Starlink Internet could be coming to Royal Caribbean

[smokeybandit]

23 minutes ago, Matt said:

I agree. As @JC Pats pointed out, the trucking industry may have done the heavy lifting for pushing this through faster.

[Al Miller]

On 6/29/2022 at 8:46 AM, Matt said:

The benefit of that much bandwidth is you can multitask. Stream music, check these awesome message boards, and upload photos back to the cloud at the same time.

I think we also need to keep in mind that Freedom is a test. I can't imagine they will keep the tap wide open once it rolls out in earnest. I would imagine they'll have to revamp their tiers of service. I am going to venture a guess and say that once this goes official, no one will be seeing the speeds folks are getting on Freedom right now. 

I could see them still having some sort of social media tier, only suitable for low bitrate video. Say 1-1.5 Mbs. A Streaming tier which would cap out at around 7-10 Mps and some sort of power user tier at 25-30 Mbps.

[Ampurp85]

I agree this will become even more tiered but for those of us who would cruise more if the internet speeds were better and more reliable, it would be a game changer. I want my brother to cruise but as a mechanical engineer he needs better speeds. I tried to get some work done on my last cruise and what should have been 20-30min took almost two hours because of how the connection works for teams. I hate to say it, but I would pay a little more for better speeds.

[Moby Dick]

If they fully open the magnitoconstimulator to the fullest micropulse actuator and if they flux the contempulator to be proportioned to the helixsticy, the speed will be fully quantomzed.  But, none of that will help if they don't first electocomorbidify the holmium to 750 icombs per millennium.

[Al Miller]

37 minutes ago, Ampurp85 said:

I agree this will become even more tiered but for those of us who would cruise more if the internet speeds were better and more reliable, it would be a game changer. I want my brother to cruise but as a mechanical engineer he needs better speeds. I tried to get some work done on my last cruise and what should have been 20-30min took almost two hours because of how the connection works for teams. I hate to say it, but I would pay a little more for better speeds.

A side benefit of the low earth orbit satellites that Starlink uses, is the latency that is so important for any sort of video collaboration tools is drastically reduced. IMO, once this gets rolled out it really will be a game changer for those that want to work from cruise ships.

[Oliver]

Geez. I wish that I had the problem of having “only” 50 mbps on a cruise ship. I can’t believe Princess already has that. I really don’t have too much interest in trying Princess however, haven’t heard too many good things. Hopefully Royal can increase our Wi-Fi speeds to 50 Mbps soon. I’d settle for 10-15, I’m just tired of only getting 3-4.

 

 

[twangster]

I suspect the winds of the military played a heavy hand in this approval.

Also keep in mind that Royal's letter of support came long after SpaceX had applied for mobility use cases.    Royal's letter to the FCC may have played no role in this approval.

Several branches of the US military performed trials.  From KC130 refueling tankers to boots on the ground the military has been testing Starlink long before Royal did.  That is why China is looking at ways to shoot down Starlink satellites - it gives the US military a significant edge on the battlefield.  

There is no question in my mind this approval resulted from the military use cases that tried the technology.  The military quickly decided this is a game changer.  When Musk gave 5,000 terminals to the Ukraine military that was the ultimate proof of concept and the US military saw they needed it now.   Hence the FCC got on board.  

[twangster]

10 hours ago, Al Miller said:

A side benefit of the low earth orbit satellites that Starlink uses, is the latency that is so important for any sort of video collaboration tools is drastically reduced. IMO, once this gets rolled out it really will be a game changer for those that want to work from cruise ships.

Once SpaceX lowers the light shields and begins using lasers between satellites.  That is the key to low latency Starlink but it will have the astronomical societies up in arms.  By that point the military uses will allow Starlink to steam roller over the astronomical societies.  

[Moby Dick]

2 hours ago, twangster said:

I suspect the winds of the military played a heavy hand in this approval.

Also keep in mind that Royal's letter of support came long after SpaceX had applied for mobility use cases.    Royal's letter to the FCC may have played no role in this approval.

Several branches of the US military performed trials.  From KC130 refueling tankers to boots on the ground the military has been testing Starlink long before Royal did.  That is why China is looking at ways to shoot down Starlink satellites - it gives the US military a significant edge on the battlefield.  

There is no question in my mind this approval resulted from the military use cases that tried the technology.  The military quickly decided this is a game changer.  When Musk gave 5,000 terminals to the Ukraine military that was the ultimate proof of concept and the US military saw they needed it now.   Hence the FCC got on board.  

 

2 hours ago, twangster said:

Once SpaceX lowers the light shields and begins using lasers between satellites.  That is the key to low latency Starlink but it will have the astronomical societies up in arms.  By that point the military uses will allow Starlink to steam roller over the astronomical societies.  

Before I get started, I want it known that I don't disagree with anything you say/reported, not at all.

It is worthy of noting though, the military can and does many many things, such as not getting approvals from agencies like the FCC before testing and improving certain systems.  If there is a National Security and highly sensitive purpose for the system, they just do it.  And I can't blame them as there are far too many untrustworthy people in highly sensitive positions through out our government agencies.  So, I suspect that the military were probably already far into testing and improving their systems long before they got into the FCC approval process.  They've probably already morphed the systems capabilities into a much better system than I will ever see in my life time.  Maybe not though, it's just my guess.  

Bottom line, if the system is truly better and faster, I'm all for it on Royal's ships.

[twangster]

39 minutes ago, Moby Dick said:

 

Before I get started, I want it known that I don't disagree with anything you say/reported, not at all.

It is worthy of noting though, the military can and does many many things, such as not getting approvals from agencies like the FCC before testing and improving certain systems.  If there is a National Security and highly sensitive purpose for the system, they just do it.  And I can't blame them as there are far too many untrustworthy people in highly sensitive positions through out our government agencies.  So, I suspect that the military were probably already far into testing and improving their systems long before they got into the FCC approval process.  They've probably already morphed the systems capabilities into a much better system than I will ever see in my life time.  Maybe not though, it's just my guess.  

Bottom line, if the system is truly better and faster, I'm all for it on Royal's ships.

You are right about the military but Musk will leverage the military so that it benefits the consumer use cases.  Much of the cost of the platform will be covered by military money.  Our tax dollars at work.  The significant prices the military pays will ensure their traffic is secure and prioritized.  Consumers come second.  Musk will use the consumer profits to line his pockets.  Good for him, it's a great business model.   There is little doubt in my mind his arrangement with the military included some influence being applied to gain favor with the FCC.  That's how it works.   

[Moby Dick]

14 minutes ago, twangster said:

You are right about the military but Musk will leverage the military so that it benefits the consumer use cases.  Much of the cost of the platform will be covered by military money.  Our tax dollars at work.  The significant prices the military pays will ensure their traffic is prioritized.  Consumers come second.  Musk will use the consumer profits to line his pockets.  Good for him, it's a great business model.   There is little doubt in my mind his arrangement with the military included some influence being applied to gain favor with the FCC.  That's how it works.   

Right-on!

[Al Miller]

4 hours ago, twangster said:

Once SpaceX lowers the light shields and begins using lasers between satellites.  That is the key to low latency Starlink but it will have the astronomical societies up in arms.  By that point the military uses will allow Starlink to steam roller over the astronomical societies.  

Even with the shields, Starlink's latency beats geosynchronous sat Internet all to pieces.

[MuttMutt]

My only question is how soon they are going to get all the ships outfitted. 

[twangster]

3 hours ago, Al Miller said:

Even with the shields, Starlink's latency beats geosynchronous sat Internet all to pieces.

Over land true.  But over the open ocean they don't work well without inter-satellite lasers to link back to land.  

[twangster]

2 hours ago, MuttMutt said:

My only question is how soon they are going to get all the ships outfitted. 

That may depend on the existing Speedcast/O3b contract.   If they are committed in their current contract then it's likely Icon and Utopia will deploy with Starlink while the rest of the fleet runs out the clock on the current contracts.  Or maybe they can group a handful of ships to consume the existing contracts and upgrade some of the fleet.  The Serenade World Cruise would sure benefit from Starlink. 

So maybe Vision and Radiance class minus Serenade are left on the old gear while Voyager, Freedom, Oasis and Quantum vroom forward to Starlink.   

Or maybe since Quantum, Freedom and Oasis class have better MEO technology they stay while the older ships get upgraded.  

Or maybe it's some hybrid of this ship and that ship randomly chosen based on other factors.

i.e. - Anthem dry docked last year so maybe it gets upgraded when it dry docks in 2026.

[smokeybandit]

In looking for some contract info on O3b, I found this in one of Matt's old articles

 

" By the summer of 2013, Oasis of the Seas will benefit from O3b's enhanced connectivity at sea that claims it will be like being connected to fiber at home or in the office."

https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/2012/06/23/o3b-networks-provide-high-speed-internet-royal-caribbean-cruise-ship

[smokeybandit]

So the original contract was five years that would have expired in 2018. I can't really find anything about a renewal

 

https://spacenews.com/o3b-networks-setting-sail-cruise-ship-contract/

[Pattycruise]

On 7/1/2022 at 5:03 PM, smokeybandit said:

In looking for some contract info on O3b, I found this in one of Matt's old articles

 

" By the summer of 2013, Oasis of the Seas will benefit from O3b's enhanced connectivity at sea that claims it will be like being connected to fiber at home or in the office."

https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/2012/06/23/o3b-networks-provide-high-speed-internet-royal-caribbean-cruise-ship

Just got off Oasis.  Week 1 I had surf and stream (4 devices since traveling with family). Not perfect  but pretty good.  Week 2 I purchased my usual Voom only, if was horrid  3 separate  days I went to the Voom desk to complain.  Calls dropping, pages not loading, texts not going through, unable to get email.  I was told Facebook doesn’t work on Voom (it had in the past), these pages were slow/or not at all loading (it had in the past).  I was told Voom is not for calls…..unless WhatsApp or WiFi calling (mine were WiFi)… finally they said being at full capacity was straining the system…partial admission of fault.  Apparently all the times I’ve used FaceTime, phone calls and surfed Facebook of this site while using Voom were anomalies..  

when I asked what I could do with Voom I was told text, WhatsApp, email.  If only that were true!

[Moby Dick]

5 hours ago, Pattycruise said:

Just got off Oasis.  Week 1 I had surf and stream (4 devices since traveling with family). Not perfect  but pretty good.  Week 2 I purchased my usual Voom only, if was horrid  3 separate  days I went to the Voom desk to complain.  Calls dropping, pages not loading, texts not going through, unable to get email.  I was told Facebook doesn’t work on Voom (it had in the past), these pages were slow/or not at all loading (it had in the past).  I was told Voom is not for calls…..unless WhatsApp or WiFi calling (mine were WiFi)… finally they said being at full capacity was straining the system…partial admission of fault.  Apparently all the times I’ve used FaceTime, phone calls and surfed Facebook of this site while using Voom were anomalies..  

when I asked what I could do with Voom I was told text, WhatsApp, email.  If only that were true!

I just don't understand this, an all time favorite excuse for just about anything Internet issues related is, "there are too may people using the system right now or you are trying to do that during peek/prime time usage hours.  Well, why doesn't the entity, in this case, Royal, make the customers, all of them, happy and equip the ship to handle maximum capacity/usage with ease and make the customers happy.  Instead of issues like @Pattycruiseand most of us experience far too often.  If I want crappy Internet service, I'll cruise on Brand X cruise lines.

It's like when there are road improvements and they're turning a 2 lane road into a 3 lane road (center lane for turning, for example) when you know that there is going to be a need or already past the need for a 4 or 6 lane road in the very near future.  Which is happening just down the road from me.  Why not just do it.  Spend the money now, make the users/customers happy and use today's dollars, not the inflated/worthless dollars of the future.  

[twangster]

12 minutes ago, Moby Dick said:

I just don't understand this, an all time favorite excuse for just about anything Internet issues related is, "there are too may people using the system right now or you are trying to do that during peek/prime time usage hours.  Well, why doesn't the entity, in this case, Royal, make the customers, all of them, happy and equip the ship to handle maximum capacity/usage with ease and make the customers happy. 

In a nutshell because it costs money.

Before the shutdown ships were full and there wasn't the contention for bandwidth we see today.  There is one simple answer - Royal is not subscribing to enough throughput with the current provider.  If too many users are the culprit it means there isn't enough bandwidth right now yet there was in 2019 so what's changed?  

A secondary reason is that Royal is conditioning us to hate the current experience at the current price points.  Then they can come along and save us by introducing a new service at a higher price point.  "Introducing Vroom!  The enhanced ultra speed internet powered by Starlink.  For just $39.95 per day..."   

[Moby Dick]

14 minutes ago, twangster said:

In a nutshell because it costs money.

Before the shutdown ships were full and there wasn't the contention for bandwidth we see today.  There is one simple answer - Royal is not subscribing to enough throughput with the current provider.  If too many users are the culprit it means there isn't enough bandwidth right now yet there was in 2019 so what's changed?  

A secondary reason is that Royal is conditioning us to hate the current experience at the current price points.  Then they can come along and save us by introducing a new service at a higher price point.  "Introducing Vroom!  The enhanced ultra speed internet powered by Starlink.  For just $39.95 per day..."   

LOL, I hear that!

[Moby Dick]

16 minutes ago, twangster said:

In a nutshell because it costs money.

And that was part of my point, it's cheaper today than tomorrow.  I'm going to say something but I don't want to turn it into a political debate:  It is now well know that the recent infrastructure bill that was passed, just a few months ago, is no longer feasible, much of it at least, because of the sharp rise in construction and labor costs.  An example of you snooze, you lose. 

Yes, you are right, it is because of costs.  But, the avoidance of cost is costing us a lot more in the long run.  And the cost of borrowing money is going up, too.  It still ain't bad to get a loan.  But, it ain't gonna stay, "Not Bad" for long.  "Get 'er done" is my mantra.  

[The Cruise Junkie]

Here is a good read on how the "SpaceX Navy" has been able to use starlink onboard their vessels.

https://api.starlink.com/public-files/SpaceXNavyStarlink-case-study.pdf

[twangster]

49 minutes ago, The Cruise Junkie said:

Here is a good read on how the "SpaceX Navy" has been able to use starlink onboard their vessels.

https://api.starlink.com/public-files/SpaceXNavyStarlink-case-study.pdf

Glimpse into the cost of satellite internet before they used Starlink:

• At over $165k per month for 25 Mb/s download by 25 Mb/s upload of pre-paid bandwidth, satellite internet was one of the top operating costs for SpaceX’s recovery fleet.

The RCI "Navy" often had speeds twice that per ship or more.  Now we know why they couldn't make internet free on ships.  Bayley has said before their internet bill is millions per month for the fleet.  These numbers support that claim.  

Their internet bill went from $165k to $50k with a 5900% speed increase.  Flat rate $5k per month per ship now.  

[smokeybandit]

A hint at to the pricing:

 

High-speed, low-latency internet with up to 350 Mbps download while at sea. $5,000/mo with a one-time hardware cost of $10,000 for two high performance terminals.

[smokeybandit]

Also their coverage map, which would currently cover all north American sailings except the ABCs and south

 

https://api.starlink.com/public-files/maritime-coverage-map.pdf

[twangster]

With a 70% reduction in costs while gaining 5900% speed increase we should all expect Royal to drop the price of Voom significantly with Starlink.  

Let's see... $21.99 less 70% =  <$7

[smokeybandit]

8 minutes ago, twangster said:

With a 70% reduction in costs while gaining 5900% speed increase we should all expect Royal to drop the price of Voom significantly with Starlink.  

Should we though? 

[twangster]

9 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Should we though? 

Yes we should expect that.  Will we get that is an entirely different matter.

[smokeybandit]

8 minutes ago, twangster said:

Yes we should expect that.  Will we get that is an entirely different matter.

So we should expect it, even if we shouldn't expect it

[twangster]

Carnival is floundering.  NCL is on even thinner ice.  Royal could strike a dagger in their hearts by making internet free... and super fast.  Just sayin... 

[The Cruise Junkie]

1 hour ago, smokeybandit said:

Also their coverage map, which would currently cover all north American sailings except the ABCs and south

 

https://api.starlink.com/public-files/maritime-coverage-map.pdf

That map will change in the future as they a launching about every week and when they get Starship up and going with V2 it will be a game changer for sure!

[twangster]

2 hours ago, The Cruise Junkie said:

That map will change in the future as they a launching about every week and when they get Starship up and going with V2 it will be a game changer for sure!

Another 53 went up this morning.  Several more batches potentially from CA and FL all month.  Could be several hundred going up this summer alone.

[twangster]

Here is an interesting article that leans heavily on the SpaceX report Matt posted above.

https://wccftech.com/spacex-shows-eye-popping-change-in-rocket-landing-video-quality-courtesy-starlink/

Key takeaways for me:

1. SpaceX is now using Starlink on it's own recovery ships.  These ships face the same harsh sea salt environment that cruise ships face but some of the ships also face the harsh environment of a rocket booster touching down on the ship.  If the Starlink terminals can work in that environment then cruise ships are a natural fit.

2. During the most turbulent part of booster landing on a recovery ship using the legacy technology the VSAT antennas couldn't maintain enough uplink signal and they would frequently lose connectivity.  The Starlink antennas reportedly do much better and allow for crystal clear video during a booster landing that wasn't possible using legacy technology.

3. 5900% increase in throughput with a 70% reduction in cost.  That's right!  70% lower cost compared to legacy technology.

 

Tweet showing the old technology and new technology uplink capabilities:

 

Pretty impressive results with much better stability and availability in harsh conditions.  All with a massive reduction in cost. 

[smokeybandit]

Now we just need to convert those helicopter pads to SpaceX landing sites. Could charge a ton for that excursion

[twangster]

4 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

Now we just need to convert those helicopter pads to SpaceX landing sites. Could charge a ton for that excursion

Not sure it's safe to stand there when a booster comes down 

[WAAAYTOOO]

59 minutes ago, twangster said:

Not sure it's safe to stand there when a booster comes down 

Yeah, those boosters’ll kill ya !

[smokeybandit]

38 minutes ago, WAAAYTOOO said:

Yeah, those boosters’ll kill ya !

[twangster]

Be careful what you wish for:

https://www.pcmag.com/news/starlinks-massive-growth-results-in-congestion-slow-speeds-for-some-users

I do think Starlink will improve in the years ahead.  Right now they are a victim of their success.  This July should or could see a few hundred more satellites going up but no one knows when they'll go into service or when relief will come.  Meanwhile they sign on more subscribers.  Maybe in 2023 or 2024 it will be a viable option.  

[Moby Dick]

14 hours ago, twangster said:

Be careful what you wish for:

https://www.pcmag.com/news/starlinks-massive-growth-results-in-congestion-slow-speeds-for-some-users

I do think Starlink will improve in the years ahead.  Right now they are a victim of their success.  This July should or could see a few hundred more satellites going up but no one knows when they'll go into service or when relief will come.  Meanwhile they sign on more subscribers.  Maybe in 2023 or 2024 it will be a viable option.  

Just looked at their availability map and it doesn't make sense to me.  I guess it does if the intent is for the rural areas to get it first.  But, there are a lot of major metropolitan areas that don't have service, yet.  I would think that at start-up they would concentrate where the masses and money is to help pay for the expansion.  But, my name isn't Musk.