Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

throwaway836282672 t1_ix4oj1z wrote

Reply to comment by afterburners_engaged in European Union strikes €6bn deal to develop own broadband satellite network by Sorin61

Sort of - https://www.space.com/ukraine-spacex-starlink-terminals-offline-funding-shortfall

8

Cadsvax t1_ix5adkp wrote

Can anyone explain what was the deal here? These were 1300 units purchased from Britian and Ukraine even went to them to try and foot the bill for these, so was Ukraine paying to the UK who was paying to keep the service for those units? Why only these units went offline?

5

throwaway836282672 t1_ix5ddwg wrote

I don't know - so please, please take this with a massive grain of salt. My guess: export restrictions and/or supply.

You cannot support a foreign military without approval from a lot oversight. Starlink likely already had access to export to the Kingdom, so that's who was billable.

In regards to the supply aspect, the guarantee of military operation means only binned units are supplied. They likely didn't have additional binned units, so the UK provided their units.

>Why only these units went offline?

The war isn't in the news as frequently in the USA. So SpaceX wasn't receiving the advertising as desired. So they defaulted the account. There would be substantial negative press if they terminated service for civilians, so they didn't.

3

Uzza2 t1_ix5s0p3 wrote

There are many organizations that have supplied/donated Starlink terminals to Ukraine. Some are paying for the monthly costs while others, like the one you're referencing, can't afford to do that and are requiring that someone else foots the bill until Ukraine can pay it back.
This batch of terminals in question were to be continued to be funded by the UK government, but they decided that there were more important places to allocate the funding for Ukraine than paying for the terminals, so the subscription for them lapsed, and the terminals was removed from the frontlines in anticipation of it.

All other subscriptions being funded by other organizations, or the ones that SpaceX are providing free of charge, are still operational.

1

Cadsvax t1_ix5sszf wrote

So why is SpaceX getting dragged through the mud for a UK company/government basically saying 'nah fuck that we aint paying anymore'?

I get hating Musk is very popular (and deserved nowadays) but its perplexing how quickly SpaceX is made out to be the bad guy here when thousands other units are still functional.

5

FreshNoobAcc t1_ix6ji9v wrote

Hating Musk is popular is the nutshell

It becomes very emotional for people and they can’t see beyond the emotion to take time to consider the facts of the situation. We are fallible humans with biases and when a big rich man (who despite bringing EVs to the masses, something the establishment and big oil has pushed down for decades, and something the left minded folk have wanted since childhood) starts taking sides on politics when half of the population is strongly one side and half the population is strongly the other side, the side he voices opinion against trashes everything he is involved in and ignores the benefit that has been provided and clearly documented

0

FreshNoobAcc t1_ix6k7sx wrote

He should’ve avoided choosing sides in politics publicly. He was asked by ukraine to provide starlink so he probably thought that was a good idea, but underestimated that the terminals get destroyed in combat regularly and need replacing, then all of a sudden an unrelated American man/ company is footing a large bill for a war he has no relation to, didn’t start and has no say in (and rightly so, but after providing much needed internet he was told to fuck off by a govt official. Do you continue to provide services to people who tell you to fuck off? And he still is, just not free, understandably. What if the war drags on for 30 years (not impossible), is he to provide ongoing terminals for 30 years free?)

3