Starlink and Sky Q

[Stu24041973]

Hi all

Thinking of getting Starlink but have seen that some users have issues when connecting to Sky Q, wanted to know if this is still the case and if so what work around were used.

many thanks

Stuart

[Chodley]

Where did you see that some people have issues?

[Stu24041973]

On this forum and when googled sky q and Google. 

[Stu24041973]

@Chodley On this forum and googling sky q and starlink

[Chodley]

Hmm. Ok. Hadn't heard that.

[lettice]

I can tell you from someone I know that has been running Sky Q and Starlink without issue since early Summer 2021.
They have been getting a reliable speed of 150-170 mbps download and 25-35 mbps upload.
Their latency is around 20ms, occasionally up to 30ms.
They have a Sky Q main and Sky Q minis set up with the Sky Q mesh allowing the extra value of hotspots for those wifi extremities.
Mind they get pretty good wifi coverage across their large property and garden, so really probably do not actually need the extra the hotspot mesh gives.. 

[Godfrey]

---

@Stu24041973 wrote:...Thinking of getting Starlink but have seen that some users have issues when connecting to Sky Q, wanted to know if this is still the case and if so what work around were used.

---

The latest advice to Sky installation engineers that I can find is this;

Although in its design to be in our lower orbit(and publicises lower ping rates), like most other satellite broadband services it can suffer from Latency issues - This is a measurement of the time it takes to send data and receive a response - For example telling the Sky Q box to download content or access an app or any other internet based services.

Another issue which could lead them to not get along, is we as a business also have in place a geographic location setting preventing our content being accessed outside of our known footprint. If the connection is in lower orbit in theory it could look like the connection is outside of this geo-fence, so not inside the UK or Ireland.

Engineers have tried to install Sky Q with Starlink, and altered the DNS to try and get round the issue, this won't work, as the latency issue will still remain.

Here lies the tricky bit, as an engineer you cannot simply cancel a job because these or any other ISP don't get along (after all they can still use it with no BB connection), all you can do is connect to their hub on your iPad, run a speed test and check the Ping Rate - Ideally it needs to be under 25ms, and consistent, by this we mean to run several tests to ensure the ping rate is stable.

If it's higher than 25ms, then you need to inform the customer of the potential issues, such as:

• Call to upgrade message when attempting to access Catch Up and On Demand.
• Missing tiles within the on demand content.
• Programmes stuck in the download queue.
• Failed on demand downloads..

It's then the customer's choice to determine if they still want to go ahead with the install

[Chodley]

The idea that there is any network comms a Sky box needs to do which is as latency senstive as that blows my mind. Do they think they're writing Call of Duty: Moonraker edition?

as for geofencing and low orbit - I think someone made that up after a particularly heavy night on the Absinth 😉 Yeah maybe there could be an issue if starlink as a global provider assigned you an IP in a range that looks like it's outside the UK. No idea why changing DNS would help.

I always said Q's networking was whack.

[Stu24041973]

Thanks @lettice it's good to hear that it can get along and from someone that knows someone that actually uses both services.

all the best

[Stu24041973]

Thanks for sharing this @Godfrey 

[rscott]

---

@Chodley wrote:

The idea that there is any network comms a Sky box needs to do which is as latency senstive as that blows my mind. Do they think they're writing Call of Duty: Moonraker edition?

as for geofencing and low orbit - I think someone made that up after a particularly heavy night on the Absinth 😉 Yeah maybe there could be an issue if starlink as a global provider assigned you an IP in a range that looks like it's outside the UK. No idea why changing DNS would help.

I always said Q's networking was whack.

---

If the box is making multiple requests in quick successsion, even for small items, high latency can make it appear very unresponsive. Eg scrolling through an on demand section with large numbers of thumbnails.

That's not particularly Q specific - even browsing an image intensive website on a high latency connection isn't pleasant.

[Chodley]

---

@rscott wrote:

---

@Chodley wrote:

The idea that there is any network comms a Sky box needs to do which is as latency senstive as that blows my mind. Do they think they're writing Call of Duty: Moonraker edition?

as for geofencing and low orbit - I think someone made that up after a particularly heavy night on the Absinth 😉 Yeah maybe there could be an issue if starlink as a global provider assigned you an IP in a range that looks like it's outside the UK. No idea why changing DNS would help.

I always said Q's networking was whack.

---

If the box is making multiple requests in quick successsion, even for small items, high latency can make it appear very unresponsive. Eg scrolling through an on demand section with large numbers of thumbnails.

That's not particularly Q specific - even browsing an image intensive website on a high latency connection isn't pleasant.

---

30ms isn't particularly high and you would stream in and pre-cache the next block of resources as people move down . Low bandwidth would be a much worse experience than an extra 20ms (or 40) for the data to start flowing.

and this in the text Godfrey quoted isn't talking about "clunky", it's talking about not working.

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Chodley wrote:

The idea that there is any network comms a Sky box needs to do which is as latency senstive as that blows my mind. 

---

Not sure it's an actual functional issue: I suspect it's more about detecting Q boxes which have strayed beyond their country of installation.

[coowill]

I would like to share my experience on this:

I recently got Sky Q installed after having Starlink for a while and my Sky signal quality drops randomly from 90 to 30/40 - this results in losing HD channels and numerous other channels. It's extremely annoying. 

Seemingly the only deduction to be made after numerous investigations is that it's the fault of Starlink. But I can't prove it. I still hope there's something simple that's being overlooked. 

I've had engineers come check it out a few times but Murphy's Law the signal quality is 90 when they are here. 

I live in a new build in a place with zero obstructions and in a densely populated village so there should be no issue getting a strong quality signal all the time. 

[Chodley]

Why would the population affect the expectation of signal?

Is the starlink dish anywhere near the line of sight of the sky dish?