News
SpaceX Starlink Gen2 constellation weakened by “partial” FCC grant
More than two and a half years after SpaceX began the process of securing regulatory approval for its next-generation Starlink constellation, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has finally granted the company a license – but only after drastically decreasing its scope.
In May 2020, SpaceX filed its first FCC license application for Starlink Gen2, an upgraded constellation of 30,000 satellites. In the second half of 2021, SpaceX amended its Starlink Gen2 application to take full advantage of the company’s more powerful Starship rocket and further improve the constellation’s potential utility. Only in December 2021 did the FCC finally accept SpaceX’s Gen2 application for filing, kicking off the final review process.
On November 29th, 2022, the FCC completed that review and granted SpaceX permission to launch just 7,500 of the ~30,000 Starlink Gen2 satellites it had requested permission for more than 30 months prior. The FCC offered no explanation of how it arrived at its arbitrary 75% reduction, nor why the resulting number is slightly lower than a different 7,518-satellite Starlink Gen1 constellation SpaceX had already received a license to deploy in late 2018. Adding insult to injury, the FCC repeatedly acknowledges that “the total number of satellites SpaceX is authorized to deploy is not increased by our action today, and in fact is slightly reduced.”
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
That claimed reduction is thanks to the fact that shortly before this decision, SpaceX told the FCC in good faith that it would voluntarily avoid launching the dedicated V-band Starlink constellation it already received a license for in order “to significantly reduce the total number of satellites ultimately on orbit.” Instead, once Starlink Gen2 was approved, it would request permission to add V-band payloads to a subset of the 29,988 planned Gen2 satellites, achieving a similar result without the need for another 7,518 satellites.
In response, the FCC slashed the total number of Starlink Gen2 satellites permitted to less than the number of satellites approved by the FCC’s November 2018 Starlink V-band authorization; limited those satellites to middle-ground orbits, entirely precluding Gen2 launches to higher or lower orbits; and didn’t even structure its compromise in a way that would at least allow SpaceX to fully complete three Starlink Gen2 ‘shells.’ Worse, the FCC’s partial grant barely mentioned SpaceX’s detailed plans to use new E-band antennas on Starlink Gen2 satellites and next-generation ground stations, simply stating that it will “defer acting on” the request until “further review and coordination with Federal users.”

Throughout the partial grant, the FCC couches its decision to drastically downscale SpaceX’s Starlink Gen2 constellation in terms of needing more time “to evaluate the complex and novel issues on the record before [the Commission],” raising the question of what exactly the Commission was doing instead in the 30 months since SpaceX’s first Gen2 application and 15 months since its Gen2 modification. In comparison, SpaceX received a full license for its 7,518-satellite V-band constellation less than five months after applying. SpaceX’s 4,408-satellite Starlink Gen1 constellation – the first megaconstellation ever reviewed by the modern FCC – was licensed 16 months after its first application and eight months after a modified application was submitted.
Adding to the oddity of the unusual and inconsistent decision-making in this FCC ruling, the Commission openly acknowledges that the idea to grant SpaceX permission to launch a fraction of its Starlink Gen2 constellation came from Amazon’s Project Kuiper [PDF], a major prospective Starlink competitor. The FCC says it agreed with Amazon’s argument, stating that “the public interest would be served by taking this approach in order to permit monitoring of developments involving this large-scale deployment and permit additional consideration of issues unique to the other orbits SpaceX requests.”
The V-band Starlink constellation already approved by the FCC was for 7,518 satellites in very low Earth orbits (~340 km). In the first 4,425-satellite Starlink constellation licensed by the FCC, the Commission gave SpaceX permission to operate 2,814 satellites at orbits between 1100 and 1300 kilometers. Increasingly conscious of the consequences of space debris, which would last hundreds of years at 1000+ kilometers, SpaceX later requested permission in 2019 and 2020 to launch those 2,814 satellites to around 550 kilometers, where failed satellites would reenter in just five years. For unknown reasons, the FCC only fully approved the change two years later, in April 2021.
The “other orbits [requested by SpaceX]” that the FCC says create unique issues that demand “additional consideration” of Starlink Gen2 are for 19,400 satellites between 340 and 360 kilometers and 468 satellites between 604 and 614 kilometers. Starlink satellites are expected to be around four times heavier and feature a magnitude more surface area, but the fact remains that the FCC has already granted SpaceX permission to launch almost 3000 smaller satellites to orbits much higher than 604 kilometers and more than 7500 satellites to orbits lower than 360 kilometers. It’s thus hard not to conclude that the Commission’s claims that a partial license denial was warranted by “concerns about orbital debris and space safety,” and “issues unique to…other orbits” are incoherent at best.
Perhaps the strangest inclusion in the partial grant is a decision by the FCC to subject SpaceX to an arbitrary metric devised by another third-party, for-profit company LeoLabs. In a March 2022 letter, LeoLabs reportedly proposed that “SpaceX’s authorization to continue deploying satellites” be directly linked to an arbitrary metric measuring “the number of years each failed satellite remains in orbit, summed across all failed satellites.” The FCC apparently loved the suggestion and made it an explicit condition of its already harsh Starlink Gen2 authorization, even adopting the arbitrary limit of “100 object years” proposed by LeoLabs.
In other words, once the sum of the time required for all failed Starlink Gen2 satellites to naturally deorbit reaches 100 years, the FCC will force SpaceX to “cease satellite deployment” while it “[reviews] sources of satellite failure” and “determine[s] whether there are any adequate and reliable mitigation measures going forward.” The FCC acknowledges that the arbitrary 100-year limit means that the failure of just 20 Starlink satellites at operational orbits would force the company to halt launches. The Commission does not explain how it will decide when SpaceX can restart Starlink launches after a launch halt. SpaceX must simultaneously follow the FCC’s deployment schedule, which could see the company’s license revoked if it doesn’t deploy 3,750 Starlink Gen2 satellites by November 2028 and all 7,500 satellites by November 2031.
Based on the unofficial observations of astrophysicist Jonathan McDowell, SpaceX currently has more 30 failed Starlink Gen1 satellites at or close to their operational altitudes of 500+ kilometers, meaning that SpaceX would almost certainly be forced to stop launching Gen1 satellites if this arbitrary new rule were applied to other constellations. The same is true for competitor OneWeb, which had a single satellite fail at around 1200 kilometers in 2021. At that altitude, it will likely take hundreds of “object years” to naturally deorbit, easily surpassing LeoLabs’ draconian 100-year limit.
In theory, the FCC does make it clear that it will consider changing those restrictions and allowing SpaceX to launch more of its proposed Starlink Gen2 constellation in the future. But the Commission has also repeatedly demonstrated to SpaceX that it will happily take years to modify existing licenses or approve new ones – not a particularly reassuring foundation for investments as large and precarious as megaconstellations.
Ultimately, short of shady handshake deals in back rooms, the FCC’s partial grant leaves SpaceX’s Starlink Gen2 constellation in an undesirable position. For the company to proceed under the current license, it could be forced to redesign its satellites and ground stations to avoid the E-band, or gamble by continuing to build and deploy satellites and ground stations with E-band antennas without a guarantee that it’ll ever be able to use that hardware. There is also no guarantee that the FCC will permit SpaceX to launch any of the ~22,500 satellites left on the table by the partial grant, which will drastically change the financial calculus that determines whether the constellation is economically viable and how expansive associated infrastructure needs to be.
Additionally, if SpaceX accepts the gambit and launches all 7,500 approved Gen2 satellites only for the FCC to fail to approve expansions, Starlink Gen2 would be stuck with zero polar coverage, significantly reducing the constellation’s overall utility. Starlink Gen2 likely represents an investment of at least $30-60 billion (assuming an unprecedentedly low $1-2M to build and launch each 50-150 Gbps satellite). With its partial license denial and the addition of several new and arbitrary conditions, the FCC is effectively forcing SpaceX to take an even riskier gamble with the billions of dollars of brand new infrastructure it will need to build to manufacture, launch, operate, and utilize its Starlink Gen2 constellation.
News
Tesla snags Lamborghini alum to help in newly entered market
Tesla has snagged a Lamborghini alum to help with its entrance into a new market, which has proven to be an intricate situation for the automaker.
A report from Bloomberg states that Tesla has hired Sharad Agarwal, who was formerly employed by the Italian luxury carmaker, to run its operations in India. With Lamborghini, he was employed to handle operations in India.
Tesla launches in India with Model Y, showing pricing will be biggest challenge
Tesla has gone through quite a few different team members with its launch in India, starting with a few hirings a few years ago, well before the company actually committed to selling cars in the country.
The move helps Tesla streamline its executive decision-making process, as it previously had employees in India reach out to managers based in China, among other areas. Agarwal will be stationed in India and will handle the company’s operations.
Tesla’s mentality behind the strategy is to have local leadership, something that seems to cater to the market specifically.
Tesla had previously put Isabel Fan, the manager of Southeast Asia for the company, in the position. However, Tesla seemed to want someone who was more permanent and would be dedicated to India exclusively.
India has the largest population on Earth and has a massive automotive market for that reason. Tesla stands to gain a lot from a strong performance in India, and its clean energy vehicles could help with pollution of all kinds in the region.
Tesla’s path to entrance in the Indian market was a long one, as the company tried for nearly ten years to get into the elusive region. Back in 2016, CEO Elon Musk said Tesla “would love to be in India,” teasing the Model 3.
By 2017, Tesla had met with officials from the country, but tried to get import duties down to nothing from 100 percent.
Indian authorities denied Tesla’s request.
For years, Musk met with Prime Minister Narendra Modi to try and iron out a deal of some sort. Nothing truly came to fruition, at least until last year, when real movement started.
By 2024, India had introduced a strategy to reduce import duties for some companies, which was enough for Tesla to make a move. It is now 2025, and the company still has not committed to building a factory in the region. However, it is not completely out of the question.
News
Tesla Sentry Mode helps lock up drive-by shooting suspect in Seattle
“A nearby Tesla actually captured the video that showed a man crouched behind a vehicle firing gunshots. A lot of vehicles record, and officers know that Teslas, especially, record, so we use that video all the time in these instances.”
Police in Seattle, Washington, are crediting Tesla’s well-known Sentry Mode for helping find a suspect in a drive-by shooting case.
A 21-year-old was arrested for an alleged drive-by shooting in the Pioneer Square neighborhood of Seattle this past Sunday, and the leads on the case seemed to be slim.
However, a Tesla parked nearby was able to record the shooting, as well as the car that the suspect hopped in after the crime occurred. It helped police identify the person they were looking for.
Seattle Police Department Detective Brian Pritchard said to MyNorthwest that the Tesla was a critical part of finding the suspect and placing him under arrest:
“A nearby Tesla actually captured the video that showed a man crouched behind a vehicle firing gunshots. A lot of vehicles record, and officers know that Teslas, especially, record, so we use that video all the time in these instances.”
The Tesla footage helped the Police put the suspect into handcuffs about an hour after the crime was committed. They are currently charged with drive-by shooting and unlawful possession of a firearm.
Tesla Sentry Mode is a security feature the vehicle utilizes to help solve crimes like vandalism, but it is also a cool feature that has caught things like accidents and other incidents on camera.
Many people still do not know about it, including the many vandals who keyed or broke the windows of Teslas earlier this year, as people damaged others’ cars in an act of retaliation against CEO Elon Musk when he became involved in politics.
This is far from the first time Sentry Mode has helped Police Departments solve crimes. Last September, we reported on Oakland’s Police Department in California using Teslas near crime scenes to help solve cases.
Tesla Sentry Mode is Oakland PD’s secret weapon against rising crime
Sergeant Ben Therriault, president of the Richmond Police Officers Association, said, “We have all these mobile video devices floating around,” in reference to the Teslas that sit and capture nearly everything that surrounds them.
Sentry Mode has helped officers arrest a variety of suspects, including several people who were allegedly involved in the murder of a 27-year-old woman in Northern California.
Elon Musk
UPDATE: Tesla investors push Charles Schwab for Musk comp plan clarification
Update: 4:00 p.m. EDT – Charles Schwab has reached out to TESLARATI with the following statement, clarifying that it plans to vote FOR Musk’s compensation package:
“Schwab Asset Management’s approach to voting on proxy matters is thorough and deliberate. We utilize a structured process that focuses on protecting and promoting shareholder value. We apply our own internal guidelines and do not rely on recommendations from Glass Lewis or ISS. In accordance with this process, Schwab Asset Management intends to vote in favor of the 2025 CEO performance award proposal. We firmly believe that supporting this proposal aligns both management and shareholder interests, ensuring the best outcome for all parties involved.”
There have also been updates to the headline and various paragraphs to reflect this as well as accuracy.
Tesla investors are pushing Charles Schwab for clarification after it was expected to vote against CEO Elon Musk’s pay package.
Several high-profile Tesla influencers are speaking out against Charles Schwab, saying its decision to vote against the plan that would retain Musk as CEO and give him potentially more voting power if he can achieve the tranches set by the company’s Board of Directors.
The Tesla community appeared to see that Schwab is one firm that tends to vote against Musk’s compensation plans, as they also voted against the CEO’s 2018 pay package, which was passed by shareholders but then denied by a Delaware Chancery Court.
Schwab’s move was recognized by investors within the Tesla community and now they are speaking out about it:
Hey @CharlesSchwab – I need to speak with someone from Schwab Private Wealth Services this week. Please reach out via email, the mobile app message center, phone, or X DM.
Here’s why this is urgent: At least 6 of your ETF funds (around 7 million $TSLA shares) voted against… https://t.co/uSgPWnfTFc— Jason DeBolt ⚡️ (@jasondebolt) November 3, 2025
If @CharlesSchwab doesn’t vote for Elon Musk’s 2025 CEO Performance Award plan, I’ll move all my assets to another brokerage. My followers, many of whom also hold assets with Schwab and collectively own at least hundreds of millions in $TSLA, may do the same.
I can’t in good… https://t.co/6iUU6PdzYx— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) November 3, 2025
ready to help with the @CharlesSchwab exodus
— Gali (@Gfilche) November 3, 2025
At least six of Charles Schwab’s ETFs were expected to vote against Tesla’s Board recommendation to support the compensation plan for Musk. The six ETFs represent around 7 million Tesla $TSLA shares.
Jason DeBolt, an all-in Tesla shareholder, summarized the firm’s decision really well:
“As a custodian of ETF shares, your fiduciary duty is to vote in shareholders’ best interests. For a board that has delivered extraordinary returns, voting against their recommendations doesn’t align with retail investors, Tesla employees, or the leadership we invested to support. If Schwab’s proxy voting policies don’t reflect shareholder interests, my followers and I will move our collective tens of millions in $TSLA shares (or possibly hundreds of millions) to a broker that does, via account transfer as soon as this week.”
Tesla shareholders will vote on Musk’s pay package on Thursday at the Annual Shareholders Meeting in Austin, Texas.
It seems more likely than not that it will pass, but investors have made it clear they want a decisive victory, as it could clear the path for any issues with shareholder lawsuits in the future, as it did with Musk’s past pay package.
-
News2 weeks agoTesla rolled out a new feature with FSD v14 to fix a major complaint
-
News2 weeks agoTesla just made Service even easier and more convenient
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Full Self-Driving’s new version officially gets a wider rollout
-
News2 weeks agoTesla makes crazy move to spur short-term demand in the U.S.
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Sweden faced with fresh strike from elevator company
-
News2 weeks agoKia and Tesla top list in Swedish study of strongest EV batteries
-
News2 weeks agoTesla is looking to conduct FSD tests in new Swedish city: report
-
Investor's Corner2 weeks agoTesla analyst says this common earnings narrative is losing importance

