Skylon

SpaceX Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Just now, tater said:

Yeah, my DSL modem is also a router and wifi. I use it as a modem, instead.

Is my DSL box "magic" in the sense you mean or does cable/etc do something more proprietary that doesn't let you change the local settings?

 

More proprietary.  Some of the all-in-ones, which I still don't like, do let you change everything.  Some let you, say, change the wifi name and DHCP settings, but won't let you port forward.  I had cable service once where I was not allowed the login for the box, at all.  As long as the box is fully configurable, everything would be fine, albeit possibly annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Geonovast said:

More proprietary.  Some of the all-in-ones, which I still don't like, do let you change everything.  Some let you, say, change the wifi name and DHCP settings, but won't let you port forward.  I had cable service once where I was not allowed the login for the box, at all.  As long as the box is fully configurable, everything would be fine, albeit possibly annoying.

You raise a good point. My previous ISP did this, one of the reasons I dumped them (for Comcast, that should tell you how bad it was). My gut is that SpaceX/Elon wouldn’t go this route, it seems counter to their open-source appreciation, but I’ve got nothing to back that up. The earlier tweet about the StarLink receiver is the most info we’ve gotten in months about the actual service. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Geonovast said:

This is my fear.  Today, 'easy' equates to: "Here's your magic internet box.  Plug it into the wall.  Your Wifi password is written on the side"

Which is not how I work.  I've actually stopped myself from upgrading to a faster internet package, because the next tier up requires the use of modem-router-wifi AP "magic box" provided by my ISP, which my PFSense router would have to sit behind.

It's not impossible that the StarLink receiver will just sit on the roof, plug into power, then have a separate box that goes in the house for wifi and, at least hopefully, ethernet connections with a powerline local connection to the receiver.

If anyone knows where there's any even preliminary info on this, a link would be appreciated.  If the receiver is essentially just a modem, I'll consider jumping on to the early adopter train.  If it's a "magic box" scenario, I'll just forget about Starlink altogether.

One issue here is that you often can not have the starlink box in your living room, just having a metal roof on your house would make that impossible. 
I assume the antenna need pretty unrestricted access to the sky so you might need to put a away from the center of house, so you need to connect it with cable or wifi to an router.
This will be an pretty expensive device, more like an satellite phone than an standard router and kind of semi professional use, I assume they also has an professional version or at lest will get, one marked once connection is better is remote cell phone towers who are not connected with cable.   

Anyway you obviously need to be able to access the interface on an router, if nothing to change the wifi password, for more advanced use you might need to set up port forwarding for games or remote access. 
For my use I kind of prefer an all in one box as I have had lots of issues with routers failing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Geonovast said:

More proprietary.  Some of the all-in-ones, which I still don't like, do let you change everything.  Some let you, say, change the wifi name and DHCP settings, but won't let you port forward.  I had cable service once where I was not allowed the login for the box, at all.  As long as the box is fully configurable, everything would be fine, albeit possibly annoying.

Never ran into some boxes who did not let you do anything, one option would be to simply turn it into bridge mode. 

Note guess that lots of this is because the average users tend to mess up this a lot. 
As in, I don't know that DHCP is so I turn it off. 
The other half is afraid to press unknown buttons on their remote. 
This is as old as firearms at least, looking down the barrel while pulling the trigger don't qualify as an Darwin award and that is pretty sad :)

Friend of mine was cleaning some motorcycle parts in gasoline, just an bit in the bottom of the tall container, is the gasoline was dirty he lit it on fire, however the fire was pathetic as it was oxygen starved, solution is to breath hard on it and getting an fireball and an new hairstyle :)


Ran into an issue with an customer who had to move his web server home as he had to move office fast because flooding in the location, did not affect him but they decided to renovate. 
Long wait line to get internet at his new location so he got internet for his new office but he could get an fixed ip for his home, however the router had issues I have not seen before. 
Second line support solved this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yum. Like a lightly fried marshmallow - bit of a crunchy, brown skin and sweet, sweet goodness inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scotius said:

Yum. Like a lightly fried marshmallow - bit of a crunchy, brown skin and sweet, sweet goodness inside.

Possibly including literal cookies? I think they probably have done the cookie experiment by now, and sent back the products to be "analyzed"... :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Testing to failure? Of the tank pathfinder? I thought they were assembling SN1...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RCgothic said:

Testing to failure? Of the tank pathfinder? I thought they were assembling SN1...

They probably want to verify the performance of their changes before stacking the whole thing, as another StarPopper would be very... discouraging...

I expect the actual thing to go together pretty darn quick once they actually start on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, RCgothic said:

Testing to failure? Of the tank pathfinder? I thought they were assembling SN1...

Same. I was thinking maybe building and testing of the small tank will delay everything but they built it pretty quick. Although, some of the domes were transported from FL so that definitely sped up the process if there were parts already available.

Edited by Wjolcz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Scotius said:

Yum. Like a lightly fried marshmallow - bit of a crunchy, brown skin and sweet, sweet goodness inside.

Mmmm, just like my kerbals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone looking for work?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, tater said:

Anyone looking for work?

This is something to think about, considering I'm not too far from there(in Texas terms). I wonder what they pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AngrybobH said:

This is something to think about, considering I'm not too far from there(in Texas terms). I wonder what they pay.

The pay is meh but you get a free P2P rocket pass. 
Once available...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

The pay is meh but you get a free P2P rocket pass.

As someone who works for an airplane manufacturer, I have always somewhat envied/resented that airline employees get free travel (with restrictions), but we don't get the same. (Of course, it's the airlines buying our products that ultimately pay my salary, so....)

I still think that Starship will never do P2P. The SpaceX folks just have no comprehension of everything involved in that business. But it would be interesting to see if the same anti-trust rules that prohibit airplane manufacturers from running airlines would prohibit rocket manufacturers from running a P2P service. (So far no one seems to be saying that space tourism or satellite launch businesses must be separate from rocket manufacturers.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

As someone who works for an airplane manufacturer, I have always somewhat envied/resented that airline employees get free travel (with restrictions), but we don't get the same. (Of course, it's the airlines buying our products that ultimately pay my salary, so....)

I still think that Starship will never do P2P. The SpaceX folks just have no comprehension of everything involved in that business. But it would be interesting to see if the same anti-trust rules that prohibit airplane manufacturers from running airlines would prohibit rocket manufacturers from running a P2P service. (So far no one seems to be saying that space tourism or satellite launch businesses must be separate from rocket manufacturers.)

IMO those regulations won't be put into place until after it becomes likely that P2P will be a thing. When or if that happens is anyone's guess, but I agree that Starship will not be ready for P2P for a long time, if ever. Looking in the far future, if the business case is valid and we don't end up in a post apocalyptic world, reliability will probably improve to the point where someone will at least try it eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

But it would be interesting to see if the same anti-trust rules that prohibit airplane manufacturers from running airlines would prohibit rocket manufacturers from running a P2P service.

You mean the same anti-trust rules that would, say, prevent Disney from gobbling up all other outlets and slowly becoming the sole provider of all global media? 

Oh, wait... ;)

Of all the challenges SpaceX faces in making P2P a thing, I think antitrust rules are the least of their worries in this reality.

...<coughBOEINGcough>... dusty in here...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

IMO those regulations won't be put into place until after it becomes likely that P2P will be a thing. When or if that happens is anyone's guess, but I agree that Starship will not be ready for P2P for a long time, if ever. Looking in the far future, if the business case is valid and we don't end up in a post apocalyptic world, reliability will probably improve to the point where someone will at least try it eventually.

Historically, the trigger for the anti-trust laws that prevent airplane manufacturers from running airlines came about when Boeing refused to sell 247s to TWA because they were reserving them all for their own airline, United. This had two consequences: TWA convinced Douglas to build the DC-1 and Boeing had to sell United (and also Pratt & Whitney). I suppose the same thing would be if somebody else wanted to run a P2P rocket business and tried to buy rockets from SpaceX, but SpaceX refused to sell them any in order to protect their own P2P business.

In the end, it actually would make more sense for airlines (who already know all about selling seats to travelers) to run the P2P business. I believe SpaceX is heading toward discovering that it is very hard for one company to be good at everything -- building rockets, flying rockets, building satellites, running an internet company, being an airline, colonizing Mars, etc. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

They probably want to verify the performance of their changes before stacking the whole thing, as another StarPopper would be very... discouraging...

I expect the actual thing to go together pretty darn quick once they actually start on it. 

Yes, this is much like the SLS tank destructive test. 
You pressurizes the tank so it breaks in order to test how much pressure it can handle. 
Wonder if they use liquid nitrogen? The steel is stronger then cold and the rocket will be cold during launch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.