top | item 40747869

Starlink Mini brings space internet to backpackers

54 points| iamphilrae | 1 year ago |theverge.com

70 comments

order

whicks|1 year ago

As a technologist, this is an incredible development.

As a backpacker and avid hiker, no thank you. I go outside to intentionally avoid screens and the internet/connected world. Fortunately I can just not buy this and it won’t have an impact on my life.

Another interesting thing I’m curious about is if this would provide any benefits to SAR crews over traditional sat phones. I could potentially see some benefits there, maybe, but I guess time will tell.

lxgr|1 year ago

> I’m curious about is if this would provide any benefits to SAR crews over traditional sat phones.

For their communications, I doubt it, unless they happen to need low-latency video (e.g. for telemedicine for complicated cases). Existing solutions are pretty robust, and for anything you use on the move you probably want an omnidirectional antenna you don't have to rest on some surface in operation.

I could imagine this being interesting for drone-based/agumented missing person search, though!

> Fortunately I can just not buy this and it won’t have an impact on my life.

Thank you for saying this. So many people have a knee-jerk reaction of "this will ruin the outdoors" or "this means I can never disconnect anymore", which both kind of imply a concerning lack of agency. The outdoors are large enough for everybody, and nobody can force you to buy and bring one of these things!

snapplebobapple|1 year ago

My first thought was "by backpacker they must mean the rucksack and machine gun variety protecting ukraine because not many backpackers want technology intruding on their expedition"

devit|1 year ago

So basically, you can carry:

- FlexSolar 40W panel: 1.35kg

- Nitecore NB20000 ~75Wh battery: 300g

- Starlink Mini: 1.1kg

- Smartphone: 250g

For 3kg you have something that should give 2-3 hours of Internet usage on an average EU/USA good weather day (assuming 20% solar panel for 10 hours = 80Wh/day, 25-35W power usage of Starlink Mini + smartphone).

For each extra 1.65kg you get an additional 2-3 hours, resulting in 7.95kg for 8-12 hours, 11.25kg for 12-16 hours.

Not bad, but not good either.

lxgr|1 year ago

Compared to what? Even remotely comparable solutions drawing less power either cost something like $5-10 per megabyte (Inmarsat L-band, i.e. BGAN, Iridium Certus) or require even more power (Inmarsat Ka-band) and still cost something like 50 cent per megabyte! Monthly plans start at several hundred dollars, and terminals start in the low 4 to medium 5 digit ranges.

If you can live without Internet when backpacking, enjoy the outdoors! If you need it for whatever reason, this just cut the cost per megabyte by about 95% and the cost for the terminal by 99%. You'll probably also not hate LEO latencies compared to GEO.

devit|1 year ago

BTW, their specs says it wants minimum 100W USB PD, so you'll actually need a different battery that can do that which is probably going to be heavier (the NB20000 tops out at 45W), assuming that's accurate.

The 630g Anker 737 PowerCore 24K might be a good option, and also the 765g HyperJuice 245W.

So this adds 0.3-0.45kg to the estimate.

grecy|1 year ago

> Not bad, but not good either

It is insanely good. Out of this world.

A few years ago I spent 3 years driving around Africa and looked into satellite internet options from all the existing providers. Any plan that offered anything remotely close to 1GB per month was 5x the cost of the entire 3 year expedition.

This WILL change the world.

e40|1 year ago

Becomes much more interesting for vehicles in remote locations.

JKCalhoun|1 year ago

Somehow I'm left thinking — I go hiking to get away from the internet.

tosh|1 year ago

Will be very interesting once they roll them out unbundled and with more than 50gb/month of data.

(right now you only get a Starlink Mini if you are an early Starlink customer and it requires an existing residential subscription)

lxgr|1 year ago

Amazing! In some way, this was the obvious next step (Starlink clearly had some capacity headroom for this), but still, this basically blows all existing competitors out of the water.

I wonder how much more bandwidth this uses compared to their stationary terminals. There's almost certainly a power/size vs. data rate trade-off here, which can explain why they don't offer it standalone in the US yet (the reasoning probably being that people will use their more efficient larger antenna at home most of the time), but do have standalone plans in areas where they probably have less users overall.

JumpCrisscross|1 year ago

“In the US, Starlink Mini is an add-on to Residential plans — at least for now. The Mini kit costs $599 which is $100 more than the standard dish, and will cost an extra $30 per month to add the Mini Roam service to existing $120 Residential plans. That gives Starlink Mini users up to 50GB of mobile data each month, with the option to purchase more for $1 per GB…”

sigio|1 year ago

Last I checked, starlink was $50/month for the residential plan here in the Netherlands... that's quite a large difference.

alexpc201|1 year ago

Becomes abstract. In the short term, you will be able to use your iPhone 17 to utilize Starlink satellites. They have already done tests with the iPhone 15.

lxgr|1 year ago

That'll probably remain limited to very low bandwidth data for the foreseeable future. Non-directional, small device antennas just don't provide for enough SNR to support more than a handful of devices per cell.

Starlink has indeed tested a video call to one phone, but you can probably do about 10-30 of these per cell until you max out the capacity (single-digit Mbit/s for everybody in a 15 mile or so radius).

For more, you need active steering and more powerful antenna arrays, which are also larger. Fitting that in a phone will probably take some time, and it might end up being awkward anyway (and slowly cook your hand/ear).

bookofjoe|1 year ago

Starlink nano in 2030 iPhone 22?

wslh|1 year ago

How that works battery / consumption wise?

iamphilrae|1 year ago

As the article says...

> That means you can power the Mini dish for two to three hours from something like an Anker Prime 27,650mAh (99.54Wh) power bank, or a little over an hour with smaller 10,000mAh (40Wh) portable batteries you probably already have laying about. It requires a USB-C PD power source with a minimum rating of 100W (20V/5A).

rkangel|1 year ago

Please read the article. This is covered in detail.

cjk2|1 year ago

Regular backpacker here. I don't want or need this.

Literally we all use eSIMs and just have downtime occasionally, which is partially the point of it.

lxgr|1 year ago

You’re in luck! As far as I can tell from the article, Starlink doesn’t have any plans to make you buy/subscribe by force.

rapsey|1 year ago

This is a very short sided view. Something like this could save a bunch of lives of hikers because it means you are always connected when you need to be in case you get injured or lost.

subpixel|1 year ago

You deserve more upvotes. This will ineluctably lead to trails resemblimg subway cars, where people stare down and play TikTok videos full volume.

inhumantsar|1 year ago

so?

considering that this is an add-on, not standalone, and the fact that it would mean like 2-3kg of extra weight to carry, backpackers who hike in places with good cell reception are not the target market.

doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people who would use this.

eg: my mother and her husband live in a small town and use starlink since none of the local or national ISPs service that town. they also own a camper trailer and travels quite a bit now that they're retired.

the mini would be perfect for them. they could power it off the camper trailer's 12V, which would be a lot more efficient than going DC->AC->DC even if you ignore the power difference, and it would take up less space when not in use. they could also pause the mini service or use it as part of their home mesh for better bandwidth.