Hacker News Reader

Comment by andrewmcwatters | Hacker News Reader

I’m always surprised how poor engineering gets exposed in products I purchase being an Arizona resident.

No, failing at 122F is not acceptable. If your hardware is exposed to outside conditions, it should operate easily below 32F, and well above 140F.

Considering that phones can operate below 0F and near 122F, that’s embarrassingly bad.

Same thing in vehicles. If you’re driving consistently at interstate speeds, you should be able to cool a cabin down below 72F while driving through 120F weather. Too many vehicles fail this, and frankly it’s repulsive for something you buy for 5-6 figures.

View on HN

It's not trivial to do things at tens of gigahertz at a wide range of temperatures. They didn't engineer it this way because they didn't consider the existence of Arizona, Texas, and Southern California. The thermal limits exist because RF is absurdly difficult. Maybe in 30 years we'll have TCXOs and other RFICs that make it trivial. Right now it's not.

tl;dr: Your phone doesn't have radios capable of talking on bands like 10.7–12.7 GHz (X/Ku band) and 37.5–42.5 GHz (Ka/V band)

It's not impossible either.

Cheap brute force hack: Have a chip burn power to heat the chip up to a constant temperature. This was done in one of the early precision band-gap references.

More expensive brute force hack: Stick a Peltier cooler on the thing, and servo to a well-controlled temperature.

Communication equipment is critical to work for emergency use, and coincidentally, emergency use is when you're most likely to see high temperatures.

tl;dr: Military equipment is required to operate like this, and has insanely high-performance RF equipment.

Military BGAN doesn’t get anywhere near this throughput in this package, so the size-performance is quite different there IMO, and isn’t a fair comparison to what Starlink is doing with their terminal.

The military is not a business with business constraints. If cost and power draw is no concern, then sure, it's possible. Hell, put a little AC unit beside the enclosure.

These are CPEs and they're sold at a tremendous loss already (a quick google says a whopping $2500 loss on a $500 price tag!). They won't stay in business long if they burn an extra $500 per device to make it suitable for a couple thousand extra customers.

Every one of their dev teams likely costs more in a year than that $1M increment in BOM costs.

I’m not saying it’s a good idea, but it’s probably not going to be a kill the company expense.

I design RF/Microwave hardware. The issue is the long term reliability, specifically the semiconductor lifetime drops drastically with temperature, not to mention the passive components. The temp cycling may be more of an issue, as I have seen antenna arrays pull themselves apart during accelerated lifetime testing. I shutdown all of my stuff at 80C.

While you are 100% right, starlink is not marketed for the military.

Starlink, is like Tesla a decade ago. This is their roadster.

Will I get it, yes. Will I complain about early adpotee stuff, yes.

Is my life better just having it along? 1000% yes.

Starlink is marketed to the military, but so far they've been testing it with the antennae they normally use.

SpaceX is literally based in Hawthorne, CA. These dishes are made in a place where it gets stupidly hot.

I get your point, but specifically Hawthorne is a coastal city, so it doesn’t get “stupidly hot”. Average max temp is 85F in August.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne,_California

It's not trivial, of course. But it's also not okay to pretend that you can sell a device for $500 (which in reality costs $2,300), and skimp on the fundamental things that everyone else spends money on to ensure these things don't happen. This could have been fixed. It didn't as a cost cutting measure. I don't know why you were talking about V-Band. SpaceX is not using V-Band. They are mostly using low frequency kaband, and we'll be using high frequency soon. This is exactly the same as all other satellite internet providers out there that have solved this problem. They are not special in disregard. They just chose to ignore it.

Existing phased-array antennas cost, at a minimum, tens of thousands of dollars.

Getting Starlink Dishy to around $2,000, and I understand it's closer to $1,000 by now, is an incredible engineering achievement. SpaceX didn't accomplish that by overengineering the shit out of it.

I do not doubt that now that this problem has cropped up SpaceX will address it. If they don't, if in a couple of years this is still a problem with the system in full operation, then criticism would be justified.

There is no evidence I've seen showing that it's less than $2000. Please send a link to the source.

> According to SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell, the company has “made great progress on reducing the cost.” Initially, Each dish would cost SpaceX $3,000 USD to manufacture, Shotwell said they reduced the manufacturing cost to around $1,500 USD.

https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/starlink-dish

You mentioned $1000. $1500 is impressive, but is there a follow-up?

I don't see why they don't just leave the antennas in the dish then run waveguide to a box in the shade.

Edit: after looking at a teardown I suppose it's because there are ~3000 channels. Woof.

122F is 50C. How much of the world actually gets that hot?

AZ is currently the hottest place in the world at the moment. Not the upper range. The hottest place.

https://www.wx-now.com/Weather/WxExtremes?hottest=true

An object in direct sunlight is going to get hotter than the ambient air temperature.

especially when it's in direct sunlight sitting above roofing asphalt. Air temps can get up to 150 F without too much trouble on building roofs with a dark material.

A sizable portion of the world has reached 45 C or higher.

And you have to keep in mind the temperature is measured in particular ways, local temps near dark surfaces can get significantly higher.

Very few places have air temperatures that hot, but in most of the US the surface of a metal fixture right under the sun can and will exceed 122F.

Synthetic turf fields at your local park can get as hot 160 degrees pretty easily.

A piece of metal sitting in the sun can get that hot pretty easily in lots of places, even if the ambient temperature is much more reasonable.

Where I live in Florida, roofs routinely get hotter than that. Listed temps measure air temp, in a ventilated box 5 feet above grass. This is nothing like being on a roof in Summer here. We aren't a desert and we have tens of millions of people. This isn't going to work.

An aside, I was dating a woman from The North. She came here and we were travelling around the State. We stopped in Venice at a restaurant, I wasn't paying attention, and she just hopped out of the car barefoot! Only did that once, though.

This would be absolutely wild to do in “the North” during summer as well.

You are living in a city affected by global warming

Everyone is.

I live in America's wang. Another few decades of "Global Improvement™" and the USA will be a eunuch.

In the desert sun it will be higher than 50 degrees.

Palm Springs CA gets that hot, especially inside a vehicle.

You don’t put a star link inside a vehicle

That's true, but also -- an object sitting outside in the sun is going to exceed, or greatly exceed depending on the materials, the ambient temperature.

When the ambient temperature is 123°F (e.g. yesterday) where are you supposed to out it? Does the terminal work indoors? Even on cooler days in the low 100s your home's roof is going to be significantly warmer than 120f

I think the issue is that these dishes might be routinely mounted onto roofs, concrete pads, asphalt pads, etc. And, by requirement, in direct sun. Where the temperature could be significantly hotter than the air temperature you hear on a weather report.

Spain, or the deserts of Africa, California, Chile, or the southwestern US, as well as a good chunk of the middle east? What about anywhere along the equator?

I guess you could consider border states of Mexico as the same geographical region as the southwestern US, but those too. Anecdotal, but I've seen routine thermal throttling on macs in a border state with outdoor temperatures of 45, ambient indoor temperatures of 30-33, so you basically need either AC or some other external cooling system to manage more performance than a web browser and office apps.

I have heard anecdotal stories of the adhesive on rear-view mirrors of cars literally melting in the Phoenix sun (which can hit 120 F / 49 C or worse). So your story is not surprising at all, sadly

In addition to what people have said about the temperature of surfaces in direct sunlight, you have to account for the power the electronics are using. The aluminum backplate is serving multiple purposes, but judging by the gap pad they are using and RF electronics in general, it's likely a non-trivial amount of power.

This isn't the hottest month though. And the air temperature doesn't have to be 122F, just the dish.

it’s not about the air temperature. it’s surface temperature. i was at the beach the other day when it was only like 75 degrees but the sand was hot enough to burn my feet.

+55-56C is about is the hottest AIR temp you'll get globally. Pretty common to see telecomm gear that falls in line with this max temp. The +55C does not include heat from direct sunlight/insolation. Unless rated for much higher temps, you'll need a sun shade for your gear out in the field. Problem with Starlink is that with a sun shade you'd most likely lose line of sight to the sats or attenuate the signal badly.

Even in Northern Europe, a car parked in direct sunlight can easily get to 70C (160F) inside. In winter the same car may be expected to start up straight away without issues at -30C (-22F).

While most modern car much of the time manage to start at -30C indeed, "expected" is overstating it. You really need one with an engine heater.

Well I expect it of my car, and it hasn't let me down yet :-)

It’s not a safety issue like car regulation, engineering choices have costs.

Just because it doesn’t work in your environment doesn’t mean that it’s not suitable elsewhere and the burden of spec changes for your climate may make the cost go up for people elsewhere who don’t have the same requirements

Why build a product for everyone you're marketing to when you can cheaply build a product that works for some but still sell to all. Caveat Emptor after all. Hit my OKRs for the quarter, I'm going to the pub.

Eh, every design choice is a compromise between multiple variables. The cost has to be reasonable for there to be someone to sell the product to.

Because the cost would go up, and marketing becomes harder which makes it harder to get data and revenue to continue engineering.

Google shows me loads of industrial SBC devices that operate from -40 to +85C(!) that are under $200 USD.

It's not reasonable for Starlink?

Starlink dish costs $500, and has an antenna and motor.

$500 seems cheap for what it does, and that makes sense if it’s cost optimized but doesn’t have the broadest climate zone tolerance.

* This product is not intended for sale in AZ, NV, NM, TX, Parts of Utah, California, Idaho and the Dakotas in the summer, direct sunlight, and most roofs.

Is it common to have a car on the roof?

Where is it suitable then? I expect higher temps on roof of the farthest northern borders of the US.

As a Canadian, 32F seems like an oddly high lower limit to me. Things should operate down to at least -40.

Great point. I think this highlights the importance of what we consider acceptable tolerances.

fascinating how a post about inclusive design manages to have a blind spot that it does not consider. A wonderful demonstration on why diverse backgrounds in engineering is important.

Assuming you can keep something in the shade - does anywhere on Earth get to 140F beside inside forest fires, lightning bolts and volcanoes?

There is a substantial portion of the worlds population that lives months at a time where temperatures are regularly well below freezing.

Pavement.

A satellite dish doesn't do super well in the shade :)

Depends on the shade: http://www.dishcamo.com/fabric_dish_cover.htm

Line of sight to a satellite is only close to the sun for an hour or two a day, and only in certain locations on earth. It is entirely feasible to shade the rest of the sky.

My guess is that most people follow the directions to place the satellite dish with an unobstructed view of the sky. Thus, most of them are in the sun, regardless of how they are pointed and oriented.

Right. Snow tires, 4WD, and engine block heaters should be standard equipment on cars because obviously things should be designed to handle every environment they might reasonably encounter.

Block heaters are pretty standard on many new cars sold in the colder parts of Canada. So are all season tires.

As a sibling comment points out, block heaters are pretty standard in much of Canada. 4WD is not universal, but if there is a 4WD version of a particular model available, dealers will have a hard time selling the 2WD variant because enough people really do think 4WD is better in the snow. Snow tires are just a waste in the summer. What you do is have two sets of tires and swap them out in spring and fall.

I'm confused by your statement, anyway. Are you saying things shouldn't be designed to handle every environment they might reasonably encounter?

Side note: “40 below” is approximately where C and F intersect.

As a result, that temperature being “effing cold” is something US Americans and Canadians readily agree on.

Interesting. What phone operates at 0F? A few years ago I was in 15F conditions, the batteries in both my phone and my hiking partner's phone would not work at all. Going out briefly in 0F weather and pulling the phone out of the pocket of a warm jacket might be fine, but I'm doubtful a phone could continue to function when thoroughly cooled to 0F. If there's been a recent shift in phone technology, then I'd like to know more.

I’ve found this is very much a function of how new/good the battery is. I’ve been out skiing in ~0 degrees for a couple hours with a newer phone and not had trouble and I’ve had the same phone a year or two later go dead after 45min in 20 degree weather. My current iPhone 12 Pro lasted 45 min at -15 this winter and didn’t run out of battery. I keep my phone in an unheated water bottle carrier

My OnePlus One (old, I know) worked just fine this winter. I was able to read on my phone the entire 20 minute walk to the store and back. It's when I got home into the warmth that it would end up rebooting/saying the battery was empty.

It's possible that the phone generated enough heat to stay warmer though. The main problem with operating it was actually how cold my hand that's holding the phone gets since it doesn't move like the other hand does. I had to wear double gloves.

I’ve only had problems even well below 0F in Minnesota using old phones.

It’s just battery chemistry, current capacity and voltage are depressed by low temps.

Some phones aren’t engineered very well and regularly pull current near their battery’s capacity which is just poor design.

Of course 3/4 of the people responding to how cold can a phone get are from Minnesota. Lolol. Edit: I am also

Every iPhone I've had has worked fine outside in Minnesota winters. The phone uses energy to function and so probably is hotter than the surrounding air.

I live in MN, and if it’s cold out, I keep my phone next to my body somehow, like a pants pocket or inner jacket pocket in the chest area. This keeps the phone warm enough to work for a while at any temperature you would attempt to use a phone in (I don’t try to use my phone outside when it’s -20F because I don’t want to remove gloves, but 0F is fine) and if it’s too cold, you can rapidly warm it up by placing it between your legs/against your skin/etc.

In he summer, I don’t leave my phone in direct sunlight for extended periods or else it will overheat. Simply placing it in the shade or in a pocket prevents this. It usually only hits 100 here, so I don’t have experience with the 100-120F range and overheating.

Tl;dr Prevent your phone from reaching extreme temperatures and it will work fine.

Samsung used to guarantee their smartphones to operate down to -4°F. Not sure they still do. Having trouble finding current information online.

We're talking about 122F and exposed to direct sunlight for long durations. So more like 150F inside that thing and then with one stroke you are locked out of using any sort of customer electronics parts or packaging. I'm sure SpaceX will look into it but you might not like the outcome.

(And no, most phones will not operate at that temperature for longer than a few minutes)

> No, failing at 122F is not acceptable

I don't think it is a simple as saying that. If, for example, it cost twice as much to design something that works up to 140 as it does to make it work up to 122, I don't think it makes sense to make everyone in the world pay twice as much for something they don't need.

You should sell a more expensive version that works up to 140.

There's a cost to building multiple SKUs. Also you massively overestimate the cost of materials for withstanding such temperatures.

Sure, but I was replying to your general comment that it is simply unacceptable for something not to be engineered to withstand heat above 122.

I think it is a design decision, and the costs and benefits have to be weighed. If the extra cost per unit is more than the lost revenue from not being able to sell to consumers in hight temperature locations, it might make sense not to design it for high temperatures.

As long as these limitations are communicated to potential customers, I don’t see a problem with that.

My iPhone starts panicking whenever it runs maps when the temps go over 100F which considering its 115F today is not a good user experience.

You're driving what is essentially a greenhouse, I don't want to pay extra for a cooling system that's designed for temperatures up to 150 degrees. Though also I wouldn't pay 6 figures for a car.

I completely agree with you. Though as a Minnesota resident, a 32F low temp operating bound is hilariously ludicrous. "Well below" -20F would be the expectation here. I'm sure Canadians would extend that to well below -40.

> Too many vehicles fail this, and frankly it’s repulsive for something you buy for 5-6 figures.

What's repulsive is the way many people live in AZ.

Literal hot take: maybe people living in one of the hottest places on Earth shouldn't expect to have the same consumer experience (without modulating their habits). IMHO, AZ is chock full of human hubris. Pools, fountains, water features, grass lawns, and golf courses.

Why should people expect to live as if it were Cascadia or New England with water consumption? Same with car performance. Maybe you don't get to have an icy 68°F in your rolling greenhouse behind a 40,000BTU power plant at dead noon in the heckin desert.

To be fair, we’re all environmental parasites no matter where we are on this heckin planet.

It's a v1 beta. Maybe put it in the shade.

I'm pretty sure shielding a satellite dish from the sky makes it inoperable.

Shield it from the sun, not the sky.

Maybe they didn't do the math or are planning to improve upon it. But maybe they did do the math and consciously wrote you off.

I'd say maybe places where the air temperature regularly gets to >110 F aren't meant for human habitation

What's your definition of "regularly"? You're probably ruling out most of the US southwest. I made the same comment about people living in areas that are routinely >90% humidity, mosquito infested jungles and was totally slammed for it. People moving to those locations are the odd ducks to me. People born and raised there don't have a choice.

Really, it's not "don't live there," as humans have inhabited these conditions for thousands of years. But "don't live there and expect the same standard of living."

Contrast living in an adobe house/masonry house with no AC, taking a siesta/riposa in the hottest hours, and tolerating a bit of sweat, vs in-ground pool, AC set to 68, driving around mid-day in a rolling greenhouse.

Do air conditioners need special handling over there? When we got ours serviced the guy told me that in Western Sydney the split systems sometimes shut down on the worst days when you need them due to heat in direct sunlight. You need shade, but even then some had sprinkler/misting systems for the hotter days.

No, they're built with pretty extreme tolerances. Further, they're often placed on rooftops, so it's by design rather than convenience of the materials used.

This is literally a record breaking heatwave; https://www.allsides.com/story/western-us-hit-heat-wave-thre...

122F is not a normal temperature.

You live in a desert. I feel like the extremes of your environment are not a useful barometer for a reasonable operating temp.

I also live in the fifth most populous city in the United States. So, yeah, it is.

If anything, you should fully expect, at this point, that how we deal with extreme conditions in Phoenix is a harbinger of what is to come for other parts of the nation.

>I also live in the fifth most populous city in the United States. So, yeah, it is.

But that's still less than half a percent of the US population.

I guess we should also avoid rust proofing metals since most people don't live by the ocean, too.

I mean, I don't expect California cars to get undercoated, for example.

You need rustproofing wherever you put salt on the roads in winter, too

Just because lots of people made the same decision doesn’t make it smart or reasonable.

I just don't understand comments like this. 7 million people didn't decide to move here this year. Conditions in Arizona have dramatically changed over the lifetime of the state.

It doesn't make sense to live where you can freeze to death or don't have access to water, either, does it? Except those two scenarios include most Americans. Without modern infrastructure, it hardly makes sense to live anywhere.

Obviously 7 million people didn’t move there over the course of this year. If that’s what you thought I was getting at, I’m not surprised you were confused. Conditions have changed, but are people reconsidering their own decisions?

People don't decide where they want to be born.

Right, but your point seems to be getting at Starlink owing you a functioning dish in your climate, which is just kind of an odd take. There are dozens of products that are a bad fit for where I live.

If it makes economic sense, I'm sure they'll fix it or someone else will do it better eventually. If not, maybe the municipal governments can subsidize something that works there?

Nope, namely if you suggest they decide to move. But other taxpayers has to pay to help them continue comfortable live as they live now.

Please. The whole point of Starlink is that it's suitable for places where there is poor existing infrastructure. The desert tops the list! They also have service area restrictions for sign up.

Just say Tesla dropped the ball on this engineering prototype and V2 will work on the sun.

To be clear, I hope Tesla fails in everything they do. That wasn’t really the point I was making though.

I guess you hate Phoenix? Alice cooper, the Meat Puppets, stunning desert vistas?

People should almost certainly get over grass lawns, I know there is going to be huge problems with water, but afiact Phoenix recycles a huge proportion of their greywater, and this is a perfect use case for solar, molten salt, nuclear.

Hard to farm, I guess. Isn't there gold to mine too?

I guess you hate Phoenix?

Before reading this thread I didn't...

Millions of humans live there. And loads of other equipment operates. Maybe it's not really at the "extreme" point yet - since all the existing stuff has moved extreme further out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com