LEO vs GEO Satcom: What’s Better for Your Aircraft Fleet?

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest
Global,Network,Connection,Covering,The,Earth,With,Lines,Of,Innovative
SKYTRAC-White-Paper-Feature-Image

Organization: SKYTRAC
Industry: Satellite Communications 
Web URL: SKYTRAC.ca

Download the white paper

Background

As satellite networks continue to evolve to deliver higher bandwidth and throughputs, operators must consider the best options for their aircraft fleet. When deciding between Geosynchronous Equatorial Orbit (GEO) satellite networks and Lower Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite networks, here are some factors for operators to consider: 

  • Do you need access to real-time connectivity?
  • Do you require connectivity in Northern and Southern regions?
  • Do you require connectivity in severe weather events such as heavy wildfire smoke or natural catastrophes?
  • Do you need to be aware of Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) considerations?
 
SpaceX’s Starlink, Amazon’s Kuiper, and Iridium’s NEXT constellations are all recently launched LEO networks poised to provide powerful, low latency connectivity to millions of consumers and organizations around the world. 
 
While GEO satellites have higher latency and require more power and bigger antennas, they provide higher bandwidth for business and passenger jets with many simultaneous users. GEO satellite systems are heavier and costlier to operate, so balancing necessity with operational efficiencies is a key activity when selecting Satcom networks. The right network will depend on the requirements of the aircraft and what missions are being served. This whitepaper will provide an overview of both options to enable the right decision.

Download the White Paper

This whitepaper will provide an overview of the benefits and constraints of GEO and LEO satellite networks and Satcom devices to enable you to make the right decision.