US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.


AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
Starlink will be faster than 4G, cable and ADSL.

Speed will be comparable to that of fiber and 5G in short distances but will be again faster if the data source is far especially across oceans. This is actually one of the marketing points, targeting stock traders. Starlink claims it will be faster to use their satellites than the current fastest fiber link between London-NYC.

I pretty confident Starlink will be competitive with the price, too. Think about the amount of investment China is spending on 5G to that of SpaceX's Starlink effort. There is an order of magnitude difference may be more 200 billion vs 20 billion??. Obviously small devices like cell phones cannot use Starlink so 5G is supreme for mobile *but* for large enough vehicles (trucks/ships/planes/trains - ignore when they are in tunnels) and homes I think Starlink will be very competitive.

In any case, global coverage at high speed is so significant, it will be a game changer for many cases we cannot even think right now.

I am ready to bet (also hope) we will have similar solutions form other countries. This is a new GPS moment.
Think about it.

Speed and cost are intimately related, because a fixed bandwidth has to be shared across multiple users.

You could have a single Starlink satellite providing ultra-fast services to a small number of users, but they're going to be paying a lot more for that privilege.

In the UK for example, gigabit broadband is being rolled out in the UK for $60 per month.
And a Starlink satellite currently only supports 17 such subscriptions per satellite.

---

Also, the beam width is going to cause capacity issues, because a satellite cell is going to cover a lot of land area.

Consider California, which has 40million people and covers 423,000km2.
Even the planned constellation of 30K starlink satellites means each satellite has to cover an average of 17,000 km2 of surface area.

That means 25 starlink satellites for California. So that is a grand total of 425 Gigabit broadband connections for those 40million people.

So I'll repeat again, this is why your statement that Starlink Satellite broadband will displace terrestrial-based broadband for many users is incorrect.

These are the primary reasons why Elon Musk only expects 4% of the USA to use satellite broadband.
What do you expect the other 96% of the population to be using?


---

China is spending a lot more on 5G than Starlink yes.

But you're talking about 3 million existing 4G base stations in China, which could be upgraded to 5G.
And each 5G base station can have the throughput the equivalent of a Starlink satellite, if the consumer demand is there.

---

I agree high-speed internet will be a game changer for many use cases.

Latencies for long distances will be lower, so yes, financial trading firms will sign up.

But the transmission of the latest trading data barely uses any bandwidth, and there aren't actually many companies that need to shave off 10 milliseconds of transmission time.

Yes, ships and airplanes will see a revolutionary impact by having high-speed internet at a much lower cost than currently.
However, trucks and trains will likely stick with terrestrial 5G networks, because they are already in range of existing 5G base stations.

Plus I'm aware of a number of other companies which are planning to create their own satellite broadband networks.
I did a post on the topic last year.

After all, the business model works because there is a small percentage of people who can't get decent broadband from any terrestrial source. For example, even 4% of the global population means 280million customers.
 

AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
Yes! That is the point. And also not a dream. Starlink investment is cheaper when you think laying fiber across the whole country (forget about world). SpaceX is almost paying zero for the launches. They are using "2nd hand" rockets which were already payed by other customers. That is what makes Starlink so damn smart.

Also it is not a pi$$ing contest for everything. Learn what is good, leave what is bad. I think Starlink idea/implementation is very good.
Fibre already reaches local telephone exchanges in most of the world.
It's the only way to support the existing 60mbit DSL services delivered by copper telephone lines to every home.

For example, there are 5500 telephone exchange in the UK, which should be representative.
So that is roughly 12000 people served from a single telephone exchange.

1. If you want to deliver Gigabit broadband, you could lay down fibre from each telephone exchange to the local cabinet/building, which is expensive yes.
But note this is already happening in cities in the UK, because there is sufficient demand for Gigabit broadband at $60 per month.

2. Or perhaps you stick a 5G/Wimax antenna on a 50m pole on top of each telephone exchange.
That would cover everyone and you can deliver Gigabit broadband that way instead.

In both these scenarios, the cost of delivering Gigabit broadband is far less than with a satellite broadband service.

I think Starlink and SpaceX concepts are genius from both a technology and profitability perspective.

But don't get sucked into the Starlink marketing hype that it will change the world.
 

AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
Point 1) past performance doesn’t nessisarily equal future outcomes.
Point 2even then this is a number of straw men arguments.
Your examples were targeted to Chinese centric models.
In the case of PayPal they didn’t launch in China till what 2019 when it bought up Gopay. Alipay by then had an established lock in a large population density.
In the US And most of the wold Tesla is classed as a luxury car. It’s depended on government subsidies and cap and trade for profit. The same holds true globally. Until model 3 most Tesla aren’t in the price point for regular buyers nor really popular class. Even then it depends on subsidies and clever use of cap and trade to make a price. By contrast many Chinese EV are classed as Taxis Or are buses that Operate a drives as commercial vehicles operating in a different market and driving production at higher rates. You again also have the Chinese market where imports have a higher price point than on the global one. Even an entry level car because it’s an import has a premium price in China well most indigenous models are cheaper.
Next Musk targets his batteries for his production. Vertical integration. If you can only get his battery in his product and he doesn’t sell For other products that’s going to keep him smaller.

Finally. In the case here the questions that should be asked IMHO regarding your projection are.

[*]Could Jack Ma or some Private Chinese oligarch afford to launch a competitive global constellation in China? Let’s consider a hypothetical “AliLink™️”.
Space X has undercut the launch market by reusable launchers first stages now they are even reusing fairings. Without that it’s far more expensive to launch such constellations.
Government can afford to launch disposable rockets sure but but has little interest in doing so for commercial interests alone. Defense and exploration are in the budgets, private sector isn’t.
It’s far to expensive subsidize hundreds of launches for a single maker. Look at One Web bankruptcy.
The ability of Space X to one stop shop and basically rent a rocket, pad and build your payload is a true game changer. Starlink targets sale and use of its Starlink to a number of commercial and government enterprises. In essence this would change the situation from today where we deploy custom one off satellites in high orbits dependent on orbits and government launches to off the shelf ready to go communications networks. Cheaper than the current systems. Part of the aim is mass of production and ability to supply as demanded.
Yes perhaps Jack Ma could do some “AliLink™️“ down the line but he would need a launcher, costumers, satellites and ground stations. Where does he get it?
LM8 is still Vapor wear but also government owned. That might not be a problem for inside the PRC If he was subsidized for the program but global positioning? Who builds the satellites? The Chinese Space agency?If the user is Chinese only no issue, outside of that? Hauwei? Alibaba? Speaking of which.

[*]If a Chinese “AliLink™️“ did exist What about the Great Firewall?
Land line and 5G have to run though the server farms in country. Starlink would only have to do so partially If you get linked up to “AliLink™️” are you on the Chinese Internet or the Open global net? Are Google, YouTube and the Chinese banned firms available? That might be a decision that affects the international marketing of the system.
In the PRC that might fly.
you aren’t in China linchpining your Beyond next generation communication system to “AliLink™️” might Cause issues. Not because of the issues just of security but compatibility. The Great firewall locks out a number of APPs and locks out access to some networks. Which leads to.

[*] Who would be the clients for “AliLink™️“?
The PLA? Chinese government? Chinese state owned? Okay. Chinese firms? Okay. Rural China? Ready made potential assuming that they have the money to buy in or own a device at all. This isn’t as simple as owning a phone this requires a ground station box about the size of a pizza box. But you notice it? If that is your costumer base isn’t this more or less just another High Speed infrastructures program? Not “AliLink” but Sinolink? Yes perhaps a larger user base but are they costumers who choose it or is it rather a captive audience government program?
If Starlink fails Musk takes the fall it’s OneWeb again. If he succeeds he does so with the US gov not as the central component but just another happy costumer.
All valid points, but I see nothing insurmountable.

If we can see satellite broadband works with Starlink/SpaceX, the Chinese government and Chinese companies can see this as well.
There's no fundamental reason why a SpaceX/Starlink couldn't eventually be developed in China, and we already see this beginning.

Remember that SpaceX/Starlink are based around the concepts of simplicity, mass production, and commodity components at the lowest cost.
That is exactly the sort of industry that Chinese companies have conquered previously.

SpaceX/Starlink do have a lead, and it will take some time to catch up.
But this is an engineering issue, not a technology one.

And when we see thousands of Starlink satellite launches in the coming year, you can be sure the Chinese government and Chinese companies will make this a top priority.
 

Khalij e Fars

Junior Member
Registered Member
U.S. Navy F/A-18F Super Hornet Crashed Into The Philippine Sea

"Details are still limited, but a U.S. Navy
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, assigned to Carrier Air Wing 11 embarked on the Nimitz class aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, crashed in the Philippine Sea earlier today. The jet's two crew members ejected successfully and were rescued by an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 8 (HSC 8) also assigned to the carrier.

This crash also follows a string of U.S. military aviation mishaps in recent months, both in the United States and overseas. Just on June 15, a U.S. Air Force F-15C Eagle assigned to the 493rd Fighter Squadron, part of the 48th Fighter Wing based at RAF Lakenheath in the United Kingdom,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, tragically killing the pilot, 1st Lieutenant Kenneth Allen.

A C-130H Hercules airlifter
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
at Camp Taji in Iraq, hitting a wall and suffering a subsequent fire, last week. In May, an Air Force F-22 Raptor and one of that service's F-35A Joint Strike Fighters
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
while operating out of Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.

Another F-15C
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
at Andrews Air Force Base outside of Washington, D.C. that same month after making an emergency landing. The nose landing gear on another F-35A
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
after that jet also made an emergency landing at Hill Air Force Base in Utah earlier this month."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yet another U.S. accident after:

- Crashed F-35 in Florida (20th May)
- F-35A nose landing-gear collapsed in Utah (8th June)
- F-22 crash in Florida (15th May)
- C-130 crash in Iraq (8th June)
- F-15C crashed into the North Sea off England (15th June)
- And now F/A-18F crashed into the Philippine Sea (18th June)

All within the past 4-5 weeks.
 

caohailiang

New Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Now it seems there are 3 CVN in west pacific, plus the LHA USS America.
A question i have been curious for long: in war time, if there are indeed 3 carriers in the same theatre, would they be deployed in close formation, or they will be separately deployed with a distance of, say, at least 100 nm. What would be the considerations?
Seem to me if deployed in close formation, they can share the air defense as well as ASW resources.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Generally it would depend on the mission. If it’s a large scale regional conflict or vs a single nation. Even vs a single nation they may distribute so as to act against multiple targets simultaneously.
Although clustering them can combine their escorts it also makes a large target and if the enemy has anti ship tactical nuclear weapons like nuclear torpedos or missile that could cripple the fleet in one shot.
Multiple targets means that a single large action can’t take out the whole of the fleet.
 

caohailiang

New Member
Registered Member
Generally it would depend on the mission. If it’s a large scale regional conflict or vs a single nation. Even vs a single nation they may distribute so as to act against multiple targets simultaneously.
Although clustering them can combine their escorts it also makes a large target and if the enemy has anti ship tactical nuclear weapons like nuclear torpedos or missile that could cripple the fleet in one shot.
Multiple targets means that a single large action can’t take out the whole of the fleet.
This drill in Philippine Sea is probably in response to recent PLAAF activities near Taiwan island. In real action, I think the main mission of those carriers would be to defeat any PLA amphibious operation crossing the Taiwan strait.
 

Top