<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Signal Structure of the Starlink Ku-Band Downlink · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2210.11578/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2210.11578/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Signal Structure of the Starlink Ku-Band Downlink — mentioned by toomuchtodo</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40324895</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2210.11578:40324895</guid><pubDate>Sat, 11 May 2024 00:01:33 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Interesting considering only one percent of StarLink’s constellation capacity would be needed for StarLink to provide the service intentionally, and constellation signals can also be used opportunistically. https://people.engineering.osu.edu/sites/default/files/2023-... https://people.engineering.osu.edu/media/document/2023-08-11... https://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.11578 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10056358/ Recent somewhat related thread with great comments on GNSS RTK: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40318487&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2210.11578/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>eess.SP</category></item></channel></rss>
