logoalt Hacker News

mooredsyesterday at 6:05 PM2 repliesview on HN

Cost, maybe? It is one thing to ship up a valuable satellite (which they all can do). But to ship up 1000s of satellites (and keep doing it in perpetuity, because IIRC they don't have a long lifetime[0]) gets expensive.

0: Looks like 5 years. https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellites.html


Replies

SlinkyOnStairsyesterday at 6:48 PM

Another major detail is that SpaceX is simply burning enormous amounts of money on this.

Starlink's revenue is comparable to the ESA's entire 5 billion euro budget, and it still looks like starlink is not net-profitable as a service. (And kessler syndrome avoidance is already pushing up costs with the lower orbits)

The chief problem "stopping" other countries from developing a starlink competitor is that starlink simply doesn't make all that much sense if your country is capable of basic infrastructure construction. Fiber runs are expensive but not that expensive.

show 2 replies
victorbjorklundyesterday at 8:17 PM

Because the Chinese govt doesn’t have money to burn…