Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Submission + - Satellite Internet connections for South America (specifically Peru). Advice? 6

EdIII writes: I've been looking on the Internet for a decent contention service (4:1,10:1) in South America and I am not finding much. I have also heard that some frequency bands are a lot better at cutting through cloud cover. This is for a fairly remote ground station with reliable power generation, but also routinely cloudy. I would need at least 3/1Mbps with hopefully decent latency. What's your advice Slashdotters? Yes, I know that some of the solutions can cost 20K for deployment and 2-10K per month for service. Not looking NASA results with Home Depot parts on the budget of a 7/11 chiclet. Feel free to to tell me about a good commercial service. There is another ground station that might be deployed in north east Alaska. Thanks
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Satellite Internet connections for South America (specifically Peru). Advice?

Comments Filter:
  • there is no such thing as decent latency with satellite connections, 275-350ms average, I've never seen better.

    • by jfalcon ( 163956 )
      +1 as you cannot change the laws of physics.

      You might want to look into providers like Inmarsat who will be releasing a new product soon that will be >1mbit bi-directional. Also there are Ku band providers like Hughes and others who provide megabits of speed. As for weather, keep in mind as the higher in frequency you go, the more that weather and obstructions play a factor in connection speed.
      • by EdIII ( 1114411 )

        I love how people beat me up instantly :)

        Never meant less than 250ms latency, as I am well aware of physics. I meant relative to all of the offerings out there in my market.

        I'll look into Immarsat. I did not expect Hughes to be servicing the South America market. All of their offerings so far I have found to be in the North America market.

        Thanks for the insight regarding the frequency bands.

    • by Megane ( 129182 )

      If the satellite is at GEO, the the speed of light takes about 1/4 second to go 22000 miles each way between ground and GEO, resulting in round-trip ping times of around 1000ms (1 second). A half-satellite connection (using a modem for lower-bandwidth upstream) would have better latency, but ping times would still be at least 500ms.

      If the satellite is at a lower orbit, latency will be better, but you will probably need tracking equipment for a two-way connection.

      • by EdIII ( 1114411 )

        I'm looking for LEO services in a specific market.

        Modem being used for upstream is out of the question. This is a really, really, really remote ground station in Peru. A combination of solar and generators are used for power at the site currently. It takes about a day just to make it back to civilization.

        The proposed site in Alaska is going to be the same thing.

    • by EdIII ( 1114411 )

      I meant decent latency relative to the offerings available in the industry. Not relative to all networking technology itself.

      275-350ms is perfect and I did not expect less. A long time ago I had Hughes which sucked balls and was easily 1500ms on a good day.

God helps them that themselves. -- Benjamin Franklin, "Poor Richard's Almanac"