Starlink?

[PAylor]

We're looking into Starlink.  Would love to hear experiences you all have had.  Our goal is to get rid of Directv and possibly ATT.  Want to know monthly expenses,  ease of use, customer service,  etc.

Thank in advance! 

[palmeris]

Starlink.com

599.00 for hardware.  150.00 per month for unlimited data,  check web site for specifics, coverage,  speed, etc.

Download app to phone, plug in the router , point dish at sky.

Need clear views of sky to the north.  It doesn't like trees 

[GeorgiaHybrid]

Without Starlink, we wouldn't have internet or phone service a LOT of the time on our trip to Alaska. You do need a clear sky or be willing to accept interruptions in service when a satellite goes behind an obstruction but it is pretty much the best game in town for remote areas.

For home use only, it depends on your situation. If fiberoptic cable is available in your area, it is a much better option. For slower internet options, Starlink is a viable solution.

If you travel frequently, and don't want to depend on slow, free Wi-Fi in parks or slow cell service, it is worth taking a long, hard look at it.

Edited June 29, 2023 by GeorgiaHybrid

[Payroll Person]

8 hours ago, palmeris said:

Need clear views of sky to the north.  It doesn't like trees 

Be aware. Does not always orient north. Left coast it may orient north west. East coast may orient north east. This mainly concerns static installs but is something to be aware of. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Payroll Person

[palmeris]

Use the app to "check for obstructions" using the camera on your phone you scan the sky and it will show you where dishy wants orientation based on your location. 

[GeorgiaHybrid]

LOL, in Alaska, the preferred direction is due south.

[palmeris]

This is a cool link https://satellitemap.space/ showing the global constellation and ground stations for starlink 

[Lou Schneider]

It's a myth that Starlink needs a clear view to the north.  The reason Dishy orients itself in that direction in the contiguous 48 states is to minimize the chance that it's uplink will interfere with satellites in geosynchronous orbit over the equator.  Starlink satellites can be anywhere in the sky including to the south of your location.  The wider your view of the sky is in ALL directions the more satellites you have a chance of hitting.

Edited July 2, 2023 by Lou Schneider

[lappir]

On 6/29/2023 at 7:40 AM, palmeris said:

Starlink.com

599.00 for hardware.  150.00 per month for unlimited data,  check web site for specifics, coverage,  speed, etc.

Download app to phone, plug in the router , point dish at sky.

Need clear views of sky to the north.  It doesn't like trees 

It will have to drop at least $50 per month to match my current unlimited Verizion that has been very good for me. I tried one of the "New" Verizon plans with a new phone, but found the speeds slower and had a near daily reminder that I was "Out of Data" after 8 days of my typical use. 

I still want one of the new "Fold" phones and will use it for my GPS in everything. It's coming with me anyway. 

I'll wait for a bit and see what the Fold 5 holds since the Pixel seemed to miss the mark. I liked the Fold 4, but not $1800 worth of like. 

Rod

[Vladimir]

I have had a Gen 1 dish and a Gen 2 dish at my second home business.

Travel with Gen 1 dish would be a pain.  The Gen 2 dish works for travel.  it is small enough.

I have Verizon unlimited service, but most areas I camp in have NO CELL service.  Quite frankly, I am thinking of switching to another service.

The future plan at this point, is to switch to very cheap cell plan and use StarLink for wifi calling.  It works really well for that. 

Yes, you pay more for StarLink, but you pay LESS for data and you have cell service, internet, and TV everywhere you camp.

Now, if StarLink would quit destroying the night sky it would be a win-win.

 

[Jaydrvr]

19 hours ago, Vladimir said:

 

Now, if StarLink would quit destroying the night sky it would be a win-win.

 

Can you explain that please? I don't understand.. Jay

[Vladimir]

2 hours ago, Jaydrvr said:

Can you explain that please? I don't understand.. Jay

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/spacex-starlink-problem-astronomy/

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/satellites-elon-musk-starlink-ruining-093049566.html

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01420-9

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/22396388/space-x-elon-musk-starlink-too-bright-astronomy-stars-pollution

https://www.science.org/content/article/astronomers-stumble-diplomatic-push-protect-night-sky

There was a technical paper on how much these satellites will brighten and destroy the night sky.  It did NOT show up in my brief list.  If you are interested I will do a comprehensive search and find the science paper.

BUT, most of the above links cover the issues for those without a science background.

[Dutch_12078]

16 minutes ago, Vladimir said:

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/spacex-starlink-problem-astronomy/

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/satellites-elon-musk-starlink-ruining-093049566.html

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01420-9

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/22396388/space-x-elon-musk-starlink-too-bright-astronomy-stars-pollution

https://www.science.org/content/article/astronomers-stumble-diplomatic-push-protect-night-sky

There was a technical paper on how much these satellites will brighten and destroy the night sky.  It did NOT show up in my brief list.  If you are interested I will do a comprehensive search and find the science paper.

BUT, most of the above links cover the issues for those without a science background.

You missed a link...

 

[Vladimir]

Magnitude seven is pretty bright. 

Some of the recent papers I have seen, indicated they need to reach mag 14 to keep from brightening the night sky just because of sheer numbers.  We are losing our night sky.

We are looking at 200,000 plus of these satellites in low earth orbit in the next few years.  StarLink is the first up, next is Amazon, a firm in Britain, Russia, China, and our own DOD.

When I am doing astro-imaging with a 8 inch scope I see the tracks of mag 14 satellites.  Yeah, doesn't matter for my observations. 

BUT for professional observatories it is a major headache to remove satellite images.

The other issue is flying into space from earth.  Hitting one of these satellites will definitely ruin your day, not to mention ending your life.  Musk is using StarLink to fund his trip to Mars.  He might not able to leave earth safely in a few years.

BUT, all the techies think that high speed internet is WORTH destroying the night sky for high speed internet.  BIG TECH is really evil.

That is a value judgement whether you prefer having vestiges of the real world over a totally artificial one.

I for one, will miss the night sky.

 

Edited July 4, 2023 by Vladimir

[RV_]

The disappearing night sky is not just from Satellites and space stations anymore. A lot is from the ground in addition from LED blue lights - it's a two way street:

Excerpt:

"In recent years, cities, towns and small communities across the world have taken part in a radical revolution — of our light-bulbs. Traditional orange-tinged high-pressure sodium bulbs are being swapped for more energy-efficient, whiter and brighter LED (light-emitting diode) lights. But the rise of LEDs is also illuminating new problems for our night sky, as well as our health.

Over the past decade, scientists found, the night sky has become nearly 10 percent brighter each year because of artificial lights, mainly LEDs emitting too much glare. Streetlights are part of the problem, as are sources such as illuminated billboards and stadium lights.

Those same outdoor lights are also affecting our health. Common types of LED lights contain higher proportions of bluer wavelengths, which can affect people’s nighttime patterns. They disrupt our circadian rhythms, lower the performance of our immune systems and increase the occurrence of certain diseases, including cancer.

“People need to understand LED lights are being installed everywhere, not just streetlights, but they’re blasting up in all directions,” said Jim White, senior energy efficiency engineer with the Chelan County Public Utility District who helped with the county’s LED transition.

But he added, “It’s one form of pollution that we could solve.”

Agencies and organizations such as the National Park Service and the American Medical Association have recommended ways to reduce light pollution and its harmful effects on life. The changes begin with what type of LED light to buy in the first place.

Shedding light on the issue

The concern has come to light in recent years with the emergence of new LED technology. LED lights are the Olympic marathon runners of light bulbs: They consume up to 90 percent less energy and can last up to 25 times longer than traditional incandescent lights.

As the most energy-efficient bulb on the market, it’s no surprise that so many people are adopting the technology. The Energy Department estimated LEDs made up about 19 percent of all lighting installations in 2017, saving about 1 percent of total energy consumed in the United States. By 2035, the lights are expected to comprise 84 percent of lighting installations. Roadways, parking, building exteriors and area lights — which are applications typically high in lumens, a measure of brightness — are expected to see nearly full conversion to LED lights by 2035.

White was excited to have Chelan County, located in the middle of the state with a population of about 80,000 people, be part of the LED light revolution. Starting in 2014, the Chelan County Public Utility District began meeting with local governments, communities and agencies to discuss what it would take to replace their streetlights. In 2018, it embarked on a $1.9 million project, partially funded by a state grant from the Washington State Department of Commerce, to replace nearly 3,700 high-pressure sodium streetlights (about 60 percent of their outdoor street and area lights) with LEDs.

The energy savings were discernible. After the transition, the new lights conserved 2,612,491 kilowatt-hours – enough to power about 120 all-electric homes in the county for a year.

But there were downsides, too: Researchers with the National Park Service found the LED lights washed out more of the stars, particularly near the horizon.

“You can tell the lighting gets bigger, so it extends higher into the sky … the entire sky got brighter,” said Li-Wei Hung, an astronomer with the National Park Service who published a study on the LED transition in Chelan County. “Just a few years ago, this [was] really new knowledge for us. Does the change to LEDs really decrease the light pollution or increase it? We [didn’t] exactly know."

Camera data showed the sky over local Burch Mountain was 60 percent brighter after the county completed the switch in 2019 compared with 2018. The new artificial light stood at 3.69 times the natural light level after the transition; before the transition, artificial lights generated 2.30 times the natural light. White said the increased pollution was “a total surprise” because the Public Utility District had tried to direct lights toward the ground, but the light still scattered.

Detailed nightglow data from individual cities is hard to come by, making the transition in Chelan County an important case study in understanding both the good and bad effects of LED lights. Yet observations and anecdotes indicate Chelan County is not alone. From 2011 to 2022, reports from citizen scientists indicated the average night sky got brighter by 9.6 percent each year, which researchers attribute to LED light replacements. Some cities, such as D.C., paused a transition to LEDs after residents complained about the bright lights disrupting their sleep.

This graphic shows an annotated photo taken from aboard the International Space Station at night. The view is from above Baltimore and D.C. at night. This vantage shows us the difference between the bluer LED light present in Baltimore's metro area compared to the more amber colors in D.C.'s metro area. This is from the cities' respective rollout of LED lights from newer LED bulbs (Baltimore) to older amber-colored bulbs (D.C.).

The bluer LED lights clearly outline Baltimore’s metro area when viewed from the ISS"

Source with much more:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2023/glaring-problem-how-led-lights-worsen-light-pollution/

Edited July 4, 2023 by RV_

[RV_]

17 hours ago, Vladimir said:

BUT, all the techies think that high speed internet is WORTH destroying the night sky for high speed internet.  BIG TECH is really evil.

That is a value judgement whether you prefer having vestiges of the real world over a totally artificial one.

I for one, will miss the night sky.

 

Vlad don't you also "think that high speed internet is WORTH destroying the night sky for high speed internet" by operating two of these evil systems?

Edited July 4, 2023 by RV_

[RV_]

49 minutes ago, Dutch_12078 said:

You missed a link...

 

Thanks!

[Vladimir]

I live in Chelan County up Burch Mountain Rd.  Here is my comment in a amateur astronomy forum on the Washington Post article...........................................................

I live in Chelan County up Burch Mountain.  The NPS images were taken about four miles from my house.

Several important comments that were NOT covered in the article.

FIRST......

The Wenatchee Valley has several state highways including the main route through Wenatchee.  Washington Department of Transportation INSISTED on brighter and bluer lights than Chelan County put in on their roads.   Chelan County Public Utility District #1 did a great job of matching the light intensity needed for safe driving. 

It is hard to protect the night sky when the state of Washington refuses to consider environmental protection a priority.

SECOND......

We have had several large corporations move into the valley during that time that have NO ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES.  The worst of the bunch is MicroSoft Corporation.  They moved into the rural adjacent county and their data center is BRIGHTER than downtown Wenatchee!!!  The light spills over to Chelan County.  I don't know why their outside lights need to be brighter than those for a urban center.

They are moving into Chelan County and hopefully, they will follow the light trespass and pollution ordinance for Chelan County. I suspect they will once again, try to avoid to do anything to protect the environment.

THIRD.........

Major out of area retailers like Costco, Home Depot, and Lowes continue to insist on selling outside lights that are ILLEGAL under Chelan County ordinance.  And like mentioned in the article, most of those are LED lights.

FOURTH.....

Major growth in the Wenatchee Valley with urban refugees flooding the valley and lighting their McMansions. 

Chelan County does not put up streetlights, where most Wenatchee residents are content with ONE porch light, these folks string 50 or more bright LED lights along their roof lines so the less fortunate can see how large their McMansions are in the "dark".  As the NPS light surveys were started, these McMansions were just being built.  Where I once could see sagebrush under a full moon I can now see twenty of more home with literally a 1,000 bright LED lights on their roof lines.

The article focuses on streetlights, but the problem is NOT streetlights.

The problem is a state government that actively promotes destroying the night sky.  Corporations like MicroSoft that move to a rural area and light up their data centers like downtown Seattle!!!  Really?? Why do you have to light up a data center??

Then companies like Costco, Home Depot, and Lowes that put private profit in front of protecting the environment, public resources and selling products consistent with local laws.

It is good article for bringing up the with streetlights, but the problem is NOT streetlights.

Yeah, I am madder than a wet hen, watching the Milky Way disappear from my home in the past five years.

 

[palmeris]

Isn't the biggest destroyer of the night sky the sun?

Perhaps clouds a close 2nd?

Just some brevity , lighten up.

[RV_]

5 hours ago, palmeris said:

Isn't the biggest destroyer of the night sky the sun?

Perhaps clouds a close 2nd?

Just some brevity , lighten up.

👍👍

[RV_]

On 6/29/2023 at 2:42 AM, PAylor said:

We're looking into Starlink.  Would love to hear experiences you all have had.  Our goal is to get rid of Directv and possibly ATT.  Want to know monthly expenses,  ease of use, customer service,  etc.

Thank in advance! 

PAlor,

Back to your original question. DirecTV is easy as you can stream Sling TV for $35 a month and we have that, but are about to drop it because we no longer watch cable channels. OTA TV (Over The Air broadcast TV) has 50 channels or more and in HD for about half. Crystal clear reception these days. Over The Air broadcast TV here now has a 24 hour news channel which was the only reason we had Sling TV.

If you in a city area with cheap reliable broadband, or are you rural with no to slow broadband? If in near a major city OTA (over the air TV) is likely available in HD for all the major networks free after you buy your $40 antenna and ~$50 distribution amp. In cities the OTA is there most folks just never set it up. We have line of sight to the broadcast antennas here because they are on top of Cheyenne mountain.

Our phones are through an MVNO US Mobile (Hot Spot extra and not worth it) which is grandfathered at $61 for all three unlimited lines. One line is for our LTE Tablets, the unlimited isn't (75GB then slows) and works in both the Pro 7+LTE  and Go2 LTE tablets we have. Their prices have gone up since we got it after a fail trying T-Mobile, and new customers have to pay about Verizon prices now.

It depends where you are. If in a city you can test your OTA cheaply trying one of these. https://www.ebay.com/itm/325323468091?hash=item4bbeca2d3b:g:UasAAOSw3ihjDdJ~&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA0PfVYnvzzW%2FDQVEZkDNZnGxft7qzhilSQ2oZkQmEx%2FTvEXw8%2BMmpsX%2FXq51W5iWb6utuJWJhMEW%2BtCTzb3%2BPG364IBuFnsqPx8eMotMbgny7VqK4GPcOCax8H%2Fxg6H5g7SnSpnAiBzdavq%2BahwaA4aR1lKgjbQOX%2BpzjszIcak1if2Ls6U%2F9yDf1bAOAuNWbdljKtWQEDLKjd4S0AAnYB6XQ%2BMC10yfseS6eymJ4ytEs8uXkexkOBMyX6Y28luZQ6Fdu1Xzoxn8e6SzkpiApzEI%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR_7-tKKkYg

I have two of those one on each of my desktop systems hooked up to Hauppauge Win TV HVR 995Q TV tuners to Windows computers devices but they would work directly on regular TVs too. Many times these will not have enough amplification to bring in all OTA channels or even one depending on your surroundings. Sometimes only an outdoor antenna and a bigger amp is needed. I use these to feed our TVs:

Amp - https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001222256/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Antenna - https://www.amazon.com/GE-Outdoor-Supports-Included-Resistant/dp/B01MYMVPVX/ref=sr_1_5?crid=1SP3927RMO1K0&keywords=digital+antenna+outdoor&qid=1688496038&s=electronics&sprefix=digital+antenna%2Celectronics%2C114&sr=1-5

Is that what you wanted to know as a future cable cutter like us?

 

Sometimes in the boonies no OTA will work.

 

 

[Vladimir]

On 7/3/2023 at 5:39 PM, RV_ said:

Vlad don't you also "think that high speed internet is WORTH destroying the night sky for high speed internet" by operating two of these evil systems?

I ONLY operate ONE.

That said, I ran my life on a strict moral and environmental code for years. 

My family is much poorer for that decision.

Our business needed to install StarLink to stay in business.  I was not happy about it, but our clients were pretty insistent on having high speed internet.