Test Results: Starlink on a Sailboat Underway

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by jbinbi

This guy claims a 10-30% power reduction , high power/low power modes by bypassing the inverter. He thinks that part of that is due to nominal draw of inverter to begin with in quiescent state, so low power gets a better power reduction.

https://www.tuckstruck.net/truck-and...-on-ac-and-dc/

I would think that given the interest in marine/RV community version 2 or 3 over the next couple of years will see the design engineers figure out a way to be more power efficient. At least I hope that is the case

Tuck's a good guy, with a pretty cool rig, & he knows his stuff. He's a land-cruiser, so very similar to us water-cruisers.

Starlink uses a (somewhat bastardized) Power-over-Ethernet (PoE) system to get power from the router to Dishy. Tuck (& several others) use a PoE injector to inject their own 48v into the Ethernet cable to power Dishy, so they can then use a different router.

Inverters are generally pretty efficient, but there's a cost to turn them on. My 1,500W Heart draws 4A just to turn it on, but it's pretty efficient after that.

So running things from small, dedicated power supplies is usually more efficient, which is why we run all our laptops from dedicated 12v->19v "mobile" power supplies (~$30-50 at Amazon). I'd expect a dedicated 12->48v supply to be similarly efficient, although there will always be small parasitic losses.

One would hope that the 12v community (cruisers, RVers, off-griders & maybe truckers) would be a large enough community for Starlink to recognize us, but we're a very small community compared to the rest of their customers. I'm also expecting Tesla to embed the guts of Dishy into the rooves of Teslas in the not-so-distant future (but they've got a different electrical system entirely).

FWIW, it wouldn't take much for Starlink to build a 12->48v supply into the router (to then supply Dishy) instead of their existing AC supply, but I'm not sure we're a large enough customer base for them to bother. Also, if you turn on Dishy's heaters, they can push Dishy's normal 50W up to well over 100W, & any internal power supply would have to be able to handle that, which would drive prices up.

The question is: how do we raise our voices enough for Starlink to recognize us, especially when we're not supposed to be using the system underway at all right now?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

Tuck's a good guy, with a pretty cool rig, & he knows his stuff. He's a land-cruiser, so very similar to us water-cruisers.



Starlink uses a (somewhat bastardized) Power-over-Ethernet (PoE) system to get power from the router to Dishy. Tuck (& several others) use a PoE injector to inject their own 48v into the Ethernet cable to power Dishy, so they can then use a different router.



Inverters are generally pretty efficient, but there's a cost to turn them on. My 1,500W Heart draws 4A just to turn it on, but it's pretty efficient after that.



So running things from small, dedicated power supplies is usually more efficient, which is why we run all our laptops from dedicated 12v->19v "mobile" power supplies (~$30-50 at Amazon). I'd expect a dedicated 12->48v supply to be similarly efficient, although there will always be small parasitic losses.



One would hope that the 12v community (cruisers, RVers, off-griders & maybe truckers) would be a large enough community for Starlink to recognize us, but we're a very small community compared to the rest of their customers. I'm also expecting Tesla to embed the guts of Dishy into the rooves of Teslas in the not-so-distant future (but they've got a different electrical system entirely).



FWIW, it wouldn't take much for Starlink to build a 12->48v supply into the router (to then supply Dishy) instead of their existing AC supply, but I'm not sure we're a large enough customer base for them to bother. Also, if you turn on Dishy's heaters, they can push Dishy's normal 50W up to well over 100W, & any internal power supply would have to be able to handle that, which would drive prices up.



The question is: how do we raise our voices enough for Starlink to recognize us, especially when we're not supposed to be using the system underway at all right now?

More likely the dishy design might be licensed by established marine in motion suppliers of comms units KVH , Ray etc.

Expect a commensurate sakes price

[donradcliffe]

Today's financial news

In a big win for Elon Musk's Starlink (STRLK) network, the Federal Communications Commission has approved the company's plan to expand broadband offerings to vehicles in motion. "Authorizing a new class of [customer] terminals will meet the growing user demands... whether driving an RV across the country, moving a freighter from Europe to a U.S. port, or while on a domestic or international flight," wrote Tom Sullivan, International Bureau Chief of the FCC.

[Jon Hacking]

This is, indeed, excellent news for us cruisers (& RVs & ships & ...), & involved none of the delays & pandemonium of the FAA ruling. I think this has been in the works for over a year. The timing suggests that the cruise-ship industry, which recently wrote the FCC requesting this, gave it the nudge to push it through, but we'll probably never know.

In other interesting (OK, anecdotal) news, it appears that Starlink may now be experimenting with their sat-to-sat laser-mesh. Cruisers in the SE Caribbean are reporting that it's often working for them, despite them being too far from the only 2 ground stations (that I know of) in the Caribbean, both in Puerto Rico.

Given that the birds are up ~300nm, & that their beams can point out ~45-deg from vertical, users have had to be within about 300nm of a ground station for reliable coms. Yes, the max single-hop range is ~600nm, but for reliable comms you need to be closer.

From Puerto Rico, 300nm cuts through Guadeloupe. Yet these boats are much further south, sometimes 450nm from PR, & still reporting good (if not really reliable) Starlink operation. There are a few reasons this could be working, but the sat/sat laser-links is high on that list.

There are currently about 2,500 operational birds in orbit, with perhaps half of them being the laser-equipped birds. About 50 more join the constellation every week, & ~600 are boosting up to their operational orbits at any given time. But I don't know the effective range of those sat/sat lasers.

[toddtimes]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

How did you get "roaming" enabled, if you don't mind me asking?

Starlink now let's you turn this on for a small additional fee (pretty sure it's $35 extra per month)

Check out the FAQ "What is Starlink's Portability Feature and Policy?" https://support.starlink.com/

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by toddtimes

Starlink now let's you turn this on for a small additional fee (pretty sure it's $35 extra per month)



Check out the FAQ "What is Starlink's Portability Feature and Policy?" https://support.starlink.com/

But portability is not “ in-motion “

And portability is limited to a particular continent

[bcboomer]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

But portability is not “ in-motion “

t

See #153

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by bcboomer

See #153

Yes but starlink have not yet released an in motion antenna

[bcboomer]

The existing antennas work fine in motion.

[SV Tom Crean]

Originally Posted by bcboomer

The existing antennas work fine in motion.

Yes. You can even disable the motors and mount it fixed horizontally and it works fine. No need for active stability. They may bring out a version with cables that can be disconnected (for easier running) and a router that can be fixed in place and has a DC power source. Would work for cars, RVs and boats.

[BlueH2Obound]

Originally Posted by bcboomer

The existing antennas work fine in motion.

The issue is not that the existing antenna's will work in motion (ours works just fine) but rather that under the new ruling, the existing antennas are not authorized for "in motion" use. And the "portability" feature is an additional $25.00/mo, not $35.00.
It remains to be seen what the cost of the "in motion" option will cost, and what the new antenna (if offered) will cost to set up.
But overall, this is indeed good news. Eat your heart out dish . . .

[toddtimes]

Originally Posted by BlueH2Obound

And the "portability" feature is an additional $25.00/mo, not $35.00.
It remains to be seen what the cost of the "in motion" option will cost, and what the new antenna (if offered) will cost to set up.
But overall, this is indeed good news. Eat your heart out dish . . .

Sorry for the confusion there. I was basing that additional on a $100 / month normal price, which was what I had previously seen, but that has already inflated to $110. But agreed it's $135 / month now for "in motion" use

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by BlueH2Obound

The issue is ... that under the new ruling, the existing antennas are not authorized for "in motion" use...

I didn't pick this up. I read a synopsis of the ruling, since the FCC article was too full of legalese, but it was my impression that the existing UTs could now be used in-motion.

What's the problem with the existing Dishy that it's not supposed to be used in-motion?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

I didn't pick this up. I read a synopsis of the ruling, since the FCC article was too full of legalese, but it was my impression that the existing UTs could now be used in-motion.



What's the problem with the existing Dishy that it's not supposed to be used in-motion?

Starlink has stated that current Dishys are not warranted for in-motion usage. Presumably they feel better motors etc are needed

[BlueH2Obound]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

I didn't pick this up. I read a synopsis of the ruling, since the FCC article was too full of legalese, but it was my impression that the existing UTs could now be used in-motion.

What's the problem with the existing Dishy that it's not supposed to be used in-motion?

One article I read stated that the "in motion" as approved by the FCC must download on 12 ghz, but needs to upload (possibly because of interference concerns) on a different frequency. There is some confusion as to what freq the "dishy" actually uploads on.
Either way, expect another price increase with the in motion . . .