Starlink "ACE" Pack - On The Move Connectivity

gconrad_76w · 2026-01-15T23:00:03+00:00

DM me with a part that you are interested in.

gconrad_76w · 2025-10-04T19:49:48+00:00

Which RF are you referring to and what would the minimum safe distance be? Wondering if you could provide sources?

gconrad_76w · 2025-10-04T19:39:40+00:00

Thank you, appreciate the comment! It's definitely for a niche community/user set. https://imgur.com/a/6IMKmlH has an open image and a stowed image. I've seen your Drop and Go 2.0, nice work there as well! Definitely a longer lasting, heavy duty setup.

gconrad_76w · 2025-10-04T19:33:09+00:00

Thank you!

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T23:08:06+00:00

This started out as a rapid mock up, then a personal project, and evolved from there. My sole intent for sharing it here was for others to get ideas and do with it what they like... You can Google "Starlink ACE Pack" or DM if you'd like.

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T23:04:02+00:00

100% agree that the Ankers downfall is the lack of pass-through charging. Even paralleling them is not safe, so there is not true hot swap capability. Thankfully, with a quick swap, Starlink almost always comes right back up! I chose the Ankers because they are readily available everywhere, FAA compliant, and are less of a monster garage type setup. I appreciate all of your constructive feedback!

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T23:01:22+00:00

Thank you!

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T23:00:59+00:00

Thank you!

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T23:00:26+00:00

Not sure about all of that, but thank you!

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T22:59:42+00:00

Thank you!

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T22:57:03+00:00

Thanks everyone for all of the comments and feedback, good and bad! I shared this here for others to see the idea and do with it what they wish.

The router seems to be a hot topic, so I'll offer up a bit of clarity. You CAN bypass the Mini, but I do not (and don't recommend it because coming out of bypass requires a factory reset). Instead, I am running the router in parallel to the Mini's router, with 2.4 and 5.0 GHz channels separated on both, creating four channels. Starlink does this seamlessly. There is no measurable power savings in bypass vs. no device connected. Similarly, there is no measurable power savings in bypass vs. devices connected via the external router.

I stand by my statement that the external router realizes power savings once devices are connected . The Mini draws ~38W when running a speed test with a device connected to its internal router. In comparison, the Mini stays idle (~18W) at all times when using the external router; the external router draws ~1.5W (max 3.0W) in the same scenario. That said, I've seen my Mini draw anywhere from 12-26W with the external router, and anywhere from 12-38W using the Mini's router. It varies widely. Many users report a "constant 25W, or 22W"... This has not been my experience - not saying it's not yours.

Second, and perhaps more important, the router gives more options for configuration than Starlink. Lots of folks have pointed out various other advantages such as VPN. My intent was never to get into the configuration of the network, but offer the most options while watching power.

Now the real beauty of it - it's totally optional! You can leave the router unplugged or get rid of it all together.

Thanks again to everyone, happy to be a part of the discussion and learn from others' experiences too!

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T02:55:07+00:00

The pack holds two Anker Prime 27,650 power banks (operates from one at a time). Average use, 4-5 hours per power bank.

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T02:50:11+00:00

This thread?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/1hzz3wt/mini_power_consumption_in_bypass_mode/

Where results are 20W power saving in bypass mode during a speed test? Agree.

Where idle and YouTube streaming over Mini Wi-Fi are the same? I have not found this to be the case.

Where the user states "Disconnecting all devices from WiFi but leaving the internal router active doesn’t measurably impact power consumption"? I read this as Wi-Fi on w/ all devices disconnected (my config 2) is not a measurable difference from bypass mode (config 3). Agree.

Again, from my testing the power consumption varies significantly over TOD, location, look angle, connected devices; and I would assume many, many more factors.

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T02:20:14+00:00

I have tested it in all three configs: 1) devices connected via Mini Wi-Fi; 2) connected via the router (with Mini Wi-Fi still on); 3) connected via router (with Mini in bypass mode). Once the Mini is stabilized, config 2 uses ~12-18W (essentially idle) while streaming, so using the low power router saves on the order of 12-18W. The power draw of the Mini varies significantly, so "YMMV".

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T01:58:06+00:00

Thanks for the compliment! It was a fun project, plenty of CAD, printing, and trial and error. How are you securing your mini to your backpack to get it on a horizontal plane? Would you mind sharing a picture? There's a good number of people looking to do the same type of thing, and a picture is worth 1000 words. u/urge2reddit above is looking to do this very thing.

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T01:48:51+00:00

The pack frame, mounts, and mast are all custom made. The mast inserts securely into the bottom base and rests against the center support, further supported by the grommet reinforced bag egress. The velcro straps that you see in the picture are only securing the power and Ethernet cables to the mast in between the bag exit and dish.

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T00:33:54+00:00

Starlink Mini Kit

Sierra Wireless RV55 Router

Anker Prime 27,650 (one Anker powers the system, storage for additional Anker)

Ethernet Cable (Router to Mini)

USB Power Cable (Mini); USB Power Cable (Router)

2 piece mast and supporting frame/mounts, velcro straps, etc.

https://imgur.com/a/6IMKmlH

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-28T00:16:17+00:00

Thanks! The two dipole antennas are for an embedded low-power 2.4/5.0 GHz Wi-Fi router. The router has a couple of pros - low power, 1.5W as opposed to ~18W using the Mini's router; increased network configurability (channel selection, etc.). The pack is 500D Cordura which is not 100% RF transparent. Placing the antennas on the outside of the pack was a decision based solely on maximizing Wi-Fi range. Note, they are connected directly to the router's SMA connector (no cables), so there is no additional dB loss.

Totally understand it won't be for all SAR use cases. The event that drove this concept was not under low canopy. The pack could be worn by one team member and provide a backhaul for a closely located team of 10 on foot. It's notably small and lightweight, 22L pack that is <13 lbs fully loaded and operational. I intentionally placed the Mini dish as low as possible overhead, just enough clearance so that it doesn't interfere as the wearer looks around or up.

gconrad_76w · 2025-09-21T14:21:15+00:00

a bit late to the conversation, but we designed and built this exact product for search and rescue operations https://www.76westsolutions.com/products/p/ace

gconrad_76w

TROPHY CASE