SpaceX plans Starlink broadband for cars, boats, and planes(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
SpaceX plans Starlink broadband for cars, boats, and planes
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/03/spacex-plans-starlink-broadband-for-cars-boats-and-planes/
130 comments
How so?
I mean, besides providing better connectivity for people on ships, what will/can change? What was blocked in building out by current satellite offerings?
I mean, besides providing better connectivity for people on ships, what will/can change? What was blocked in building out by current satellite offerings?
On cruise lines at least, internet is extremely expensive and slow. Like $80/gb. Starlink would be awesome (Assuming it will be safe to go on cruises in the future...).
You could live on cruise ships 11 months out of the year...
Most vessels will have some form of connectivity on board right now. It depends on their vicinity to coast.
Right now data sizes of an email are industry standard. As you go into 100s of Mb you start to see people really struggle.
I would look at BIM systems for a parallel with ships. Ships are incredibly complicated and often self reliant. Shore based monitoring is hated by the crew but vessel operators see return from it.
A simple example would be an extension of the IoT devices already on board probably around engines. Anything with tangible benefits to Efficiency and safety would see investment.
Right now data sizes of an email are industry standard. As you go into 100s of Mb you start to see people really struggle.
I would look at BIM systems for a parallel with ships. Ships are incredibly complicated and often self reliant. Shore based monitoring is hated by the crew but vessel operators see return from it.
A simple example would be an extension of the IoT devices already on board probably around engines. Anything with tangible benefits to Efficiency and safety would see investment.
There’s a surprising amount of real time route optimization that in theory could improve efficiency and cost by a few percent by taking current and weather into account.
Weather routing is already prevalent over existing satphone connections. The GFS model that is typically used for this purpose has low enough resolution that there's marginal returns to additional bandwidth or reduced latency.
You can interpolate the GFS very accurately in terms of wind over land and close to land with WRF-ARW. There is highish resolution land use data and good elevation models. This is something you can do on your laptop even these days.
However I have no idea of good it is at wave and currents.
However I have no idea of good it is at wave and currents.
You can also put the compute and the data on land, and do routing as a service. The decision bandwidth (i.e., ideal heading/route) is miniscule.
You can also get real time data via ham radio although it’s extremely slow. It still works for navigation adjustments and optimizations. I fail to see how this is relevant beyond crew morale.
Well, routing seems like something that needs just ship position. You can easily send that over, for example, iridium network and as long as you won't try doing that 10 times per second (because why?) if savings were actually that big, it could already be done, even many years ago
Tracking the status of your cargo. At the moment you always have uncertainity during the voyage - you don't know if e.g. temperature was held consistently until you took control of the cargo after arrival, or if it was tampered with during transit in any way.
For fleet owners, no matter if for ships, cars/trucks or planes, management becomes way easier if they have global high bandwidth data uplink: you can detect stuff like engine or other part wear early by running big data analysis on telemetry, and in disaster case you have way better logs to operate on (both post mortem and during troubleshooting).
This by the way also is relevant for car manufacturers - with the exception of Tesla, the only way classic car manufacturers get information on how their cars are used in the real world comes from test drivers, accident reports and shop visits. Consistent data uplinks allow for a lot more telemetry that can be used to improve their products.
Surprisingly, even scientists can benefit from this - have ships transmit real-time data about air pressure, sunlight, wave height etc. and suddenly you have a global network of floating data buoys.
For fleet owners, no matter if for ships, cars/trucks or planes, management becomes way easier if they have global high bandwidth data uplink: you can detect stuff like engine or other part wear early by running big data analysis on telemetry, and in disaster case you have way better logs to operate on (both post mortem and during troubleshooting).
This by the way also is relevant for car manufacturers - with the exception of Tesla, the only way classic car manufacturers get information on how their cars are used in the real world comes from test drivers, accident reports and shop visits. Consistent data uplinks allow for a lot more telemetry that can be used to improve their products.
Surprisingly, even scientists can benefit from this - have ships transmit real-time data about air pressure, sunlight, wave height etc. and suddenly you have a global network of floating data buoys.
> temperature was held consistently until you took control of the cargo after arrival, or if it was tampered with during transit in any way.
There are already temperature and tamper devices for sensitive freight. There are devices that will show if orientation has changed or if shock occurred etc.
Sensitive freight is an entire industry that has already innovated around the lack of connectivity.
That's not to say there isn't further innovation to be made.
There are already temperature and tamper devices for sensitive freight. There are devices that will show if orientation has changed or if shock occurred etc.
Sensitive freight is an entire industry that has already innovated around the lack of connectivity.
That's not to say there isn't further innovation to be made.
> There are already temperature and tamper devices for sensitive freight. There are devices that will show if orientation has changed or if shock occurred etc.
Tiltguard stickers or how were they called... about the most useless bullshit I've seen. Back when I worked in stage lighting, many cases had these affixed... and you can guess what every shift leader had in their pocket: yep, a load of replacement ones.
Tiltguard stickers or how were they called... about the most useless bullshit I've seen. Back when I worked in stage lighting, many cases had these affixed... and you can guess what every shift leader had in their pocket: yep, a load of replacement ones.
Consistent data uplinks allow for a lot more telemetry that can be used to improve their products.
Shipping is one thing -- the company still owns the goods. But keep this out of my cars.
Shipping is one thing -- the company still owns the goods. But keep this out of my cars.
I’m curious, why?
Because that data can be seized by cops or mined by secret services.
Ships already have satellite connections, and GPS, and internet, and all of that. Starlink wouldn't revolutionize anything.
At best, it might be cheaper than what is currently on the market, but that expense is largely driven by durability requirements for equipment exposed to heavy amounts of moisture and inclement weather. Durable products are not something that any of Musk's companies are known for (especially Tesla), so they enter this market with the disadvantage of that reputation.
At best, it might be cheaper than what is currently on the market, but that expense is largely driven by durability requirements for equipment exposed to heavy amounts of moisture and inclement weather. Durable products are not something that any of Musk's companies are known for (especially Tesla), so they enter this market with the disadvantage of that reputation.
> Durable products are not something that any of Musk's companies are known for
Starlink is not Tesla, and from my study of the /r/starlink subreddit, there have not been any significant complaints about the dish reliability, even in the bitter snow and cold
Starlink is not Tesla, and from my study of the /r/starlink subreddit, there have not been any significant complaints about the dish reliability, even in the bitter snow and cold
That's precisely the argument I heard from Nokia die-hards when they iPhone was introduced :-)
This isn't a Nokia vs iPhone situation.
Shipping already does everything that Starlink proponents claim Starlink will enable, i.e., track ships, track cargo, track temperatures in containers. And this data isn't like video, so you don't need a lot of bandwidth for it.
Starlink might make things cheaper than current satellite communications offerings, but this is evolutionary not revolutionary.
Shipping already does everything that Starlink proponents claim Starlink will enable, i.e., track ships, track cargo, track temperatures in containers. And this data isn't like video, so you don't need a lot of bandwidth for it.
Starlink might make things cheaper than current satellite communications offerings, but this is evolutionary not revolutionary.
In another thread, someone suggested Viasat was costing between $20k and $50k per month.
On a ocean going cargo ship, that is not that much relative to the other costs.
On a ocean going cargo ship, that is not that much relative to the other costs.
And my blackberry could already run apps, browse the web, and send quick messages to each other years before the iphone.
To be fair, your iphone doesn't really do anything interesting past what your blackberry did. It's mostly network effects, which used to exist for blackberries and now exist for smartphones. What they're used for by most people is almost indistinguishable from what they used to be used for.
Not the same apps, though. In this comparison, it would be "my blackberry already runs iOS apps, but they're a bit slower than the new iphone".
Improvement for sure, and I'd bet on StarLink making a lot of money on this by volume, but it's not going to radically change shipping.
Improvement for sure, and I'd bet on StarLink making a lot of money on this by volume, but it's not going to radically change shipping.
Funny, I've just gone back to a Nokia.
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
Part of me thinks planes with a stable and fast connection would be amazing.
The other part of me will mourn the days when a plane flight was one of the few places you could be expected to be totally unavailable.
The other part of me will mourn the days when a plane flight was one of the few places you could be expected to be totally unavailable.
Isn’t this already here? ~5 years ago I remember watching Netflix, playing rocket league and remotely accessing as unix server during a flight.
Depends on airline and, mostly, where your flight is.
For international longer-haul flights satellite coverage can be rough for airlines - at least a few years ago when I was familiar with it airlines had either global coverage, but slow, or smaller coverage but fast.
It'll be interesting if Starlink can solve this for fast-moving planes for airlines like Qantas that fly from Aus to Europe, Asia, and America.
For international longer-haul flights satellite coverage can be rough for airlines - at least a few years ago when I was familiar with it airlines had either global coverage, but slow, or smaller coverage but fast.
It'll be interesting if Starlink can solve this for fast-moving planes for airlines like Qantas that fly from Aus to Europe, Asia, and America.
In my experience, flying over oceans or less populated areas on the US reduce the speeds to a crawl, if you get any connection at all.
It's different for every airline, but I believe the system for Southwest just uses signals from cell towers, which is spotty at best.
It's different for every airline, but I believe the system for Southwest just uses signals from cell towers, which is spotty at best.
This hasn't really been true for a couple years now.
Most of the major US airlines have been migrating from cellular to Ka- or Ku-band satellite internet over the last few years. (Including Southwest.)
There's some individual aircraft that haven't been upgraded yet, since installing the satellite antenna is a major upgrade. But at least on my flights, most offer it now.
Most of the major US airlines have been migrating from cellular to Ka- or Ku-band satellite internet over the last few years. (Including Southwest.)
There's some individual aircraft that haven't been upgraded yet, since installing the satellite antenna is a major upgrade. But at least on my flights, most offer it now.
It's possible to cache NetFlix shows before you get on the plane. Ideally before the airport too since they appear to throttle it.
I’m kind of surprised Netflix doesn’t partner with airlines to put mini Open Connect Appliances on planes and sell Netflix subscriptions per flight (if you don’t already have a subscription).
I tried using WiFi on intercontinental flights on Lufthansa in 2018/2019 aaand it was IMO unusable for anything besides text messaging.
Maybe depends on what kind of tech is installed on plane, but there is definitely space to improve it.
Maybe depends on what kind of tech is installed on plane, but there is definitely space to improve it.
Throw Neuralink into the mix and the "always connected" nightmare becomes quite literal.
NeuraLink is SciFi and lifetimes away from being even close to a consumer product.
Source?
Common sense. Look around you, look at the state of the art, read some research on brain interfacing. It's fantasy.
this is not a source
It’s not a research paper it’s an opinion.
we must request sources when someone else is making sweeping judgments about something amazing being just sci-fi and lifetimes away
if you are only sharing opinion, then my opinion is that you're wrong and that neural links are already here and will be accessible to all within our lifetime.
if you are only sharing opinion, then my opinion is that you're wrong and that neural links are already here and will be accessible to all within our lifetime.
Great, agree to disagree.
agreed. Absolutely something we could agree to disagree on. Ultimately none of us really controls that tech or its development so all equally valid speculation until we see more news.
If you’re flying on planes with viasat connections, it can feel like normal broadband. The GoGo terrestrial cell tower option is the terrible one that barely works.
FYI: not for cars.
https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/13690514319032688...
https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/13690514319032688...
Weird that he's saying that. Someone shows up in the comments with one on top of a car that seems to indicate it'd fit fairly well.
https://twitter.com/astrajamz/status/1369051953523744773
Seems like you could definitely fit one in the family minivan. Maybe skip it for the Porsche.
https://twitter.com/astrajamz/status/1369051953523744773
Seems like you could definitely fit one in the family minivan. Maybe skip it for the Porsche.
> large trucks & RVs.
Those qualify as cars. Just not Tesla cars. At least until the Tesla Semi is out, I guess.
Those qualify as cars. Just not Tesla cars. At least until the Tesla Semi is out, I guess.
I think most do not consider a truck or an RV to be a "car". The literal definition doesn't seem to make a distinction though, strangely.
And by the downvotes I'm getting I guess others agree, haha.
But before this moment, I personally would've definitely classified semis and RVs as "cars".
But before this moment, I personally would've definitely classified semis and RVs as "cars".
I think for some strange historical reason ‘car’ sort of means ‘sedan’ in the US. Like Ford recently announced they’re stopping selling ‘cars’... but they aren’t they have a full range of many types of cars, just not sedans anymore.
Contra Wikipedia's definition of car:
> A car (or automobile) is a wheeled motor vehicle used for transportation. Most definitions of cars say that they run primarily on roads, seat one to eight people, have four wheels, and mainly transport people rather than goods.
An RV would seat more than 1-8 people, and a truck is designed to transport goods rather than people (despite what they may actually be used for).
> A car (or automobile) is a wheeled motor vehicle used for transportation. Most definitions of cars say that they run primarily on roads, seat one to eight people, have four wheels, and mainly transport people rather than goods.
An RV would seat more than 1-8 people, and a truck is designed to transport goods rather than people (despite what they may actually be used for).
I assumed he means semi trucks.
This is what I want from Starlink. Drive around the wilderness and still have internet for evenings and emergencies. Glad they're thinking about it (even though it was obvious from the start.)
I strongly believe connecting cars (specifically Tesla cars) to the internet permanently so they can act as a giant data vacuum sucking up telemetry and improving maps is literally the reason why Starlink exists. Level 5 self-driving is going to require amazing map data and real time feedback on the state of roads, traffic, etc. Starlink is a very clear route to getting that data.
That's funny because I assumed StarLink was just a way to launch more rockets. Seems like there are enough synergies in the Musk empire to make this a really worthwhile endeavor.
That's funny because I assumed Starlink was just a POC for "best way to have internet on Mars".
That's funny because I just assumed Elon found another old and inefficient monopoly to disrupt.
It's this one.
Starlink is an easy way to make oodles of money, which they can redirect toward getting to Mars.
They can launch their satellites at cost (or less, if they sell ride sharing). No other telecom can do that. And their customer cost is already fraction of everyone else's.
Add to that their mass-production optimized satellites, and no one else can even touch them. There is a very good chance that Starlink will achieve its goal of printing money.
Starlink is an easy way to make oodles of money, which they can redirect toward getting to Mars.
They can launch their satellites at cost (or less, if they sell ride sharing). No other telecom can do that. And their customer cost is already fraction of everyone else's.
Add to that their mass-production optimized satellites, and no one else can even touch them. There is a very good chance that Starlink will achieve its goal of printing money.
I like the idea of a networked sat based computer based on solar energy for computations, radiation for cooling, thermally neutral. The real "cloud". Free from earthly constraints and free of gross externalities.
[deleted]
That's my understanding as well - that if you have that kind of lift capacity you can make $x selling it to other or if $10x putting up your own satellites for something like Starlink.
Ars has updated its article to say Musk has poured cold water on the idea of Starlink for Tesla cars:
Update 6 pm EST: Although a SpaceX filing said that Starlink terminals could be deployed "on passenger cars," SpaceX CEO Elon Musk indicated on Twitter today that passenger cars are not in the plan. "Not connecting Tesla cars to Starlink, as our terminal is much too big. This is for aircraft, ships, large trucks & RVs," he wrote.
Update 6 pm EST: Although a SpaceX filing said that Starlink terminals could be deployed "on passenger cars," SpaceX CEO Elon Musk indicated on Twitter today that passenger cars are not in the plan. "Not connecting Tesla cars to Starlink, as our terminal is much too big. This is for aircraft, ships, large trucks & RVs," he wrote.
I read that as Elon saying they won't connect Teslas to Starlink until the terminal is smaller, not that they won't connect them ever. I don't know much about the tech though. Maybe they're already as small as they can be.
Please, that kind of data can be already obtained from the cars over 4G/Wifi. Even when cars are not in range for some time, you can easily store whatever you want on local ssd if needed/wanted (and pleas don't tell me that you would like to send more data over satellites than you can store locally and then send over ground connection ;) )
Seems like buying more data for the LTE modems already in the cars would be easier / cheaper path than building a fleet of novel satellites and launching them into space?
Can we please opt-in? The data is valuable etc... but it should be be voluntary.
Do we have information whether Starlink satellites have cameras on-board? I was just wondering one day that it would make sense to use the satellites itself to build real-time maps.
Tesla cars are already connected through 4G/5G (when there's coverage) and they also store video feed in their memory, which they upload when the car connects to Wifi.
Tesla cars are already connected through 4G/5G (when there's coverage) and they also store video feed in their memory, which they upload when the car connects to Wifi.
Almost certainly not. AFAIK the technology to do street-level imagery from satellites is still mostly only on government spy satellites, and certainly isn’t cheap
enough to put on thousands of nearly-disposable sats. The type of imagery you see from Google Maps is taken from airplanes.
There's a company called Planet that offers daily satellite images with down to 50cm resolution. https://www.planet.com
Two challenges: finding enough clear sky, and having enough power.
Everything above 25 degrees needs to be clear. With even more satellites, it may start to tolerate individual tree-size obstacles, but right now the requirements are harsh.
The dish consumes about 100 Watts when in use.
Everything above 25 degrees needs to be clear. With even more satellites, it may start to tolerate individual tree-size obstacles, but right now the requirements are harsh.
The dish consumes about 100 Watts when in use.
I’m happy with the status quo of going to wilderness as one of the only ways to get people to leave their phones alone.
This is definitely a benefit of getting out into the wilderness, but people dying in emergencies is definitely a higher priority than you being unable to turn your antenna off.
Devices like “spot” which allow a distress signal to be sent exist. Some can tether to your phone so you can use the phone to enter a message.
I just miss the days before screens
I just miss the days before screens
I have a colleague in Canada who uses Starlink. He disconnects at least once per video call, and his latency spikes upwards of 4 seconds regularly.
Perhaps this is the best use for it - locations which could never get wired (or stationary wireless) internet.
Perhaps this is the best use for it - locations which could never get wired (or stationary wireless) internet.
I live in Canada, and live a 5 minute drive from a municipality of 160,000 people. I got Starlink a month ago and even with a few disconnects and occasional lag Starlink is a quantum leap improvement of internet connection. Going from 0.5-3 Mbps down with a 100GB bandwidth cap to a 80-250 Mbps link with unlimited bandwidth is literally life changing.
I work from home as a developer and no longer have to drive into town to install windows updates and compilers.
I work from home as a developer and no longer have to drive into town to install windows updates and compilers.
That’s why it’s called “the better than nothing beta” - it’s not production ready until they have extra birds in the sky.
Funny, this is the first time I've ever heard anything say that it's expected to have highly degraded performance by default.
EDIT: Key words: Highly Degraded Performance. This isn't the occasional disconnect or lag spike. It's frequent disconnects and lag spikes.
EDIT: Key words: Highly Degraded Performance. This isn't the occasional disconnect or lag spike. It's frequent disconnects and lag spikes.
It is the first paragraph, of the first FAQ answer on their website:
> There will also be brief periods of no connectivity at all.
Most articles or videos about the Beta has mentioned just that as a limitation (along with being geo-locked, both due to lack of coverage right now).
> There will also be brief periods of no connectivity at all.
Most articles or videos about the Beta has mentioned just that as a limitation (along with being geo-locked, both due to lack of coverage right now).
Don't know your exact latitude, but fwiw I've installed Starlink for a client in the US close to the Canadian border and have it set to auto speed test regularly. After a few weeks highest latency recorded has been 51ms (lowest 26ms), and no noticeable dropouts (no events on failover to the 5/1 DSL old line). Downloads 85-140, uploads 20-35. Installed it on a mast 20' up or so, fully clear view. Performance has been fully adequate for general real time video usage.
This is definitely still beta, and with only a tiny fraction of the tens of thousands of sats planned in the end, only beta intersat optical links for polar orbits, performance is more variable then would be hoped by general release. Latitude matters a lot in terms of density for LEO sats too. Polar orbits only just barely got going, if your colleague is far enough north to need that the lower density and version 0.9 sat links could explain some of that oddly high latency. Nevertheless the promise is there as a matter of physics, and they also very clearly advertised that this is still early stage stuff. They even had a groan inducing but highly memorable pun for it, "beta than nothing" (badum tish). It still beats the wired internet available at my client's location however. I'll probably transition the DSL from failover to static VLAN usage soon.
Single biggest beta issue right now is their IPv6 support still sucks, which means heavy CGNAT all the time. Not a huge deal to solve via reverse tunnels but still feels retrograde for something otherwise so cutting edge.
This is definitely still beta, and with only a tiny fraction of the tens of thousands of sats planned in the end, only beta intersat optical links for polar orbits, performance is more variable then would be hoped by general release. Latitude matters a lot in terms of density for LEO sats too. Polar orbits only just barely got going, if your colleague is far enough north to need that the lower density and version 0.9 sat links could explain some of that oddly high latency. Nevertheless the promise is there as a matter of physics, and they also very clearly advertised that this is still early stage stuff. They even had a groan inducing but highly memorable pun for it, "beta than nothing" (badum tish). It still beats the wired internet available at my client's location however. I'll probably transition the DSL from failover to static VLAN usage soon.
Single biggest beta issue right now is their IPv6 support still sucks, which means heavy CGNAT all the time. Not a huge deal to solve via reverse tunnels but still feels retrograde for something otherwise so cutting edge.
My parents live in Canada and can't get wired Internet. They previously had satellite from another provider (can't remember which) and it sounds like it was much better quality than this although latency was definitely a problem. They've since switched to some type of cellular modem (not sure what exactly) but of course not everyone has that option. (A few years back, the phone company ran fiber right across the street from them for a cell tower a few miles away, but nothing they could use as consumers.)
Here's what bugs me (I'm in "rural" america, but not quite as rural enough). All of these houses have power. They also, in most cases, had phone service. But somehow, companies can't manage to get fiber (or even copper) to these places?
Something smells foul.
Something smells foul.
It's definitely a motivation problem and not a technology problem.
But I will note that normal copper wires are not good for this. You can't get usable speeds past 2-3 miles on telephone wires.
But I will note that normal copper wires are not good for this. You can't get usable speeds past 2-3 miles on telephone wires.
In my old house in WI,a few min from Madison, it was 40,000ft of copper between my house and the central office. They had repeaters that were fine for voice traffic, but DSL is usually 15,000' or less.
The guy who installs DSL around here says the lines are bad enough that it'll reach about 3 Mbps, maybe.
This house is wired to cable television, but that doesn't carry any internet.
This house is wired to cable television, but that doesn't carry any internet.
Parent commenter and now you - what's story of wired Internet in Canada? Some law or Canada is in general extremely inaccessible? I mean I've heard it's colder and nicer America but is it that bad?
Canada has a landmass larger than the US with a population smaller than California. Where it is developed everything is much like the US (actually better, telecom rules make it so that cable providers are required to allow alternate ISPs access).
But outside of populated areas the availability of services drops off very quickly. I live about a mile from a Costco and I don’t have access to public sewer or garbage collection.
Thank you. That clears it.
By the way as an Indian I have always been attracted to your country, but it's just the cold that stops me from even attempting. (And I don't mean the "immigration" attraction, I had my chance in NL and after a backpacking trip I realized it was not my cup of tea). Same with Europe. Australia seems too far and in the middle of nowhere disconnected from every other place. I imagine it will be too lonely there.
Coming back to Canada I also think we outsiders know very little about the place compared to say your neighbours and a place like the UK. I am heavily into watching cinema. Would you please recommend some filmmakers that show Canada in a way that people get to see how and what the life is there?
By the way as an Indian I have always been attracted to your country, but it's just the cold that stops me from even attempting. (And I don't mean the "immigration" attraction, I had my chance in NL and after a backpacking trip I realized it was not my cup of tea). Same with Europe. Australia seems too far and in the middle of nowhere disconnected from every other place. I imagine it will be too lonely there.
Coming back to Canada I also think we outsiders know very little about the place compared to say your neighbours and a place like the UK. I am heavily into watching cinema. Would you please recommend some filmmakers that show Canada in a way that people get to see how and what the life is there?
I saw this coming :) It's not that bad. My parents just happen to live in farming territory a way outside a town of around 3,000. There's maybe three houses on their street and no one else really nearby so there's not a lot of financial incentive to run wires out there for providers. Like most places, the majority of the population lives in more densely populated areas and don't deal with these kind of issues.
America is sparsely populated - and Canada is even worse. Miles and miles and miles outside the cities where there’s just not much of anything.
Has a root cause been identified? Is it a growing pain like coverage gaps / satellite scaling issues or a fundamental issue?
Not positive, but I believe that current base stations point at one satellite at a time, and will lose connection for a brief moment while they transition from one satellite to another. In the future, ground stations will be able to lock on multiple satellites at a time, in order to bond channels for higher bandwidth, and also to do handoffs so there's no drop in connectivity.
I’ve long wondered when Tesla will include a Starlink system in every car. What better market penetration?
Assuming it's not free (satellites / modem aint cheap) - what do you think the subscription rate would be? Especially given most people already pay for connectivity via their phone? Would that justify the BOM cost and complexity increase on the car build?
Assuming: at-cost hardware built into car, subscription fee covers both car and home. Buy a car? $99/mo gets great service around the car, including your home when home. Want that service at home when car is away? one time $499 for hardware. Stare at those numbers, then realize you can dump that lousy $25-100/mo service, making Starlink the obvious choice ... and suddenly geography isn’t a limiting factor.
I personally don't believe that very many people would dump their cell service because their car can get broadband.
Not your cell service, your cable/internet service. Your car becomes your ISP modem for your house, and goes with you when you travel.
The terminals are a little big to be mounted on every car. That seems like a better use case for 5G.
Yeah, this isn't uncommon already, though I've never understood the appeal of paying another 20 bucks a month or whatever for a connection just for my car when my phone already has one.
I can imagine the Starlink antennas being mounted in a big "blister" aero faring. Would definitely cut into mileage for a small car, not so much a big rig though.
Build it into the hood.
I don't want an always connected car; I want it to be completely able to work off the grid.
Even connected cars need to run in offline mode. There’s no way a car with Starlink navigation is going to work in an empty parking garage or a tunnel. I can’t even get YouTube music to stream over LTE all the time when I drive across town — so smart caching is another frontier to develop.
If it makes you feel better, all of the actual car stuff, ECU's BMU's TCU's, etc will remain not-smart for a long while longer. Worst case, your head unit bricks and the HUD flashes a bunch of lights at you
it's all fine as long as you make the assumption that the CAN-bus network all of the components share isn't exploitable.
unfortunately that was shown not to be the case since at least 2010.[0]
The worst case is potentially much worse than a bricked head-unit. The worst-case is potentially a sizable loss of human life.
Note : I don't have a solution. The industry is obviously trending towards connectivity; I just wish to elucidate that it's far from solved from a security & liability standpoint.
[0]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220713691_Experimen...
unfortunately that was shown not to be the case since at least 2010.[0]
The worst case is potentially much worse than a bricked head-unit. The worst-case is potentially a sizable loss of human life.
Note : I don't have a solution. The industry is obviously trending towards connectivity; I just wish to elucidate that it's far from solved from a security & liability standpoint.
[0]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220713691_Experimen...
I have so far only seen the various car networks compromised through physical access to the vehicles diagnosis ports. It's safe to say all bets are off once you start plugging physical things into the car. Doesn't mean a head unit couldn't be compromised and start flooding the specific can bus its sitting on with packets, but usually head units are treated with a bit more care than the rest of the cars networks. Trying to jump can networks through one of the gateways, I don't think would be an easy task either.
Tencent gained remote access from Wifi all the way to CANbus on a Tesla on 2016.
https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-17/thursday/us-17-Nie-Free-...
https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-17/thursday/us-17-Nie-Free-...
Oh jeez good find. I don't know what Tesla was thinking with that gateway!
Then you can simply paint over it.
Elon should make Starlink free and complimentary for all his Tesla cars. This would probably be a big extra incentive to buy a Tesla.
Isn’t he already selling as many as he can build?
Where are we currently with Starlink and its (remedied?) harm to astronomy?
"VisorSats average 1.29 magnitudes fainter than the original-design Starlink satellites and, thus, they are 31% as bright." https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2101/2101.00374.pdf
This is really cool stuff - glad to see they’re working on it
Cheap connectivity could be incredible. Current sat systems are expensive and coverage is interesting.
IoT and autonomy offer the potential cost saving measures to get the investment from some of the most frugal operators.