Latency. Lower orbits give much less latency, and latency is a huge problem with satellite internet. This is especially bad if you’re trying to do anything realtime like, say, navigate a drone.
That’s why Ukraine got so fucked by Musk throttling Starlink on them recently. They use it to pilot both their long range drone weapons and their drone interceptor systems that protect people from Russian drones.
Radios have limited range. For reliable communication, that is limited to, functionally speaking, line of sight. While you’re probably aware that it’s possible to transmit radio signals beyond visual range by bouncing them off of the ionosphere, this kind of long range communication requires substantial infrastructure; eg, a tall radio antenna placed in a high up location. This doesn’t work for piloting drones because a) the drone does not have the benefit of substantial communications equipment on it’s part, and b) the tall or high antenna is obviously a very exposed and vulnerable target. It’s also extremely unreliable. While bouncing signals off the ionosphere is possible, it’s deeply imperfect, heavily weather dependent, and the interference involved could easily impair the operation of a drone.
What Ukraine needs is the ability to:
operate a drone very, very far beyond line of sight. Several thousand kilometres in some cases.
do so reliably and without interruption of service
do so with equipment that does not require an exposed position to operate from. Starlink dishes or similar can be pointed almost straight up, so you can operate them from, say, a small clearing in a woodland, among a cluster of buildings, or down in a trench or foxhole. They also don’t need very much power, you can run one off of a portable generator.
And they need to do all of that with as little latency as possible. LEO satellites are the only option that ticks all of those boxes.
I will note that radio is used for the operation of FPV drones, the small drones piloted using a first person view (FPV) camera that you’ve probably taking out Russian tanks and troops. This is one of the key limitations of these drones; they cannot operate beyond visual range. That means if you’re separated from your target by a hill or tree line, you will likely lose control on the final approach. These weapons have been as effective as they are in Ukraine because the terrain is extremely flat and these kinds of obstructions are rare.
But what we’re talking about here is specifically long range strike drones (intended to hit targets deep in Russian territory) and interceptor drones intended to knock out Russian long range strike drones being sent into Ukraine. In order to effect an intercept on an enemy long range strike drone you need to hit it as far out as possible. If you wait until you have line of sight, it’s already too late. Hence why, in both these cases, satellite communication is required.
Satellite internet should be in geo, not leo
Latency. Lower orbits give much less latency, and latency is a huge problem with satellite internet. This is especially bad if you’re trying to do anything realtime like, say, navigate a drone.
That’s why Ukraine got so fucked by Musk throttling Starlink on them recently. They use it to pilot both their long range drone weapons and their drone interceptor systems that protect people from Russian drones.
Any reason they can’t use radios?
The applications where you need low latency and global coverage are extremely limited.
Range, line of sight, and infrastructure.
Radios have limited range. For reliable communication, that is limited to, functionally speaking, line of sight. While you’re probably aware that it’s possible to transmit radio signals beyond visual range by bouncing them off of the ionosphere, this kind of long range communication requires substantial infrastructure; eg, a tall radio antenna placed in a high up location. This doesn’t work for piloting drones because a) the drone does not have the benefit of substantial communications equipment on it’s part, and b) the tall or high antenna is obviously a very exposed and vulnerable target. It’s also extremely unreliable. While bouncing signals off the ionosphere is possible, it’s deeply imperfect, heavily weather dependent, and the interference involved could easily impair the operation of a drone.
What Ukraine needs is the ability to:
And they need to do all of that with as little latency as possible. LEO satellites are the only option that ticks all of those boxes.
I will note that radio is used for the operation of FPV drones, the small drones piloted using a first person view (FPV) camera that you’ve probably taking out Russian tanks and troops. This is one of the key limitations of these drones; they cannot operate beyond visual range. That means if you’re separated from your target by a hill or tree line, you will likely lose control on the final approach. These weapons have been as effective as they are in Ukraine because the terrain is extremely flat and these kinds of obstructions are rare.
But what we’re talking about here is specifically long range strike drones (intended to hit targets deep in Russian territory) and interceptor drones intended to knock out Russian long range strike drones being sent into Ukraine. In order to effect an intercept on an enemy long range strike drone you need to hit it as far out as possible. If you wait until you have line of sight, it’s already too late. Hence why, in both these cases, satellite communication is required.