SpaceX: 5G expansion could kill US Starlink broadband If the proposed addition of the 12GHz spectrum to 5G goes forward, Starlink broadband terminals across America could be crippled, or so SpaceX has complained. The Elon Musk biz made the claim [PDF] this week in a filing to the FCC, which is considering allowing Dish to operate a 5G service in the 12GHz band (12.2-12.7GHz). …
Don't ever forget that the cable-owned FCC specifically excluded the cell business from limitations on data-caps, throttling, and metered billing. People will be charged by the drink for watching movies, TV, ball games, and all of it, if they rely on 5G for their broadband. Their old cable TV bills will look quaint compared to the multiple hundreds per month they will be charged for 5G. I'm being charged $80 per month today for 50 GB of 5G per month. Currently, I use about 900 GB per month on my cable-delivered home internet for streaming TV, movies, ball games and all surfing. NINE HUNDRED GB. Do the math. It takes 4-5 GB to watch a single movie, and 7-9 GB to watch a baseball game.
IMO Starlink is under NO threat from 5G. I wish ElReg would get smarter before running inflammatory, click-bait stories like this.
Starlink is doing ok in the US largely due to the way the market is structured keeping prices ludicrously high. In the UK however I can get full fiber 100Mbps uncapped for £25 per month (>$31) with more bandwidth available for a little more should I need it. This makes Starlink unattractive long term as fiber rolls out to all but the most remote areas, and 5G will be a strong contender for them. Much of the world is little different with the notable exception of the US. Starlink in the US faces the problem that as it rolls out and proves the demand in rural US, other carriers will be able to move in and undercut them by a wide margin, with or without data caps. We know this is economically possible as it has been proven in the rest of the world.
Yeah but you're forgetting that England is small and overcrowded, whereas the rest of the planet, apart from cities, is sparsely populated and needs some other form of comms. My house in the village 6kms from my farm has 300mbps fibre and 5G etc but out here in the woods, no mobile signal, no nothing, hence Starlink run off solar, mesh WiFi and LoRa. This is not for fun, this is to improve crop productivity, so you can slob in front of your streaming telly with a full belly.
No I'm not forgetting that. England still has a low level of fiber compared to many countries. Lots of the planet including some quite underdeveloped ones have a far higher level. It works out because fiber is much more robust and cheaper to maintain than traditional copper telephone wires. At some point it becomes cheaper for the phone companies to adopt fiber. This is especially true in some countries where copper wires get stolen almost as quickly as they are replaced.
5G is essentially an urban network technology with the need for many masts given its limited range and poor penetration of structures. Starlink is more of a rural network needing few if any ground masts, more suited to open landscape. In effect they are complimentary technologies rather than competing.
The FCC does exist to prevent two people trying to use the same frequencies like this.
After what Starlink has done to Astronomy, all I have to say is the 'S' word.
The FCC does exist to prevent two people trying to use the same frequencies like this.
The problem here is that in the April 2021 FCC grant, the FCC has already given this part of the spectrum to SpaceX.
Look at the linked PDF in paragraph 48 they discussed it (where objections were raised) and in paragraphs 96d, 96e and 96f they grant the 12Ghz spectrum to SpaceX.
Looking at the PDF (paragraph 96) it appears they have granted 10.7GHz-13.25GHz to SpaceX in one shape or form. In the lower parts of that they have to co-ordinate with Radio Telescopes, in the upper parts it seems to be shared with other ground station to satellite, but critically in the 12GHz range there doesn't appear to be any provisions to share
The nearest 2G, 3G, or 4G one-bar signal is an 8-mile drive from my home. OMG, 5G interference is going to nuke Starlink. Yeah, right. No doubt the Telcos will get right on that in my area.
Starlink IS for customers like me who have been left to twist in the wind with no service. Go ahead, cause interference in high-density urban environments. That is not where Starlink is competing.
I am not convinced of the general benefits of 5G. And I would be happier if Smartphones came in two parts, with a removable xG unit, so you could use the same kit each time they upgrade from a widespread, already-fast-enough service to a faster one that you can only access in a few select places.
I have fond memories of connecting to a fellow Speccy user in the next town using the terminal software that came with the VTX5000 (1200/75bps). It did actually work. PRESTEL and Micronet 800 were the precursors of the web in the UK. Plus you could use the VTX unit for WarGames related activities.
The POTS copper network should be retained as a strategic national asset. Getting rid of it to save BT a few quid is like Beeching's rail cuts.
"The POTS copper network should be retained as a strategic national asset. Getting rid of it to save BT a few quid is like Beeching's rail cuts."
Not sure... it's not like the majority of the network is copper anyway - even in the last mile there are plenty of aluminium cables as well.
What's the strategic national interest in copper over fibre?
Beechings cuts were disastrous because the prevented people accessing the mainline, so alternative forms of transport became necessary, and at that point easier to use that alternative for the whole journey.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
