Apple and Globalstar Rumored to Announce Satellite Connectivity for iPhone 14(macrumors.com)
macrumors.com
Apple and Globalstar Rumored to Announce Satellite Connectivity for iPhone 14
https://www.macrumors.com/2022/08/26/apple-globalstar-iphone-14-satellite-rumor/
133 comments
> constipation
Ha, autocorrect…
I hear the inventor of autocorrect died and went to hello.
I really can’t stand how stupid autocorrect is, surely in an age where deep learning can predict how proteins fold it can phonetically and contextually correct words?
I keep hearing how robo taxies are a year away - meanwhile when I asked Google assistant to call my wife to avoid looking at the screen and driving it decided to call some company in Delaware (despite me living in central Europe).
Seems like there's low hanging fruit in AI applications that are still not even close to optimal.
Seems like there's low hanging fruit in AI applications that are still not even close to optimal.
“something went wrong”
I've just accepted that it about 70% of the time it'll switch the words "ill"/"I'll", "well"/"we'll" and "its"/"it's" to the wrong version even when I use them correctly.
I just switched it off.
It's useful enough in other cases though - it's just a bit overzealous when I am accurate. The weird thing is that there was a period where it was near-perfect, then one iOS upgrade caused a sudden decline in quality that's remained ever since
100% agree. Maybe the specific layout of a QWERTY keyboard is somehow particularly bad for this, but jabbing at the general location of the letters I want combined with a half decent AI should make text entry really damn reliable.
Even just writing that paragraph, so many autocorrect opportunities were missed, and so many were suboptimal or just plain wrong…
Blows my mind that Apple isn’t doing better at this feature at this ooont. No, I meant to type “point”!
Even just writing that paragraph, so many autocorrect opportunities were missed, and so many were suboptimal or just plain wrong…
Blows my mind that Apple isn’t doing better at this feature at this ooont. No, I meant to type “point”!
I know right, it’s definitely not related to words you write on a regular basis…
iPhone's autocorrect at one point was rather decent because it was running from a language model. And then AFAIK they switched to a crowdsourced model which... just sucks and is never correct
That “language model” and the keyboard itself would also adapt to your own writing patterns. As you’d type, the hit areas of the letters would dynamically change to adapt based on the previously typed letters and your typing history. For example, if, when typing a word, you consistently would hit between two keys when only one made sense, it would increase the hit area of the key you meant to hit and decrease the other.
When Apple tried to use AI to make autocorrect better it got worse.
But it really ducking sucks…
But it really ducking sucks…
This rumor made the rounds years ago, and it turned out to be a big pile of hot air. It's the same pundit (Mark Gurman)[0].
It's possible he jumped the gun in 2019 and it's finally coming to fruition. It is cool, and Starlink shows it's possible, but it may also just be wishcasting.
[0] https://www.macrumors.com/2019/12/20/apple-secret-team-satel...
It's possible he jumped the gun in 2019 and it's finally coming to fruition. It is cool, and Starlink shows it's possible, but it may also just be wishcasting.
[0] https://www.macrumors.com/2019/12/20/apple-secret-team-satel...
> Starlink shows it's possible
I wouldn’t say it shows it’s possible yet. They claim it’s possible but there are none of the starlink v2 satellites in orbit that are required for it to work. Originally v2 satellites required Starship for launching, it sounds like they are pivoting to Flacon now though due to delays in Starship reaching orbit.
Apple will want the service to be available as soon as the Phone launches, so potentially in late September. It’s going to be at least late 2023 before the SpaceX/T-Mobile service lunches.
I wouldn’t say it shows it’s possible yet. They claim it’s possible but there are none of the starlink v2 satellites in orbit that are required for it to work. Originally v2 satellites required Starship for launching, it sounds like they are pivoting to Flacon now though due to delays in Starship reaching orbit.
Apple will want the service to be available as soon as the Phone launches, so potentially in late September. It’s going to be at least late 2023 before the SpaceX/T-Mobile service lunches.
Iridium and Globalstar show that it‘s possible.
Both support handheld, battery-powered client devices (some even smaller than smartphones), and the former has been using inter-satellite links since day one.
Both support handheld, battery-powered client devices (some even smaller than smartphones), and the former has been using inter-satellite links since day one.
They have tested it in a lab to show it is possible. There is nothing physically limiting it from working.
Getting the v2 satellites up is an unmet milestone, not proof that it won't work.
Getting the v2 satellites up is an unmet milestone, not proof that it won't work.
> There is nothing physically limiting it from working.
Clouds, rain, atmospheric density variations, interfering signals and noise sources, phone positioning, the attenuation and reflections from nearby materials...
Also, don't forget that the SpaceX announcement was for a max of about 4 Mbps for an entire cell which they said was a very large geographic area. It will also be asynchronous short message (text) for quite a while. Next time I am backpacking in Canyonlands it will be great to have, but it will have very little impact on the vast majority of phone usage for quite some time. Its a small but important step.
Clouds, rain, atmospheric density variations, interfering signals and noise sources, phone positioning, the attenuation and reflections from nearby materials...
Also, don't forget that the SpaceX announcement was for a max of about 4 Mbps for an entire cell which they said was a very large geographic area. It will also be asynchronous short message (text) for quite a while. Next time I am backpacking in Canyonlands it will be great to have, but it will have very little impact on the vast majority of phone usage for quite some time. Its a small but important step.
Those all physically limit any signal. Starlink already communicates with the ground, just depends on reading phone signal from noise at that altitude.
That is the intent of Starlink. Some amount of connectivity everywhere. For all the corners of the world that no traditional carrier will cover.
That is the intent of Starlink. Some amount of connectivity everywhere. For all the corners of the world that no traditional carrier will cover.
> Starlink already communicates with the ground
With a complex, large, high gain antenna.
Satellite phones you can buy right now don’t look like iPhones, for a reason.
With a complex, large, high gain antenna.
Satellite phones you can buy right now don’t look like iPhones, for a reason.
the antenna geometry will be physically interesting
It’s amazing to me that a satellite can pick up a signal from a normal-sized cell phone. What kind of advances have we had in the past few years that have made this possible without needing a bulky Iridium-style device? Have the satellites gotten much more sensitive, or are we somehow cramming more TX power into regular phones?
Globalstar devices were already pretty small even 10 years ago. I think they only require a 2W transmitter, whereas Iridium requires 10W. And their satellites are in more normal orbits rather than Iridium’s polar orbits, so coverage isn’t truly global. The satellite has to see you and a base station at the same time.
Edit: Globalstar modem data sheet: https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Downl...
Edit: Globalstar modem data sheet: https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Downl...
And Globalstar's network has been in a variety of decays ever since.
There were periods of time that the Globalstar network was literally requiring you to use a "call times tool" to determine the paltry 10 to 20 minute windows at a time every hour you could even get a call out on the system. They were so desperate to keep customers that you could get a satphone for a whole $40 a month - with unlimited! calling.
They then, finally, a few years back, launched their Sat-Fi2 service. Instead of using bent-pipe CDMA, they decided to use bent-pipe UMTS. As a Sat-Fi2 customer I can assure you I never got a working voice call, and barely working data. Globalstar was so impressed with their own technology they killed off this "next generation" service.
Now to this day, they stopped selling satellite phones (while still allowing activation), dropped every single reference to the Sat-Fi and Sat-Fi2, and are pushing hard on their simplex burst data services.
There were periods of time that the Globalstar network was literally requiring you to use a "call times tool" to determine the paltry 10 to 20 minute windows at a time every hour you could even get a call out on the system. They were so desperate to keep customers that you could get a satphone for a whole $40 a month - with unlimited! calling.
They then, finally, a few years back, launched their Sat-Fi2 service. Instead of using bent-pipe CDMA, they decided to use bent-pipe UMTS. As a Sat-Fi2 customer I can assure you I never got a working voice call, and barely working data. Globalstar was so impressed with their own technology they killed off this "next generation" service.
Now to this day, they stopped selling satellite phones (while still allowing activation), dropped every single reference to the Sat-Fi and Sat-Fi2, and are pushing hard on their simplex burst data services.
> Globalstar's network has been in a variety of decays
>TAMPA, Fla. — Globalstar has signed a term sheet with a “large, global customer” to start deploying some of its spectrum for terrestrial use “in the U.S. and beyond,” the satellite operator said May 5.
The operator said Feb. 24 it picked MDA and Rocket Lab to supply a set of 17 satellites to replenish its constellation after a “potential customer” agreed to fund most of the $327 million project. The agreement includes an option for up to nine additional satellites at $11.4 million each.
https://spacenews.com/globalstar-agrees-terms-with-global-cu...
A secret customer fronting large amounts of money to enable goods or services they want to offer is certainly in keeping with how Apple operates.
>TAMPA, Fla. — Globalstar has signed a term sheet with a “large, global customer” to start deploying some of its spectrum for terrestrial use “in the U.S. and beyond,” the satellite operator said May 5.
The operator said Feb. 24 it picked MDA and Rocket Lab to supply a set of 17 satellites to replenish its constellation after a “potential customer” agreed to fund most of the $327 million project. The agreement includes an option for up to nine additional satellites at $11.4 million each.
https://spacenews.com/globalstar-agrees-terms-with-global-cu...
A secret customer fronting large amounts of money to enable goods or services they want to offer is certainly in keeping with how Apple operates.
$300mil is the cost of a widebody jet or two, that’s pretty reasonable for almost a constellation of satellites
> The satellite has to see you and a base station at the same time.
The satellites aren't capable of a small amount of buffering? For text messages it shouldn't take up much space, and a lag on the delivery is better than no delivery at all.
The satellites aren't capable of a small amount of buffering? For text messages it shouldn't take up much space, and a lag on the delivery is better than no delivery at all.
Nope. Globalstar's voice and data network (specifically) is a literal 'bent pipe'. They use modified CDMA base stations on the ground, and it's all CDMA end-to-end through the sky to the sat and back down to your phone.
The original phone they offered (the GSP-1600) was a modification of a Qualcomm QCP-860 that they just slapped the Globalstar stuff on top of. The only difference here is that Globalstar's CDMA authentication was done on a SIM card inside the phone (which is a supported CDMA feature, R-UIM).
The original phone they offered (the GSP-1600) was a modification of a Qualcomm QCP-860 that they just slapped the Globalstar stuff on top of. The only difference here is that Globalstar's CDMA authentication was done on a SIM card inside the phone (which is a supported CDMA feature, R-UIM).
That’s why apples choice is pretty meh, if there’s a large scale regional disaster that knocks out communications, globalstars local coverage isn’t going to really let people get around that like iridium or starlink could
In general any sort of large scale regional disaster will down any communications network, no matter how robust, as people panic and simultaneously try contacting emergency services or their loved ones.
Exactly – in that scenario, who would you even message? If all infrastructure within hundreds of kilometers is down, you‘re unlikely to get help even if you can get a signal out.
You don’t even have to have that large of a regional disaster affecting hundreds of kilometers. 9/11 took down all telephony in the NYC area due to panicking people overwhelming things.
(9/11 was the worst terrorist disaster in the US, but until the towers started falling only the two towers and a few buildings that caught fire were directly impacted. If you were in, say, Brooklyn, you could see it happening but you were in the safe zone.)
(9/11 was the worst terrorist disaster in the US, but until the towers started falling only the two towers and a few buildings that caught fire were directly impacted. If you were in, say, Brooklyn, you could see it happening but you were in the safe zone.)
Iridium devices aren‘t bulky anymore. Look at a Garmin InReach: It‘s smaller than most smartphones.
If you think about it, these satellites are only 1-2 orders of magnitude farther away than a typical cell base station.
By scaling the data rate down by the same proportion, you can span that distance using roughly the same transmission power and antenna technology.
If you think about it, these satellites are only 1-2 orders of magnitude farther away than a typical cell base station.
By scaling the data rate down by the same proportion, you can span that distance using roughly the same transmission power and antenna technology.
And those bulky devices didn't work well without LOS to the sky.
I’m fairly certain they will all require LOS or an external antenna.
Iridium pagers supposedly worked indoors (close to a window), due to the very low modulation rate used. They were only one-way, though.
And same modulation used for ringing a device, so you could at least be prompted to run into LOS for incoming calls.
They did indeed.
Cheaper launches -> More satellites viable -> Lower orbit (shorter distance to the terminal at a cost of much smaller area covered by each satellite).
Went pretty far at sea recently, weeks from any land. For keeping in touch with loved ones I bought a Garmin inReach Mini 2 device. Together with a monthly data plan I was able to send and receive short messages in the middle of the ocean. Not a lot, but much better than nothing.
But the biggest surprise was the size: the device was tiny, I was easily able to hold it in my hand. The antenna extended a little but still under the size of my iPhone. Needed LOS to the sky though. Battery lasted for days. Software was atrociously bad: lots of errors and problems.
So after my trip I was 100% convinced that we will soon see this kind of connectivity built into smartphones. It's great to still be able to contact the world even when truly remote and of course phone manufacturers would love to sell us another subscription.
But the biggest surprise was the size: the device was tiny, I was easily able to hold it in my hand. The antenna extended a little but still under the size of my iPhone. Needed LOS to the sky though. Battery lasted for days. Software was atrociously bad: lots of errors and problems.
So after my trip I was 100% convinced that we will soon see this kind of connectivity built into smartphones. It's great to still be able to contact the world even when truly remote and of course phone manufacturers would love to sell us another subscription.
Are you able to type out texts or is it canned messages only? I’ve always wanted one of these but have zero use for them.
My monthly plan allowed unlimited your own texts and replies. Limited number of characters each though.
There are also some settable canned messages and an emergency signal options, but I never used them.
Do you hike, sail or otherwise travel in truly remote areas? That was my scenario - being able to tell my wife and kids that I am OK while days away from the closest outpost of civilization.
There are also some settable canned messages and an emergency signal options, but I never used them.
Do you hike, sail or otherwise travel in truly remote areas? That was my scenario - being able to tell my wife and kids that I am OK while days away from the closest outpost of civilization.
Both, depends on your plan. Custom messages cost more. My $10/month-ish plan allows unlimited pre-canned, which I use to check in with family “I’m still alive” / “on my way home” type thing. Then I get a certain allocation of custom. Sending GPS waypoints counts as custom IIRC?
As someone who owns most of the common satellite phones and data devices available today and sees the antennas on each, I’m sorry, still calling bullshit on this, just like every previous year this rumor came out.
> …I’m sorry, still calling bullshit on this, just like every previous year this rumor came out.
To me, the bizarrely premature T-Mobile/SpaceX pre-announcement ("beta in select areas by the end of 2023") makes a lot more sense if they felt they needed to beat Apple's announcement.
But I'm still mystified by this for two reasons:
(1) Apple doesn't/can't do niche. So either all customers will get this benefit for free, or it'll be another checklist feature of iCloud+ and/or Apple One.
(2) Presumably, there are non-trivial, hardware-related costs to doing this. I find it hard to believe that Apple's going to enable this esoteric capability on every device.
What am I missing?
To me, the bizarrely premature T-Mobile/SpaceX pre-announcement ("beta in select areas by the end of 2023") makes a lot more sense if they felt they needed to beat Apple's announcement.
But I'm still mystified by this for two reasons:
(1) Apple doesn't/can't do niche. So either all customers will get this benefit for free, or it'll be another checklist feature of iCloud+ and/or Apple One.
(2) Presumably, there are non-trivial, hardware-related costs to doing this. I find it hard to believe that Apple's going to enable this esoteric capability on every device.
What am I missing?
I can very well imagine that Apple will offer this service only for the Pro models for the time being. Apple has been trying to differentiate the expensive Pro models from the normal iPhones for some time now. And perhaps you only get if for free with iCloud+
I'm curious do you work environment require you to have multiple sat phones? For someone who knows nothing about these, what are some of the state of the art choices right now?
> I'm curious do you work environment require you to have multiple sat phones?
No, I’m just a tech geek who had to be emergency airlifted from 11,000ft off a mountain straight to an emergency room. I happened to have an Iridium phone at the time and it’s what likely saved my life (no cell phones worked there). Since then, I’ve been interested in something better and so have done a bunch of research trying brands over the years and have settled in on a few devices I find best for my needs.
No, I’m just a tech geek who had to be emergency airlifted from 11,000ft off a mountain straight to an emergency room. I happened to have an Iridium phone at the time and it’s what likely saved my life (no cell phones worked there). Since then, I’ve been interested in something better and so have done a bunch of research trying brands over the years and have settled in on a few devices I find best for my needs.
>"Since then, I’ve been interested in something better and so have done a bunch of research trying brands over the years and have settled in on a few devices I find best for my needs."
Could you share some of your recommendations or what your research has uncovered?
Could you share some of your recommendations or what your research has uncovered?
Oil and Gas are huge users of Sat phones - there are huge areas of Oil and Gas infrastructure across the country that reside in areas not served by cell phone service.
Also, marine (ships, platforms etc)
Also, marine (ships, platforms etc)
Guess I need to eat crow... Will be interesting to see how precise you must have your phone pointing towards the satellite.
There are Iridium-based two-way messengers on the market without an externally visible antenna.
The difference in data rate and SNR required for voice and text messaging is enormous – if you can afford for your message to take a couple of seconds to go out, you can be fine without an antenna.
The difference in data rate and SNR required for voice and text messaging is enormous – if you can afford for your message to take a couple of seconds to go out, you can be fine without an antenna.
> There are Iridium-based two-way messengers on the market without an externally visible antenna.
I currently own a couple and have owned a bunch of other devices in this category. Have you ever looked at a tear down of one of those devices? Now compare that to a tear down of an iphone? Even supposing Apple can design a much smaller antenna, where is it going to fit? What’s the battery life going to be when it has to send messages periodically (until confirmed) at MUCH higher output power?
I currently own a couple and have owned a bunch of other devices in this category. Have you ever looked at a tear down of one of those devices? Now compare that to a tear down of an iphone? Even supposing Apple can design a much smaller antenna, where is it going to fit? What’s the battery life going to be when it has to send messages periodically (until confirmed) at MUCH higher output power?
What if this is an emergency situation only thing. Say your phone detects you took an impact (car crash) or fall (hiking), it can start sending out emergency text messages with location data periodically until the battery dies. Tie this with vitals on an Apple Watch and it could prove very helpful in extreme situations.
What about the tmobile/spacex announcement earlier in the week?
Iridium flies at about 450mi above the ground, SpaceX/Starlink does a bit lower around 350mi. Both are still a VERY long way to transmit a gigahertz signal, especially unless you are standing in a wide open area with no obstructions of the sky. Iridium uses frequencies well suited for space to ground comms and has specially designed antennas on both ends with high power radios (hence the whip antenna). Even with all that, Iridium is unreliable at best, but better than nothing. So now you want to do that with standard 5G frequencies (which are more impacted by weather), using standard terrestrial phone antennas and radios on the ground, and you expect it to work?
Well, I’ve got a garmin inreach that uses iridium and it’s been quite reliable. Inreach mini is cell phone sized… of course it’s super low bandwidth so I assume that’s what’s gonna happen with the new functionality as well. Anyway all speculation at this point.
I spend a fair amount of time in northern New England and my mini takes a while to connect and sync up (10 minutes or more in some cases) and requires more or less stabilizing it somewhere where there is no tree cover. I wonder if these various satellite/phone connections coming online will require similar steps.
If my iPhone could replace my inreach for sos/simple texting and data I’d be over the moon. That’s all I want out of sat connectivity
Iridium and Inmarsat have transponders that are much higher power and have much higher RF bandwidth that supports devices at very low speed data rates.
It's very conceivable that with an L-band or similar patch antenna some kind of low speed connectivity can be accomplished with line of sight to the sky via a mobile device. There are already devices sold for hikers etc that operate like this (simple SOS text messaging etc) and sat tracking of vehicles and trucks. A lot of it is store and forward type stuff.
As for full voice and high speed data - yeah, that ain't happening yet at the consumer level mobile device.
It's very conceivable that with an L-band or similar patch antenna some kind of low speed connectivity can be accomplished with line of sight to the sky via a mobile device. There are already devices sold for hikers etc that operate like this (simple SOS text messaging etc) and sat tracking of vehicles and trucks. A lot of it is store and forward type stuff.
As for full voice and high speed data - yeah, that ain't happening yet at the consumer level mobile device.
> There are already devices sold for hikers etc that operate like this (simple SOS text messaging etc) and sat tracking of vehicles and trucks.
Yep, I’ve owned a ton of them over the years. My first was the FollowMeSpot device coming up on two decades ago. They’ve of course gotten a lot smaller, but are still definitely “thick fugly bricks” in comparison to Apple’s designs. Looking at tear downs of them, I see absolutely no way you’ll fit the important bits of one inside an iPhone case.
Yep, I’ve owned a ton of them over the years. My first was the FollowMeSpot device coming up on two decades ago. They’ve of course gotten a lot smaller, but are still definitely “thick fugly bricks” in comparison to Apple’s designs. Looking at tear downs of them, I see absolutely no way you’ll fit the important bits of one inside an iPhone case.
T-Mobile's likely going to use their 600MhZ spectrum allocation for this, which is lower than the multi-GhZ frequency used by the other parts of the 5G frequencies, and is less impacted by weather and goes further.
They already said it’s PCS, 1900Mhz.
Iridium uses the L-band; Globalstar uses the S- and the L-band.
5G phones support frequencies in these bands, and well above and below either.
5G phones support frequencies in these bands, and well above and below either.
Inmarsat, Iridium, Thuraya, and Globalstar primarily use L-band.
The early PCS allocations and a few later allocations (1900, 1800, 1700) are also L-band, but there’s good reason not to use them for this, they are already heavily in use all over. Satellite cells cover a large area and you don’t want to collide with a tower using the same frequency.
The 600-800mhz allocations are not great for satellite broadcast due to limiting characteristics of those bands.
So for the 5G bands that would not already heavily be in use and/or aren’t well suited to satellite use, that leaves us C band (3-5ghz), and K/Ku band (mmWave).
The early PCS allocations and a few later allocations (1900, 1800, 1700) are also L-band, but there’s good reason not to use them for this, they are already heavily in use all over. Satellite cells cover a large area and you don’t want to collide with a tower using the same frequency.
The 600-800mhz allocations are not great for satellite broadcast due to limiting characteristics of those bands.
So for the 5G bands that would not already heavily be in use and/or aren’t well suited to satellite use, that leaves us C band (3-5ghz), and K/Ku band (mmWave).
What's gonna happen when you enter a country with strict satellite phone restrictions with one of these new iPhones? Airport security in these places is already looking for any devices capable of satcoms and possession is a crime, not just usage.
Here's a list: https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=Dq3CEPZjfRAhtToGD4Yrz9
Here's a list: https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=Dq3CEPZjfRAhtToGD4Yrz9
Well, this is still very hypothetical (and probably unlikely near-term). But certainly it will get interesting when standard smartphones get capabilities that some countries have banned in standalone devices.
At an organizational rather than a country level you already have a situation where everyone has a camera in their pocket. At a lot of companies, it used to be a big deal to bring a camera into a building involving security passes etc.
At an organizational rather than a country level you already have a situation where everyone has a camera in their pocket. At a lot of companies, it used to be a big deal to bring a camera into a building involving security passes etc.
I assume apple will block that feature in certain geos; that may be considered compliance by some governments. It's not without precedent; you can't turn off the camera shutter sound in Japan.
Presumably some sort of satellite connection will become true at some point--at which point the devil will be in the details. If it's a subscription offering (which it's reasonable to assume it will be), it's not clear to me that you wouldn't be better off carrying a separate rugged device like a Garmin Spot if the point is to maintain text contact under most circumstances.
"The best camera is the one that's with you"
Yes, but the circumstances where having a satellite connection are most important as opposed to mildly convenient for the most part--like hiking in more remote areas--I'm not strolling around with just my phone. I'm already carrying other safety/etc. gear. Of course, others might care more about just not having the inconvenience of the occasional cell dead spot.
To be sure, if your use case is a car breakdown at night on a country road with no cell service, you're probably better off with just using your phone.
To be sure, if your use case is a car breakdown at night on a country road with no cell service, you're probably better off with just using your phone.
There's probably a lot of total utility from getting something out that'll mostly work for the unprepared who go on a hike and don't realize how remote it may or may not be (or take a wrong turn, etc), even if those who plan ahead more thoroughly have better options.
I'm not sure how useful in general an unprepared person being able to call for help necessarily is. There is search and rescue (mostly volunteer) of course. But no one is going to assemble a rescue team at the drop of a hat.
I'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make. However, as a member of one of those volunteer search and rescue teams, people absolutely do get themselves into trouble and need help whether it's through being unprepared or injury or etc. If someone is able to call for help when they need it using their cell phone or one of the various satellite based systems - PLB, inReach, the new iPhone or StarLink capabilities, etc. - then we are able to go directly to them and render the necessary aid. That is a rescue. The alternative is their spouse or friend or someone noticing that they haven't returned by the expected time and they then report the person missing. Hopefully the missing person has told someone where they were going and their intended route, but in any case, this becomes a search and we first have to find the person before being able to help them and this can add hours or days to the operation. Depending on the condition of the person that at a time can greatly affect the outcome.
In this regard, broader access to communication outside of cell phone coverage is a huge benefit.
Now, this isn't discussing whether people are more likely to push themselves further or do things they're not capable of or adventure alone or go out insufficiently prepared if they feel they can just push a button and get rescued if anything happens. that broader question is an important one but for the individual person being able to communicate can absolutely make a difference in whether you survive or not.
In this regard, broader access to communication outside of cell phone coverage is a huge benefit.
Now, this isn't discussing whether people are more likely to push themselves further or do things they're not capable of or adventure alone or go out insufficiently prepared if they feel they can just push a button and get rescued if anything happens. that broader question is an important one but for the individual person being able to communicate can absolutely make a difference in whether you survive or not.
Your last point is pretty much the one I was trying poorly to make. Individually, cell phones are a safety feature [1] even if they lead some people to think too much in terms of make a call and someone will zip up the mountain and help them down.
[1] In fact, I'd argue that while over-reliance on electronics generally is a poor practice, a cell phone (along with external battery pack) should probably be considered essential safety equipment in most circumstances.
[1] In fact, I'd argue that while over-reliance on electronics generally is a poor practice, a cell phone (along with external battery pack) should probably be considered essential safety equipment in most circumstances.
Your point about the external battery pack is a good one. Even if you have cell coverage, your phone will do you no good if it's out of battery. "Phone about to die" is a common refrain we hear. You're likely at the edge of coverage and so your phone is using high power and constantly searching for towers and been out longer than you were expecting and now it's dark and you're using your phone as a flashlight..
>and you're using your phone as a flashlight
And they've probably been using it as a GPS all day which can come pretty close to draining the battery all by itself.
Modern smartphones are pretty wonderful but it's easy to put all your eggs in that one basket and have no realistic fallback.
And they've probably been using it as a GPS all day which can come pretty close to draining the battery all by itself.
Modern smartphones are pretty wonderful but it's easy to put all your eggs in that one basket and have no realistic fallback.
I’d say the difference between a full scale search and rescue operation and a “we’ll get someone out to your location lickety-split” text messages is significant.
I used to hear on the news about people getting lost all the time on the trails around Phoenix, in flip flops and without water, having to spend the night outside before they could find them. Often enough they would have warnings on the radio and TV about it.
Hell, one of the big forest fires a couple years ago was started by a lost hiker trying to signal for help.
I used to hear on the news about people getting lost all the time on the trails around Phoenix, in flip flops and without water, having to spend the night outside before they could find them. Often enough they would have warnings on the radio and TV about it.
Hell, one of the big forest fires a couple years ago was started by a lost hiker trying to signal for help.
Absolutely true.
A large search is very personnel and time intensive.
Depending on the situation though, even a relatively simple rescue can take a dozen or more people and many hours.
A large search is very personnel and time intensive.
Depending on the situation though, even a relatively simple rescue can take a dozen or more people and many hours.
If they want to be found and can text their GPS location they probably could just be given directions to the nearest road where a ranger truck can pick them up. I think most people just don’t know how to reorient themselves and as little kids are told “if you get lost just stay where you are and someone will find you”. Give them a little help and they can get themselves out of trouble.
Reminds me of the time we were in Jungle School down in Panama. The first day was the land navigation course and a squad from headquarters had their one (and only) compass break. They ended up walking around the jungle for over a week before they found a road and flagged down a passing vehicle. If they had a way to communicate (or could read a frickin’ map) they’d have been back by chow time but, nope, the senior officers were like “they’ll turn up eventually” and didn’t even try to find them.
Reminds me of the time we were in Jungle School down in Panama. The first day was the land navigation course and a squad from headquarters had their one (and only) compass break. They ended up walking around the jungle for over a week before they found a road and flagged down a passing vehicle. If they had a way to communicate (or could read a frickin’ map) they’d have been back by chow time but, nope, the senior officers were like “they’ll turn up eventually” and didn’t even try to find them.
Depending on the situation, helping someone get back to a known trail via phone or text is absolutely a thing that is done. More often than not though, there are confounding factors like fatigue, dehydration, weather, extremely difficult terrain, etc. and it's safer to just come get them rather than risk them getting into deeper trouble.
If they're up on a mountain which tends to be the situation around where I live in New England, there's likely no nearby road to walk to.
And failures notwithstanding, a compass and map are a pretty high reliability way not to get totally turned around/lost especially in less challenging terrain.
And failures notwithstanding, a compass and map are a pretty high reliability way not to get totally turned around/lost especially in less challenging terrain.
Most of Australia is out of reach from phone. I remember driving to Broome, and the network suddenly connects 5km from the city, when you have the visual contact.
With remote working, if it were possible through satellite, digital native people would populate the unoccupied land (and oceans). The definition of “remote areas” is that you don’t know how populated they would be if network were available.
With remote working, if it were possible through satellite, digital native people would populate the unoccupied land (and oceans). The definition of “remote areas” is that you don’t know how populated they would be if network were available.
>With remote working, if it were possible through satellite,
It is possible with Starlink where available. You could never have worked from my brother's house with either a hot spot or 1Mbps DSL. With Starlink, while not 100% reliable, it's quite doable.
However, I'm making the assumption that for the foreseeable future a sat option for phones would look more like the text messaging of the Garmin devices.
It is possible with Starlink where available. You could never have worked from my brother's house with either a hot spot or 1Mbps DSL. With Starlink, while not 100% reliable, it's quite doable.
However, I'm making the assumption that for the foreseeable future a sat option for phones would look more like the text messaging of the Garmin devices.
A lot of US national parks have cell phone dead zones. Angel's Landing is wildly popular, and dangerous, and most of it and the trail to it don't have service, or very minimal/broken service.
There are PLENTY of areas people go under normal circumstances that don't have sufficient service if there's an emergency.
There are PLENTY of areas people go under normal circumstances that don't have sufficient service if there's an emergency.
Angel's Landing is also incredibly crowded. Unless someone is hiking there under inappropriate conditions, no one's remotely by themselves. And that's pretty true of a lot of areas in national parks generally.
There are use cases although I wonder how many of the people who wouldn't buy a separate device would pay for a hypothetical satellite subscription. But I'm sure some would.
There are use cases although I wonder how many of the people who wouldn't buy a separate device would pay for a hypothetical satellite subscription. But I'm sure some would.
In this case it would’ve be a separate satellite subscription but apart of Apple One’s plan with other incentive offerings
Not to mention that the battery life of an inreach or spot is orders of magnitude better.
I carry a Garmin Inreach hiking/biking when out of cell service, personally I always have my phone so it would be nice to have it all in one, possibly with a slight loss in redundancy.
All other things being equal, e.g. subscription cost, I'd probably go with the redundancy for safety equipment. Of course, if phone sat is cheaper, that starts to look more attractive in a lot of scenarios, especially less hardcore ones.
Seems weird to me we almost sort of had this eight years ago with AT&T and TerreStar
https://www.cnet.com/reviews/terrestar-genus-at-t-review/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerreStar-1
https://www.cnet.com/reviews/terrestar-genus-at-t-review/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerreStar-1
I was recently on a US aircraft carrier and there was a real problem keeping the crew off their cellphones trying to catch service while near land. I wonder what the Navy will do when common cellphones can talk to satellites.
The Navy has a process to halt all this activity, called going "River City" (slang) - which basically is a standing order by the commanding officer to halt all outgoing communications from a ship unless specifically authorized by the CO.
Aircraft carriers now have Wifi available for sailors for morale reasons, so cell phones are used all the time while underway for text and email.
However, if an incident happens (such as a crash) or, you know, going to war or etc - the ship will undergo "River City" conditions and I guarantee you everyone on board knows the drill and you'll be in deep shit if you violate River City. River City conditions will also be implemented in the case of a fatality, accident or death onboard the ship so the identity of the victims is preserved so the Navy can make next of kin notifications without family being alerted early to the issue.
Aircraft carriers now have Wifi available for sailors for morale reasons, so cell phones are used all the time while underway for text and email.
However, if an incident happens (such as a crash) or, you know, going to war or etc - the ship will undergo "River City" conditions and I guarantee you everyone on board knows the drill and you'll be in deep shit if you violate River City. River City conditions will also be implemented in the case of a fatality, accident or death onboard the ship so the identity of the victims is preserved so the Navy can make next of kin notifications without family being alerted early to the issue.
Personally, I don't see why this is an issue if they don't have specific duties at the time.
The Russian cannon-fodder invading Ukraine were so ill-equipped they were using their own phones and roaming on the Ukranian network to call their commanders. They were easily triangulated...
Ships are fairly obvious to spot, land bases are a different scenario.
They are the navy — why can’t they use jammers for the relevant frequencies?
You want them to use jammers near land?
Sure: it's 1/r^2, so they don't have to have one big one on the superstructure -- they could deploy a bunch on the deck and other areas with radio "holes". I presume the rest of the boat is steel.
Presumably it's also OK if a warship that shows up at a military dock frotzes mobile phones -- maybe even if mobile phones were disabled on bases in general? I've never been in a military and haven't the faintest idea how much is confidential. And it's not like the military doesn't have other telecom gear.
If a warship ties up at a civilian dock it's a little more tricky, but in general I'd think this principle would also apply.
Presumably it's also OK if a warship that shows up at a military dock frotzes mobile phones -- maybe even if mobile phones were disabled on bases in general? I've never been in a military and haven't the faintest idea how much is confidential. And it's not like the military doesn't have other telecom gear.
If a warship ties up at a civilian dock it's a little more tricky, but in general I'd think this principle would also apply.
They'll probably confiscate anything with a radio while underway.
There is no internet for the aircraft carrier crews on the sea?
Location data. They probably also monitor that traffic.
Connectivity is limited due to bandwidth prioritization for ship systems as well as OPSEC.
Thanks for announcing how undisciplined the US Navy is with regard to SIGINT OPS, especially the grunts, apparently. Good to know.
Surprise, a bunch of 19 and 20something years old are going to use their phones against orders, and they always will. All armies do this. For a funnier one look at the fit bit military base leaks, where fit bit released detailed paths of military bases and patrol routes because the people on them wore their fit bit's around.
So if you have an iPhone 14 on T-Mobile, will you have dual satellite connectivity, through both Globestar and SpaceX?
I imagine so, T-Mobile is setting their capabilities up using 5G and existing spectrum vs proprietary hardware, or at least that’s how it read.
I wonder if they made the public announcement at least in part as an opening salvo against the FCC. Ie the FCC may not like the sat use of 5G (or other carriers may push the FCC to object similar to the cable companies suing over Starlink receiving federal subsidies for rural coverage).
Louis CK assured me my stuff was already going to space.
This would be amazing for hiking in remote areas. Garmin InReach is quite expensive for the occasional use and I believe it has a subscription too.
I would assume any sat option for a phone would have a similar subscription--and would therefore be more or less equally expensive for occasional texts and safety backup.
Depends on the use case, but for emergency use and sending check-ins it’s quite cheap. I pay about $10/month for the peace of mind and feel that’s reasonable.
I hope this is true. I get that it's "messaging" first, but if it eventually phases in all data transport, this will give cellular companies some badly needed competition if it's competitively priced.
Have these additional globalstar sats actually launched yet ?
If so, maybe it’ll work at launch of the iPhone 14 and even though they didn’t beat SpaceX/T-mobile to the announcement, they’ll implement first; I don’t see Starship / Starlink 2 flying anytime in the next 10 days…
If so, maybe it’ll work at launch of the iPhone 14 and even though they didn’t beat SpaceX/T-mobile to the announcement, they’ll implement first; I don’t see Starship / Starlink 2 flying anytime in the next 10 days…
Seems like ATT also already had a partnership in the works: https://redd.it/wybhuh
T-mobile's own announcement says it'll be in beta end of 2023, so definitely not in the next 10 days.
but interestingly, they might be launching Starlink 2 on F9 now - https://spacenews.com/spacex-adds-falcon-9-back-to-second-ge...
Tmobile would still need masts to redirect the signal, correct? But Apple is rumored to receive the satellite signal directly?
No, The T-Mobile and Starlink agreement uses part of their existing spectrum to communicate directly between the phone and Starlink Satellite.
Looks like somebody beat them to the punch.
OneWeb were due to finish their constellation this summer, but have had to redirect launches from Russia to SpaceX delaying the completion of it. I wander if that impacted the Apple deal, with Apple wanting to launch the product this year.
OneWeb were launching incredibly quickly last year, achieving one launch of 34-36 satellites per month. It’s unfortunate that it came to a halt in February due to Ukraine. They are currently on 428 of 648 for the complete constellation, I believe just below what’s needed for initial operation.
0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/OneWeb_satellite_constellati...