[HN Gopher] Show HN: I built a Iridium/LTE satellite GPS tracker...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Show HN: I built a Iridium/LTE satellite GPS tracker and took it to
       the Arctic
        
       Author : ChopSticksPlz
       Score  : 158 points
       Date   : 2024-10-05 08:36 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | fellerts wrote:
       | Fun project! Did you look into NTN (Non-Terrestrial Networks)
       | capable modules as an alternative to Iridium? I haven't played
       | with NTN myself, but it seems modules such as SIM7070G-HP-S
       | support LTE-M/NB-IoT as well as NTN networks, and could in theory
       | serve the purpose of your Iridium tranceiver as well as your LTE
       | module. This technology hasn't matured yet, and I suspect the
       | roaming tarriffs are expensive, but I don't know how it compares
       | to Iridium.
        
         | lxgr wrote:
         | NTN seems to be only offered by geostationary satellite
         | operators at this point, which unfortunately puts the use case
         | from TFA out of coverage. See for example Inmarsat's coverage:
         | https://www.inmarsat.com/content/dam/inmarsat/corporate/core...
         | 
         | I'm not even sure if Skylo is live with Inmarsat at this point,
         | or if there are any other NTN providers covering oceans.
        
       | keepamovin wrote:
       | This is so cool! Thanks for sharing and creating something like
       | this :) BTW do you use Iridium handsets? Do you have
       | recommendations?
        
         | lxgr wrote:
         | OP is using Iridium SBD according to the article, specifically
         | this modem:
         | https://www.groundcontrol.com/product/rockblock-9603-compact...
        
       | KMnO4 wrote:
       | For anyone else wondering, the satellite transceiver is a
       | RockBoard, which charges:
       | 
       | - $302 for the hardware
       | 
       | - $17/month for a "line fee"
       | 
       | - $0.20/message (50 characters)
       | 
       | Would be nice if there was an actually affordable, programmable
       | Iridium device.
        
         | causal wrote:
         | I've been wondering how Iridium costs are tallied.
         | 
         | Recently had two calls with an Iridium phone, one sent and one
         | received, about 1 minute each. T-Mobile charged me $50 for
         | those.
         | 
         | I found it very odd - it seemed like Iridium was somehow
         | passing the call fees onto me, but I can't be sure because the
         | T-Mobile rep I chatted with was unable to comprehend the
         | situation (I suspect I was talking to an LLM, but it ultimately
         | gave me a $30 rebate at least).
        
           | slaucon wrote:
           | I've had to make and pay for an unfortunate number of Iridium
           | calls. They can be crazy expensive depending on carrier, who
           | all bill them as a call to an international line in the
           | country of "Satellite". Usually you pay your carrier's fee
           | for outgoing and it's cheaper/free to receive the calls.
           | 
           | It seems like cell carriers always charge more per minute for
           | satellite calls than any satellite provider does, so I'm
           | guessing they just set their rates conservatively to always
           | make a profit on their end. And the demand for satellite
           | calls seems like it would be pretty inelastic.
        
             | 0xffff2 wrote:
             | I've always assumed that answering a phone call would be
             | free for me (excepting the dawn of cell phones when they
             | had a limited number of minutes per month). If answering a
             | sat-phone call is "cheaper" rather than free, does anything
             | warn me that I'm incurring extra charges?
        
               | LeoPanthera wrote:
               | Paying to receive a call seems to a mostly American
               | phenomenon. In most (all?) of Europe, receiving calls is
               | always free, no matter where or how they originate.
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | This is why iridium supports calling their regular PSTN
             | gateway and then dialing the satellite number recipient,
             | then the satellite recipient pays a more palatable
             | $1.50/minute:
             | 
             | https://apollosat.com/support/iridium-two-stage-dialing/
        
           | lxgr wrote:
           | Receiving calls from Iridium should be free - the caller
           | usually pays for the satellite portion of the call.
           | 
           | That usually makes Iridium -> terrestrial calls much more
           | economical than the other way around, as telcos usually use
           | the opportunity of terrestrial -> satcom calls to add on
           | ridiculous margins. Conversely, satellite -> terrestrial
           | calling is usually around a dollar per minute or less, these
           | days.
           | 
           | In your situation, that would come out to a $50 (or maybe
           | $25) charge per minute. Hefty, but that indeed seems to be at
           | least in the ballpark of their listed rates (for prepaid
           | here, for example:
           | https://prepaid.t-mobile.com/connect/international-
           | calling-r...).
        
             | causal wrote:
             | Nice - thanks for digging. I'm guessing you're right, iirc
             | it rounded up the number of minutes.
        
         | atlgator wrote:
         | Where did you buy Iridium access for $17/month?
        
           | ac29 wrote:
           | https://www.groundcontrol.com/products/iridium/short-
           | burst-d...
        
         | GlibMonkeyDeath wrote:
         | Indeed - a Garmin InReach is about US $500 and already
         | ruggedized and tested. I understand the DIY aspect of this
         | project is the fun part, but it definitely isn't a way to save
         | money.
        
           | stilldavid wrote:
           | With a robust used market, as well. I laughed at the battery
           | life goals for this - the inreach mini I use lasts _days_.
        
         | matrix2003 wrote:
         | Depending on how you look at it, Starlink can be incredibly
         | cheap compared to Iridium. It's still not cheap from where I'm
         | sitting in my clapped out Honda Civic, though.
         | 
         | Edit: I think $250 for 50GB of truly global data. I can't do
         | the math right now, but it seems like a better deal at face
         | value.
        
           | cyberax wrote:
           | > Depending on how you look at it, Starlink can be incredibly
           | cheap compared to Iridium.
           | 
           | They don't have sat-to-sat communications deployed yet, so
           | they can work only near the ground stations.
        
             | dotnet00 wrote:
             | Hmm? Starlink has had sat-to-sat active for a while now.
             | They've been making a killing selling services to ships and
             | planes lately.
        
               | matrix2003 wrote:
               | The laser interlinks have been turned on.
        
           | lxgr wrote:
           | $50/month, these days, if I'm not mistaken. (You can only use
           | it abroad for two months at a time, but you can update your
           | location as as far as I'm aware, and it's $/EUR 50 in most
           | places.)
           | 
           | Price wise, it's no comparison, but the two don't directly
           | compete yet - power usage and antenna size of Iridium and
           | Starlink are orders of magnitude apart (largely due to the
           | L-band spectrum available to Iridium globally).
        
             | matrix2003 wrote:
             | The higher rate gets you oceanic use, which is a big
             | benefit of iridium.
             | 
             | You are correct that it can be $50, but AFAIK that's a
             | different plan that is land or near-land only.
        
         | matrix2003 wrote:
         | > Would be nice if there was an actually affordable,
         | programmable Iridium device.
         | 
         | I remember reading about this a while back, but doesn't SpaceX
         | offer some kind of IoT modem for a low cost (not the Starlink
         | dishes)
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | The keyword of the problem there is Iridium. Their SBD (short
         | burst data) and in fact all their services are just extremely
         | expensive. This reseller doesn't really seem to put much margin
         | on it.
         | 
         | When I had a sat phone (needed to travel sometimes to
         | questionable places for work) I used Thuraya which is much
         | cheaper for airtime. 40EUR gets you a whole year's worth of
         | inbound service (airtime) and about 15 mins of call credit for
         | outbound. With iridium that gets you about one month.
         | 
         | But Thuraya only had 2 active sats. One geostationary over the
         | middle east and one over the far east. No service over the
         | Americas. The Asian one failed early this year and the coverage
         | for the region which can't be met by the other one is now
         | inoperable.
         | 
         | The middle east sat is actually beyond its planned service life
         | and if it goes down there's no immediate backup. Though a
         | replacement is ready for launch according to Wikipedia. You
         | also need visibility of the southern horizon (or northern, if
         | you're in the southern hemisphere). So for hiking in valleys
         | it's not a good bet. The same goes for Inmarsat for that
         | matter. But they do have more sats.
         | 
         | Iridium in contrast is fully worldwide, has a robust
         | constellation of many low earth orbit sats that move across the
         | sky so you don't need to see a fixed point. It's more robust
         | for emergencies. But the price is much higher. It's a trade-
         | off. You get what you pay for.
         | 
         | As I no longer travel for work but do hike, I ditched the
         | Thuraya and got a Garmin InReach which runs on iridium. But
         | that costs more than Thuraya even though it can only send
         | messages. Though with their latest cost increase I might just
         | drop it and find something cheaper. Maybe Starlink direct to
         | cell.
        
         | therein wrote:
         | You can actually achieve this even with Iridium Go. I tried it
         | years ago and it worked.
         | 
         | It isn't too documented, or let me say it isn't documented at
         | all but you can write AT commands and start raw TCP connections
         | and read and write to that socket.
         | 
         | And it is actually reasonably priced. I tried to open SSH
         | connections and it was barely usable. You get a very small
         | number of bits per second.
         | 
         | Edit: Found the private repo I had created back then in case
         | anyone has any interest. It looks like I did something like
         | this:                   func (sess *IridiumGoSession)
         | ActivateDataWithCustomSettings() (*PerformTaskResponse, error)
         | {          return sess.PerformTask("2",
         | MakeOption("set state", "true", "bool"),
         | MakeOption("Firewall allow all traffic", "false", "bool"),
         | MakeOption("Firewall exceptions", "XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX-all-tcp",
         | "bool"),           MakeOption("Enable DNS forwarding", "false",
         | "bool"),           MakeOption("Dial number", "0088160000330",
         | "bool"),          )         }
         | 
         | Need to replace `XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX` with the IP you want to
         | establish a connection to. And I don't know where I got
         | 0088160000330 from. I guess that's the internet call number.
        
       | tylergetsay wrote:
       | saveitforparts on youtube recently setup an old satellite
       | terminal and went through the pricing of doing so, its expensive.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzTPZLtmSOM&t=664s
        
       | polishdude20 wrote:
       | >The ultimate motivator for building this project was the
       | opportunity to join the crew of the S/Y Southern Star yacht,
       | which sails in the Arctic.
       | 
       | Anyone know how he got this opportunity? I'd love to join
       | something like this if all I had to do was make a cool Iridium
       | transmitter!
        
       | amlozano wrote:
       | This is a very cool project, happy to see the costs of this stuff
       | coming down a little bit.
       | 
       | When I was an intern 15 years ago I worked on a software library
       | for this https://www.embeddedts.com/products/TS-IRIDIUM Board
       | that does a similar thing (though you would need to stack on a
       | cellular board if you wanted cell modems).
       | 
       | We used them to help Arizona Department of Transportation collect
       | traffic data in remote locations.
       | 
       | We had big plans at that company to make a much smaller, much
       | cheaper 9602 transceiver replacement, but the company got bought
       | out before that could launch.
        
       | thunder-blue-3 wrote:
       | Hearing about Iridium reminded me of how excited I was to take on
       | a job managing 5 engineers for them, until they offered me a base
       | salary of $135,000 in Phoenix. They work on incredibly cool
       | technology--I'm bummed I had to pass it up to work for some
       | garbage web-focused tech company becayse Iridium pays pennies on
       | the dollar to their engineering department.
        
         | 0xffff2 wrote:
         | Is it just me, or does the wording of this comment imply that
         | you passed up the Iridium job to work somewhere else that
         | underpays their engineers? Seems like you meant to imply the
         | opposite.
        
           | supportengineer wrote:
           | I think it's clear he has to work for the "garbage" company
           | because it paid more than Iridium did
        
           | barkerja wrote:
           | The opposite. Op would have preferred to work at Iridium, if
           | only they offered higher pay compared to where they are
           | currently.
        
           | thunder-blue-3 wrote:
           | yeah I meant Iridium pays pennies on the dollar -
        
       | thadt wrote:
       | Ah, that's cool. We built a similar system using Iridium SBD and
       | LTE for controlling drones a few years back. SBD isn't the
       | fastest comms around, and it can get rough if you don't have
       | clear sky view, but it works pretty much everywhere, with a small
       | antenna. If you don't have line of sight or LTE, it's a solid
       | fallback.
        
       | lormayna wrote:
       | Why not trying using something like WSPR? It really depends from
       | the propagation conditions, but it would be interesting IMHO
        
       | xadren wrote:
       | Very cool project! The company I work for is building a similar
       | sat/cell GPS tracker for civil aviation. In fact we're using the
       | same GPS and Iridium modules.
       | 
       | The costs for satellite SBD messages is definitely eye-watering
       | though. Our device transmits position data every 2 minutes while
       | relying on satellite connections, which we definitely notice the
       | costs of during development. We'd like to look at other
       | providers, but for various reasons (excluding costs) they end up
       | being less ideal than Iridium.
        
       | LeoPanthera wrote:
       | If you have an amateur radio license, a small HF transmitter
       | would probably successfully send a signal to a receiver on land
       | most of the time, and of course wouldn't cost anything.
       | 
       | HF propagation does vary over time, but you could send a signal
       | far more often to make up for it.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-10-07 23:01 UTC)