Over 10,000 Starlink satellites launched

[Analog Kid]

Reminds me of this book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Sold_the_Moon

Better to sell it than to nuke it as the US wanted to do.

   I can't say that I ever heard this idea but it sounds like something that Dr Edward Teller would propose. He was a certifiable lunatic IMO! He made a serious proposal that the US built a new, larger Panama Canal, and instead of digging it out he wanted blast a serious of craters all of the way across Central America using a series of Hydrogen Bombs.  He also proposed digging a smaller canal in Alaska as a demonstration project and that proposal was given very serious consideration within the US Gov and the .MIL

  The character Dr Strangelove was based on Edward Teller!  If any of you haven't seen the movie then you should!

Yes, Teller was one insane motherfucker.

Another one to look up: Herman Kahn, the Think Tanker of Oblivion. (To him, nuclear war was not only thinkable but winnable.)

[5U4GB]

I can't say that I ever heard this idea but it sounds like something that Dr Edward Teller would propose. He was a certifiable lunatic IMO! He made a serious proposal that the US built a new, larger Panama Canal, and instead of digging it out he wanted blast a serious of craters all of the way across Central America using a series of Hydrogen Bombs.  He also proposed digging a smaller canal in Alaska as a demonstration project and that proposal was given very serious consideration within the US Gov and the .MIL

Both the US and USSR toyed with the idea, in the US for excavations (Sedan) and natural gas extraction (Gasbuggy) as part of the Ploughshares program.  They gave up on the latter when they figured out no-one was going to buy the radioactive gas it produced, and the former because it was vented to the atmosphere and spread radiation over a wide area.  Some years ago I was lucky enough to talk to one of the guys who was sent into the crater to collect samples once the radiation had died down sufficiently, it's a pretty impressive hole when you're standing on the edge of it.

The USSR, with no need to consider public reactions, went much further and carried out over a hundred tests, also causing large amounts of radiation contamination, but it took them dozens of test each to determine that radioactive oil, gas, and water wasn't desirable.  The crazy only stopped with the collapse of the USSR.

Another one to look up: Herman Kahn, the Think Tanker of Oblivion. (To him, nuclear war was not only thinkable but winnable.)

He didn't think it was winnable, or at least never directly expressed an opinion on the topic, he was asked to produce a study on what would happen if it occurred, and methodically did so.  It's a pretty dry read, not so much because of the topic but because it's hundreds of pages of him methodically ploughing through the consequences.

[5U4GB]

Speaking of Starlink issues, this just in.

[tszaboo]

Without opening new topic:
What are your thought about the recent Starlink-Ryanair feud? Ryanair's CEO claims that it would increase fuel usage by 2% so they don't want it, Musk calls him an idiot, he calls Musk an idiot (real classy).
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/musk-ryanair-ceo-clash-over-cost-starlink-wi-fi-planes-2026-01-16/

Ballpark calculation tells me that 250 million USD a year for 600 planes, would come down to about 2 USD per flight for that "Free wifi"

[Psi]

The main question seems to be around how it affects aerodyamics, which is dependent on how and where you mount it on the plane.

But yeah 2% is ridiculous, if true it simply means someone is calculating drag assuming it's mounted in a stupid position or inside a huge dome or something.   The Starlink plane dish version is very flat vs other plane sat internet options. 

I wouldn't put it past some employee with a hatred of Musk to be intentionally using absolute worst case figures for everything and a huge mounting dome to force the number up to 2% on purpose hoping to derail adoption and wasn't expecting their 2% value to go public. At least, that's what it feels like because yeah, 2% to add a flat dish is just way to high.

[5U4GB]

I wouldn't put it past some employee with a hatred of Musk to be intentionally using absolute worst case figures for everything and a huge mounting dome to force the number up to 2% on purpose hoping to derail adoption

Or Ryanair, notorious for it's cost-cutting and nickel-and-diming, is looking for any excuse it can to not go with Starlink.  Given the reference to 1-hour flights, I can imagine that it just doesn't make sense to retrofit Starlink to its fleet so passengers can have 30 minutes or so of in-flight WiFi.

[Psi]

I wouldn't put it past some employee with a hatred of Musk to be intentionally using absolute worst case figures for everything and a huge mounting dome to force the number up to 2% on purpose hoping to derail adoption

Or Ryanair, notorious for it's cost-cutting and nickel-and-diming, is looking for any excuse it can to not go with Starlink.  Given the reference to 1-hour flights, I can imagine that it just doesn't make sense to retrofit Starlink to its fleet so passengers can have 30 minutes or so of in-flight WiFi.

Yeah, but if so they wouldn't make a point of saying it costs +2% fuel costs and that they wont be fitted because of that.
They would instead just say nothing. People now know that Ryanair won't be adding good internet to their flights. Saying what they said seems to have hurt them and I cant see how they could have expected any upside to saying it.
So I reckon the CEO honestly thought it was 2% because that's what he read in an internal feasibility report and he was so shocked how expensive it was that he figured people would be interested in the 2% fact so he tweeted about it.

[paulca]

Every launch creates 336 tons of CO2.

Yummy! That's just food for plants.

Well that is true, in the first instance, but if you start thinking it through there are challenges that cannot be ignored.

The crux you come to is this:  Hihger CO2 is causing a warming effect.  Not something which hasn't happened before mind.  The equatorial deserts are expanding north and south.  There are established concentrations of people living there who will face increased difficulties and what they currently grow there will start to fail.

The "Without adaption" premise used in most of the marketing for climate change can be seen "incorrect" with many prior permafrost areas in the north becoming farmable. 

However, there are a large band of people in the middle who are not interested in moving north to make room for the people to the south.

The crops that grew in sub-saharan African will not grow in newly thawed Alaska.  Large farming regions with specific soils and climates are shifting around and humanity doesn't have to tolerance to migration that it once had.

With total global adaption, yes, more CO2 = more plants = more green = more food.  The world has already been "greening" constantly for quite a while due to higher temps and higher CO2.  It's just not inline with our current agriculture and changing that will involve wars.

[5U4GB]

They would instead just say nothing.

No they won't, because then they'll get a neverending stream of whining from customers and the media about why they're not providing Starlink.  Being able to point to Musk, who's not exactly popular in Europe, and saying "it's all his fault" is a great scapegoat to get out of that situation.

[mendip_discovery]

They would instead just say nothing.

No they won't, because then they'll get a neverending stream of whining from customers and the media about why they're not providing Starlink.  Being able to point to Musk, who's not exactly popular in Europe, and saying "it's all his fault" is a great scapegoat to get out of that situation.

Also Ryanair looks at any media coverage as free advertising. The bloke says a lot of rage bait, like charging for toilets or double stacking seating, etc. Even though its not gone well for now, its still reminding people of the company name.

[tszaboo]

The main question seems to be around how it affects aerodyamics, which is dependent on how and where you mount it on the plane.

But yeah 2% is ridiculous, if true it simply means someone is calculating drag assuming it's mounted in a stupid position or inside a huge dome or something.   The Starlink plane dish version is very flat vs other plane sat internet options. 

I wouldn't put it past some employee with a hatred of Musk to be intentionally using absolute worst case figures for everything and a huge mounting dome to force the number up to 2% on purpose hoping to derail adoption and wasn't expecting their 2% value to go public. At least, that's what it feels like because yeah, 2% to add a flat dish is just way to high.

Is it though? Starlink's own claim is simulated 0.3% on a Boeing 737-800 aircraft. Which is conveniently chosen as one of the larger older planes.
Ryanair has 737-200, which is more modern, it is shown that winglets reduce consumption by like 6-7%. Same drag is worse on new planes. It's possible that Michael O'whatever was quoting the efficiency of older systems, so I think the truth is somewhere in between.
I think he doesn't want to pay subscription to Musk, and knows that people wouldn't pay 2 USD for airplane wifi. Which means that he needs to build it in the price by default, or charge like 20 EUR for it for whoever wants to use it.

[Psi]

I wonder how long before we see it built in to the plane fuselage from factory. That would make the aerodynamics irrelevant. It would only be the extra weight and power used.

[wraper]

Is it though? Starlink's own claim is simulated 0.3% on a Boeing 737-800 aircraft. Which is conveniently chosen as one of the larger older planes.
Ryanair has 737-200, which is more modern, it is shown that winglets reduce consumption by like 6-7%.

737-200 is a first generation of 737 and is old as hell.

[tszaboo]

Is it though? Starlink's own claim is simulated 0.3% on a Boeing 737-800 aircraft. Which is conveniently chosen as one of the larger older planes.
Ryanair has 737-200, which is more modern, it is shown that winglets reduce consumption by like 6-7%.

737-200 is a first generation of 737 and is old as hell.

So it's a max 200, not the old 200. But you probably already know that.

[tom66]

On more Starlink-related news it seems Starlink is a vital form of connectivity for Iranians who are trying to share news of the terrible situation in Iran right now.  Authorities are hunting people out that they suspect to be using these dishes. I would expect due to the phased array nature of the transmission they are hard to detect and jam.  Jamming is probably possible with a very high power transmitter but would need significant power to be feasible over more than a few square km.  Detection is likely only possible from aircraft and drones, as there will be very little leakage from the dish other than in the intended direction (there are no doubt sidelobes, but these will radiate out mostly into space; little energy will reach ground based receivers.)

Apparently Starlink is now free in Iran, or at least existing customers are not being billed for it.  I have little doubt that the US state department has asked Musk to do this, as they maintain an interest in disrupting Iran.
https://www.reuters.com/world/musks-starlink-faces-high-profile-security-test-iran-crackdown-2026-01-16/

Hopefully direct-to-cell technology becomes more common in the future and it will then be impractical to deny internet access to an area as long as people still possess smartphones.

[brucehoult]

Is it though? Starlink's own claim is simulated 0.3% on a Boeing 737-800 aircraft. Which is conveniently chosen as one of the larger older planes.
Ryanair has 737-200, which is more modern, it is shown that winglets reduce consumption by like 6-7%.

737-200 is a first generation of 737 and is old as hell.

So it's a max 200, not the old 200. But you probably already know that.

Why would someone who is not in Europe know exactly what models a random European domestic airline flies? You said 737-200, not 737 MAX 8-200, and we had a reasonable (but now diminished) expectation that you would give correct information.

Google says nine airlines around the world still fly 737-200 -- several in remote parts of Canada due to its built-in stairway and ability to operate from grass/gravel [1], plus a whole lot of freight operators.

[1] actually one of my more upvoted Quora answers https://www.quora.com/Why-can-t-planes-land-on-grass/answer/Bruce-Hoult

[coppercone2]

They would instead just say nothing.

No they won't, because then they'll get a neverending stream of whining from customers and the media about why they're not providing Starlink.  Being able to point to Musk, who's not exactly popular in Europe, and saying "it's all his fault" is a great scapegoat to get out of that situation.

Also Ryanair looks at any media coverage as free advertising. The bloke says a lot of rage bait, like charging for toilets or double stacking seating, etc. Even though its not gone well for now, its still reminding people of the company name.

Glad to see someone still remembers what advertising is, because it seems alot of people forgot that companies are interested in all publicity, and that outrage sometimes feeds the fire... it seems that this was common knowledge online a decade ago but people seem to be forgetting and are adopting a sports team fan mentality rather then one of a objective consumer.. at least that is what I seem to be reading alot of. And it seems that companies get 'more annoying' because there is more people that get too emotional/attached to the companies, its like they have more patsies available so those strategies are more viable. At this point I bet there is like a flow chart that they are following like "first accumulate 60,000 negative comments, then.... do something (I am not one of those business PR linkedin? psychologists that knows what something is).. and then X ". I know they are some how using it as a resource to 'power' a control system of some sort, its like dangerous hot oil hydraulics? Or superheated steam power? or perhaps liquid metal heat transfer, since the 'anger' seems to 'solidify into harmless (but not inert) text' pretty quickly. Like a potassium loop 

[5U4GB]

[1] actually one of my more upvoted Quora answers https://www.quora.com/Why-can-t-planes-land-on-grass/answer/Bruce-Hoult

My first response to the top image was "typical AI-generated junk, those cigarillos under the wings wouldn't even get it off the ground".  Just so used to expecting them with high-bypass turbofans.

[mendip_discovery]

They would instead just say nothing.

No they won't, because then they'll get a neverending stream of whining from customers and the media about why they're not providing Starlink.  Being able to point to Musk, who's not exactly popular in Europe, and saying "it's all his fault" is a great scapegoat to get out of that situation.

Also Ryanair looks at any media coverage as free advertising. The bloke says a lot of rage bait, like charging for toilets or double stacking seating, etc. Even though its not gone well for now, its still reminding people of the company name.

Glad to see someone still remembers what advertising is, because it seems alot of people forgot that companies are interested in all publicity, and that outrage sometimes feeds the fire... it seems that this was common knowledge online a decade ago but people seem to be forgetting and are adopting a sports team fan mentality rather then one of a objective consumer.. at least that is what I seem to be reading alot of. And it seems that companies get 'more annoying' because there is more people that get too emotional/attached to the companies, its like they have more patsies available so those strategies are more viable. At this point I bet there is like a flow chart that they are following like "first accumulate 60,000 negative comments, then.... do something (I am not one of those business PR linkedin? psychologists that knows what something is).. and then X ". I know they are some how using it as a resource to 'power' a control system of some sort, its like dangerous hot oil hydraulics? Or superheated steam power? or perhaps liquid metal heat transfer, since the 'anger' seems to 'solidify into harmless (but not inert) text' pretty quickly. Like a potassium loop 

I think the idea is they want people to be talking about it and having it in our recent memory. But hope we forget about the problems before then. Its like how they claim people hate a film character for being race swapped even before anyone could say anything.

I would like to remind people Elon does like to spout some unfounded crap at times. He is no better than the Ryanair chap. Hence why nobody can make any real sense of it all.

I don't like the way star link has been pushed out. Way to many issues created that are impacting others uses. The idea of a world wide system I dont mind but I think more research into the devices should have been done and maybe not using millions of the things to solve the problem also isn't the best idea. But I am not a tech billionaire so what do I know.

[brucehoult]

I don't like the way star link has been pushed out. Way to many issues created that are impacting others uses.

They of course obtained all necessary licenses.

The idea of a world wide system I dont mind but I think more research into the devices should have been done and maybe not using millions of the things

There are almost exactly 9500 at present, so "millions" (multiple) is at least 200 times more than reality. There is one ~100 m^2 satellite (mostly the solar panels) per more than 50 billion m^2 of sky.  Any random star-sized bit of sky has a less than 1 in 500 million chance of having a Starlink satellite in it.

[wraper]

I don't like the way star link has been pushed out. Way to many issues created that are impacting others uses. The idea of a world wide system I dont mind but I think more research into the devices should have been done and maybe not using millions of the things to solve the problem also isn't the best idea. But I am not a tech billionaire so what do I know.

A recipe how to get nothing done.

[5U4GB]

I would like to remind people Elon does like to spout some unfounded crap at times. He is no better than the Ryanair chap. Hence why nobody can make any real sense of it all.

Only "at times"?  You've got a man-child under the delusion that he's a genius going up against an Irishman.  Of course it's going to degenerate into a s**tfight pretty quickly.

[mendip_discovery]

I don't like the way star link has been pushed out. Way to many issues created that are impacting others uses.

They of course obtained all necessary licenses.

Yes they did, from what I have read it turns out they are affecting stuff outside of the frequency band they were allocated.

The idea of a world wide system I dont mind but I think more research into the devices should have been done and maybe not using millions of the things

There are almost exactly 9500 at present, so "millions" (multiple) is at least 200 times more than reality. There is one ~100 m^2 satellite (mostly the solar panels) per more than 50 billion m^2 of sky.  Any random star-sized bit of sky has a less than 1 in 500 million chance of having a Starlink satellite in it.

I was over stating the numbers but there are plans for more to be sent up, plus we now have competitors also going in for it. From what I have read online the optical and radio telescopes are suffering from the noise.