors) and get a demomstration.....


6) If you have further issues with HughesNet, I suggest contacting them, armed with this info here....
But, you're still not liekly to resolve the issues.....
{remember you're dealing with the "dollar store"..... }


I do hope this brief post answers your basic question.....
Is INMARSAT Fleet Broadband more reliable that HughesNet.....
The answer is: Yes....

Maybe I should've just written only the last 2 sentences.....


John
s/v Annie Laurie

[tsmwebb]

Good stuff, John. Thanks!

Tom

[mitbeaver]

Anyone have experience with this unit? The signal degradation mentioned with Ku-band is a little unsettling. I am about to purchase the always on 64 kbps leased option for $2k/mo. I am also concerned with the coverage mentioned for the band. I've seen the coverage maps and it seem to be in all the areas, just wondering if there is any first hand accounts.

Thanks!

[winds aloft]

I have to agree with ka4wja... If you need it and can afford it, and it sounds like you do and can, the FB500 is the way to go. Just be ready to pay about $15,000 per month in access fees, in addition to the equipment cost. (BTW, the equipment takes up quite a bit of real estate, too...) Any other solution will leave you hanging out to dry at some point. We have been cruising the Carribean and east coast of the US, as well as some open Atlantic waters for the past 2 years. I use a sat phone as a modem for wx, etc. Basic sat phone is dial-up speed (9600 baud). Not what you want for trading. Most marinas we have been in, even in the US but especially outside it, have terrible wifi connections. Even if you get a good wifi signal, the through-put can be awful, with a lot of dropped connections- not even satisfactory for voice calls. If your financial health depends on good connections, don't depend on wifi.

[lore927]

ka4wja, very interesting website, wish you had an RSS feed :-)

[buck0]

Originally Posted by ka4wja

daddle,
You ask a good question......but, I don't think this is the place for a satellite tiutorial......besides, I don't have that kind of time...

But, I'll give you the basics...
Setting aside the most common problem with HughesNet, etc....the poor installation, poor adjustment, poor commisioning, etc....as well as obstructions (trees, etc.) growing, etc...
Here are some BIG differences.....


1) There's nothing wrong with Hughes Net....but you should be aware of what the service is / does, versus what it isn't / doesn't do....
HughesNet is sold/marketed (and designed / operated) to a low consumer "price point".....with Wild Blue to a lesser extent, and Starband even further from the consumer "price point" end of the market....
(with Starband similar to the bottom-end of the commercial market)
So, just from the purely business end, Hughes Net is the "Dollar Store" version of satellite internet service....

Comparing this to INMARSAT (and/or Iridium Open Port) services, is like comparing a kid's CB walkie-talkie to a fully hardened civil defense radio comm system.....
Fact is INMARSAT Fleet Broadband isn't quite up to the Pentagon's standards, but it's an order of magnitude (or more) better than what most have experience with (HughesNet, etc.)


2) Secondly, you should be aware of Ku-Band (12 / 14 Ghz) "rain-fade", which affects your thru-put even if it's not raining.....yeah, doesn't make sense, but moisture-ladden clouds to your South, will affect your thru-put.... (as well as heavy rain at one of the HughesNet hubs, which could be on the other side of the country...)

I've written entire papers on "weather attenuation".....but I'm NOT going to do that here....
Suffice to say that satcoms on freqs below 4 - 5 Ghz are not affected much by rain....and freqs above 7 - 8 Ghz are affected......and the curve runs up very rapidly (non-linear) past 6 - 8 Ghz....
Anyone in the SE USA ever seen Directv or DISH network signals drop-out completely when it's raining.....raining somewhere in the path between their dish/antenna and the satellites.....primarily to the SW??? That's Ku-band (and some Ka-Band) rain-fade....
(For terrestrial systems, there are affects on anything aboved UHF, but they are minor until a few Ghz.....)
And, of course the X-band / 9Ghz marine radar that many here use.....ever used it to "see" rain squals, and steer around them.....well the reason you don't see that big ship in the middle of that squal, or on the other side of it, is rain-attenuation.....

Since INMARSAT and Iridium use L-band (1.5 / 1.6Ghz), there are no issues with rain-fade.....


3) You also need to be aware of "selective availability" or "selective loading"......(known comercially as "packet prioritization")
Hmmm???
You were never told about this part of the HughesNet system....
Not surprised.....

Well, what this means is that once you reach a certain level of bandwidth used per week, or per month, YOUR system is slowed-down.....
Yep, that's right, if you're a heavy user....once you get past a certain point, they penalized you.....and it's done automatically, and nobody ever tells....[shhh, don't tell anyone.... ]

They measure the amount of data you transfer...and at some point, the client's packets (your data) are given lower priority....resulting in an effective decrease in speed.....

(Wild Blue and Starband, also use the same selective packet prioritization, but to a lesser extent....and is based on the service that you subscribe to and/or modem you use...)


4) The biggest variable that you're not told about is that the number of users on the system at any particular time DOES have an affect on system performance.....
While this variable is BIG, they DO strive to maintain a decent level of performance.....

Yes, there is a certain minimum level of performance designed into the system, but that level can be reached and you're none-the-wiser.....not to mention that this "level" is a adjustable variable.....meaning that if they need more money, and sign up more customers, and do not add more satellite capacity, this "level" is then lowered.....


5) daddle, have a look at the info referenced (links posted) and you'll see INMARSAT uses geo-stationary satellites and Iridium use Low-Earth-Orbiting satellites.....
And, while you may think that Iridium Open Port has the advantage in that respect, neither system has many "www" troubles...
But, if this is a conern, PLEASE contact INMARSAT and Iridium (and their vendors) and get a demomstration.....


6) If you have further issues with HughesNet, I suggest contacting them, armed with this info here....
But, you're still not liekly to resolve the issues.....
{remember you're dealing with the "dollar store"..... }


I do hope this brief post answers your basic question.....
Is INMARSAT Fleet Broadband more reliable that HughesNet.....
The answer is: Yes....

Maybe I should've just written only the last 2 sentences.....


John
s/v Annie Laurie

so, ka4wja, it's been 5 years... any new news?
i'm looking at groundcontrol.com and they have unlimited FleetBroadband for $3000/mo and 4GB/mo for $1800 -- did the prices really go so low in 5 years or did I miss something?

[manitu]

3000$ a month? In europe you now get unlimited for 150-200$ a month on eutelsat KA-Sat at 9'E.
Tooway – Fast internet everywhere
A decent antenna on the other hand...

.manitu

[buck0]

Originally Posted by manitu

3000$ a month? In europe you now get unlimited for 150-200$ a month on eutelsat KA-Sat at 9'E.
Tooway – Fast internet everywhere
A decent antenna on the other hand...

.manitu

the problem is, if I understand eutelsat, that it is implemented for mainland Europe and it uses hudge antennas to do its work -- so, you probably have to make a new settings with eutelsat every time you cross your designated beam and 77cm dish is not small for sailing yacht and I don't think they have auto-positioning on it like other systems do, so you can not use it on moving object.

... or did I miss something?

[manitu]

Only KA-band stabilized antenna I know of is a 90cm closed dome antenna, an the price: hold on to your socks: http://www.visiontec.tv/epages/VISIO...Products/12070

As I understand it , you can either pay a large premium for a maritime connection , wich is open on all beams , or pay a fee , each time you sail out of your current beam.

EPAK Releases 10GB Monthly High-Speed Marine Internet Offer - Ship Technology

.manitu

[buck0]

Originally Posted by manitu

Only KA-band stabilized antenna I know of is a 90cm closed dome antenna, an the price: hold on to your socks: VISIONTEC Service Unit - United Kingdom - ...more than distribution

As I understand it , you can either pay a large premium for a maritime connection , wich is open on all beams , or pay a fee , each time you sail out of your current beam.

EPAK Releases 10GB Monthly High-Speed Marine Internet Offer - Ship Technology

.manitu

I don't mind the price of antenna, as it is, with 26.000E, still afordable -- If you take into account that you don't need to pay for your office rent space and that your hourly rates are probabbly high, than you can pay for antenna in few years...
The problems are, as I stated above, size and coverage. With 60kg and 71cm there is no way that it will go on the sailing boat sized 80ft or smaller. Can you imagine to have a woman strapped on your mast?
Another factor to consider is power usage of the antenna -- bigger they are, more power they use for moving?

So... another problem is coverage (EUTELSAT KA-SAT - combined uplink and downlink coverage - Eutelsat). Those beam spots on the outer layer are not as strong as the ones in mainland, so your service will not be as good as you would expect. There is also the problem of no service -- what would you do, if you stear your vessel in in open waters (Europe via another continent)?