Starlink Question that needs another thread I think

[cliffy]

With Starlink in the microwave spectrum is there any concern with being near it when it transmits (unshielded) ?

I'm just thinking about the fact that it is not just a passive receive only antenna system but that it

actually transmits (at whatever power it uses) just like a microwave oven but the the ovens have screen

guards to prevent the escape of the microwave energy from hitting humans?  Long term affects? Young children?

Any thoughts or empirical data on the subject anywhere? I can't find any yet.  

[toto]

There was a Reddit thread about this a while back

https://old.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/11lbek1/is_the_starlink_dish_safe_to_be_used_near_your/
 

[toto]

I’ll be interested to know what you come up with. I finally activated my Mini today but haven’t tried it in the plane yet. Having it on the glareshield means you’re pretty close to it all the time, but putting in the back windows isn’t really much more distant. 

The Reddit thread I linked above has some details and some conjecture.

[hazek]

For what it's worth I asked Grok AI about that reddit thread: https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_d8a152b1-427f-4232-8c0c-4bf6c71ea9a0

[Hank]

2 minutes ago, hazek said:

For what it's worth I asked Grok AI about that reddit thread: https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_d8a152b1-427f-4232-8c0c-4bf6c71ea9a0

It would be difficult to maintain 13" clearance from occupants in both front seats. Although long bodies could out in the far back window and keep it away from both front seats and one rear passenger. Us Short Body owners can only maintain clearance from either (but not both) front seats. 

[toto]

58 minutes ago, Hank said:

It would be difficult to maintain 13" clearance from occupants in both front seats. Although long bodies could out in the far back window and keep it away from both front seats and one rear passenger. Us Short Body owners can only maintain clearance from either (but not both) front seats. 

Maybe I’ll take a tape measure to the airport today. My wild guess is that from either front seat in my J, you’re at least two feet from the Starlink terminal. The pilot seat tends to be much farther forward than the copilot seat, but offset by more than a foot to the right. 

I’ve never been in a short body, so I’m not sure how the cockpit dimensions vary, but with the seat in a normal position I think 13” is easily achieved in my ac. 

[hazek]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

It would be difficult to maintain 13" clearance from occupants in both front seats.

I shot a video of my flight and looking back at when I remove it for landing and how much I extend my hand to do so gives me a good idea of distance to be able to say that I am definitely far enough from it.

[MikeOH]

Good grief!

Your risk flying around in a SEL GA aircraft has to FAR exceed the incremental risk from a Starlink’s radiation.

People will worry about anything and everything, I guess

[toto]

4 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Good grief!

Your risk flying around in a SEL GA aircraft has to FAR exceed the incremental risk from a Starlink’s radiation.

People will worry about anything and everything, I guess

That’s fair

 

[cliffy]

Hey I'm just bringing this up as a question that I haven't seen asked  yet-     :-)

For the brain trust to toss around!   

Wouldn't  be the first time of unintended consequences    

Used to work in the EMF transmission world but not an engineer  in it. 

RADAR dishes emit  enough emf  that one does not want to be "in the beam"  up  close when its running. 

[Shadrach]

3 hours ago, cliffy said:

Hey I'm just bringing this up as a question that I haven't seen asked  yet-     :-)

For the brain trust to toss around!   

Wouldn't  be the first time of unintended consequences    

Used to work in the EMF transmission world but not an engineer  in it. 

RADAR dishes emit  enough emf  that one does not want to be "in the beam"  up  close when its running. 

The number of biz jet’s that I see with a mini mounted to the copilot window suggest that Part 135 operators are not worried about it.

[cliffy]

Just because someone uses it doesn't make it legit or safe without empirical data.

I posed the question because I haven't found any references to the subject

I'll bet if you asked the 135s POI about putting an antenna in a window blocking sight out that window in flight

I'd bet you $50 bucks on his answer. Even if it is "portable"!

Are any of the signed off as legal in the log book?  Just askin'

[Shadrach]

On 11/16/2025 at 12:44 AM, cliffy said:

Just because someone uses it doesn't make it legit or safe without empirical data.

I posed the question because I haven't found any references to the subject

I'll bet if you asked the 135s POI about putting an antenna in a window blocking sight out that window in flight

I'd bet you $50 bucks on his answer. Even if it is "portable"!

Are any of the signed off as legal in the log book?  Just askin'

I’m not going to bet and I’m not going to ask. Maybe these aren’t 135 flights, perhaps they’’re leaseback aircraft out on a Part 91 owner flight.

I frequent major FBOs up and down the  East Coast several times a month. I see more and more Starlinks mounted in light jets on the ramp.

Clearly, these guys aren’t worried about an ASI strolling across the ramp or they would at least remove them after parking. I took the picture below at Signature KROA several weeks ago.  I’m looking for a low profile mount and the one in this Citation looked like it might work in the Mooney. 
 

[hazek]

1 hour ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Assuming one’s aircraft is already fully participating in ADS-B, what is the use case for Starlink in Mooney cabins?

If I were flying the States it's less likely I'd want to use it but it's still useful. You might need information available to you in flight that is urgent or at least very convenient. Like to book a hotel, rebook something, like a rent-a-car, notify someone when you're coming, checking opening times.. Say you get delayed or have to divert, finding hotels, cars, restaurants.. all that can now be done in the air by your pax or maybe even you.

[LANCECASPER]

On 11/16/2025 at 4:31 AM, bluehighwayflyer said:

“I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things. ”

― Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

One of the best parts of flying for me is being unconnected.  Same with SCUBA diving.  The price is right and it’s really neat technology, but what am I missing here?  Assuming one’s aircraft is already fully participating in ADS-B, what is the use case for Starlink in Mooney cabins?   Is it just so the wife and kids can doom scroll social media in flight or are you guys using these things operationally in any way?  Personally, I’m very happy to wait to respond to texts, emails, and voicemails after I land.  

I’m not trying to be snarky here, or judgmental.  I’d love to have a reason to buy one of these things, but with good cell phone and Wi-Fi coverage practically everywhere I go, including OCONUS, I just don’t see a need for me personally.  The Mooney would be my only use case, but I just don’t see a need there either.  Maybe I just don’t know what I don’t know.  

I felt the same way, but just recently bought a Starlink and haven't even had a chance to try it out yet.

What changed my thinking? In the summer with the thunderstorms and almost daily buildups I have found XM Weather to be considerably superior to ADS-B. Not only is the depiction more in line with what I see out the window but the age of the Nexrad has really improved on XM compared to a few years ago. I have no desire to fly close to t-storms but I have seen that with good judgment and good information ways to get around most of them safely. If I don't see a good path I have no problem landing and waiting things out. That being said I am paying $54 per month for basic XM weather and a radio package so I have something to listen to on a long cross country (Sure I could play music on my phone, but I can't listen to a Live ballgame).

As Starlink has come down in price I can get it for the same price and have access to radar that is just as current as XM, maybe even a little more so. Of course I can have music and sport as well from wherever I choose, much more choice in my access to METARs and TAFs, etc. I am not going to be watching movies, but maybe a passenger might enjoy that, nor am I going to do a Zoom teleconference while flying, but being able to send or answer a text could be helpful in cruise on a long flight. In addition I have a motorhome where I think the Starlink could be handy as well. Time will tell and if I don't like it there are no long term contracts so the only thing I am out is the $229 I paid for it. Also I live out in the country and if I have an internet outage this could serve as a backup until my service is restored.

So yes . . .  it took me awhile but I found a way to justify it, which I seem to be very good at doing . . lol.

[EricJ]

On 11/14/2025 at 6:42 PM, cliffy said:

With Starlink in the microwave spectrum is there any concern with being near it when it transmits (unshielded) ?

I'm just thinking about the fact that it is not just a passive receive only antenna system but that it

actually transmits (at whatever power it uses) just like a microwave oven but the the ovens have screen

guards to prevent the escape of the microwave energy from hitting humans?  Long term affects? Young children?

Any thoughts or empirical data on the subject anywhere? I can't find any yet.  

Starlink user terminals use uplink frequencies around 14.0-14.5 GHz.   Since a mini terminal max power consumption is around 60W, the average transmit power should be something significantly less than that.  Unless it's pointed right at you or it's steering a beam right at you for some reason (e.g., you're standing between it and whatever satellite it is trying to talk to), you'll be getting a small fraction of the transmit power.    Above 10 GHz not much electromagnetic energy penetrates the skin, so unless your skin is getting warm you're likely fine.

For comparison, a home microwave transmits somewhere around 800-1500 Watts at 2.4 GHz (the same frequency as 2.4GHz WiFi), and they often leak around the door gasket.   Electromagnetic energy at 2.4 GHz penetrates the skin and can reach internal organs.   If you're okay standing near your home microwave when it's running, a mini terminal may not be any worse than that.

Industrial microwave ovens sometimes use much higher power in the 902-928 MHz ISM band, which penetrates tissue even more easily than 2.4 GHz.

It is a legitimate concern to worry about long-term exposure to high-energy electromagnetic waves, but for the most part people would be falling over pretty frequently if it were a high-risk sort of thing.  It is definitely not a good idea to walk in front of a high-power, high-gain microwave antenna while it is transmitting, but generally that's nearly impossible to do, anyway.    Remember that microwave ovens were invented when somebody walked in front of a high-power, high-gain transmitter (actually a magnetron, but the idea is the same) and the candy bar in their pocket melted.   This is hailed as the glorious Aha!  moment that led to microwave cooking, and nobody talks about any negative effects to the guy (Percy Spencer at Raytheon) who was wearing the pocket, because it is likely that there weren't any despite the melting candy bar.

[Shadrach]

14 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

“I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things. ”

― Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

One of the best parts of flying for me is being unconnected.  Same with SCUBA diving.  The price is right and it’s really neat technology, but what am I missing here?  Assuming one’s aircraft is already fully participating in ADS-B, what is the use case for Starlink in Mooney cabins?   Is it just so the wife and kids can doom scroll social media in flight or are you guys using these things operationally in any way?  Personally, I’m very happy to wait to respond to texts, emails, and voicemails after I land.  

I’m not trying to be snarky here, or judgmental.  I’d love to have a reason to buy one of these things, but with good cell phone and Wi-Fi coverage practically everywhere I go, including OCONUS, I just don’t see a need for me personally.  The Mooney would be my only use case, but I just don’t see a need there either.  Maybe I just don’t know what I don’t know.  

I agree with your sentiment. However, 90% of my flying is for business. Being fully connected has been a game changer on days when I am airborne for 6hrs.

[cliffy]

14 hours ago, Shadrach said:

“I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things. ”

Yes that is why I got into flying- to be above the maddening crowd.

It releases me from the chaotic world on the ground. IT is the destination and my corner of solace.

OK I'm old school, the cockpit stays flight centric and not diversionary from the basic premise of flying

Even to listening to music - diverting my attention from the task at hand  --  flying.

Absorption of the sounds around you is one of the basic senses one uses to stay ahead of any trouble in flight

Why take the chance by masking that primary sensory tool with music in your ears? 

I just can't make that leap.

Too many years paying attention to the job of flying and staying safe    There is enough going on even in those 

long overwater cross countries to stay occupied keeping things in order in the cockpit for me.

@EricJ     Nice explanation of the operating forces I wonder about front to back ratios on the antenna (with my limited

knowledge of RF transmission)   

Likewise, the airplane was certified to meet a certain outward visibility scan and anything

blocking the window defeats that criteria. Even in Class A airspace  "see and avoid" is still the norm.

I think we will see more on this subject in the months to come as the use becomes more noticeable. 

My guess is the FAA will come out with a notice and then enforcement actions.   

Some studies have shown that 50% of the population are addicted to their screens. 

No studies have been done though on the electromagnetic interference to our aircraft electronics -- in all inflight aspects.

Just look to all the frequency checks we have to do when certain APPROVED radio systems are installed in our airplanes.

Its easy to say it doesn't happen but I lost all nav in a 727 once due to a cell phone user.

Checking for primary and harmonic frequency interference needs to be done especially in the microwave spectrum

I would think someone could make some money with a roof mounted aerodynamic antenna shell to utilize the small Starlink antenna

Shouldn't be too much trouble to get an STC for that but with proper freq interference checks for non-pressurized airplanes.

Although it seems nice right now at the onset of a new day, the jury is still out on the legality and performance of the system. 

 

[Jim Peace]

Blocking the window is such a great idea....awesome brainpower there.....

[MikeOH]

My opinions on the three 'concerns':

1) SAFETY (from radiation):  If you use a cell phone pressed against the side of your head, Starlink is NOT what you should worry about!

2) LEGALITY: If you block a window that interferes with your ability to see traffic...that's pretty STUPID, regardless of legality. I don't see an issue with top of the glareshield, however.

3) PERFORMANCE: Just based on this thread, it seems Starlink is pretty great.  And, in AMUs, it is nearly a negligible monetary risk.

Bottom line: I see a Starlink in my future purchases.

[Hank]

4 hours ago, Jim Peace said:

Blocking the window is such a great idea....awesome brainpower there.....

Do you often look out the side window behind your seat?

I find myself looking out the front side window when looking to the rear, but I do sometimes look out the right rear window (but not often).

I don't feel the need for in-flight internet service, so no dog in this fight. But . . .

[Jim Peace]

On 11/24/2025 at 3:00 PM, Hank said:

Do you often look out the side window behind your seat?

I was commenting on that picture posted above....it's appears to be a front window.....

[Yetti]

cellular telephone operate in the 800-900Mhz band.  The original development engineers went blind due to exposure.      

[cliffy]

What is the transmit power of a cell phone in MWs and what is the transmit power of a mini starlink?

Just did some looking-

Hand held cell phone radiates about 1 watt  but the Starlink mini consumes 40-60 watts  (5 amps @  12 volts) That's consumption not radiated output power but they don't measure radiated power the same way as a cell phone BUT a cell phone doesn't "consume" 40 watts of power either. 

Anyway you look at it Starlink has a much higher RF output than any cell phone (due to antenna distances needed)

And there's been no frequency interference testing with our microwave radio units  

Also Starlink does not publish the front to back ration of its antennas

[EricJ]

18 hours ago, Yetti said:

cellular telephone operate in the 800-900Mhz band.  The original development engineers went blind due to exposure.      

Cellular systems are all over the spectrum map these days.    They've been sucking up available spectrum in many different bands for quite a while.   I lost track of all of them a long time ago.