Connect with us
starlink-1-4-billion-revenue-spacex starlink-1-4-billion-revenue-spacex

News

SpaceX Starlink Gen2 constellation weakened by “partial” FCC grant

Published

on

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.”

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.

Advertisement

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.”

The FCC’s “partial grant” only allows SpaceX to launch 7,500 of 10,080 Starlink Gen2 satellites meant to operate at altitudes between 525 and 535 kilometers.

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.

Advertisement
SpaceX has already built a significant number of Starlink Gen2 prototypes.

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.

Advertisement

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.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Supercharger for Business exposes jaw-dropping ROI gap between best and worst locations

Tesla’s new Supercharger for Business calculator reveals an eye-opening all-in cost and location-based ROI projections.

Published

on

By

tesla v4 supercharger

Tesla has launched an online calculator for its Supercharger for Business program, giving property owners their first transparent look at what it really costs to install Superchargers on site and what kind of return they can expect.

The program itself launched in September 2025, allowing businesses to purchase and operate Supercharger hardware on their own property while Tesla handles installation, maintenance, software, and 24/7 driver support. As Teslarati reported at launch, hosts also get their logo placed on the chargers and their location integrated into Tesla’s in-car navigation, meaning drivers are actively routed there. The stalls are open to all EVs, not just Teslas.


The new online calculator, announced by Tesla on Wednesday with the note that “simplicity and transparency” have been a problem in the industry, lets any business enter a U.S. address and get a real cost and revenue model. A standard 8-stall V4 Supercharger site runs approximately $500,000 in hardware and $55,000 per post for installation, bringing an all-in price just shy of $1 million. Tesla charges a flat $0.10 per kWh fee to cover software, billing, and network operations. Businesses set their own retail price and keep the margin above that fee.

Tesla expands its branded ‘For Business’ Superchargers

 

Taking a look at Tesla’s Supercharger for Business online calculator, we can see that ROI is not uniform, and the gap between a strong location and a poor one can stretch the breakeven point by several years.

The biggest driver is foot traffic and how long people stay. A busy rest station, hotel, or outlet mall brings in repeat visitors who need to charge while they’re already stopped, pushing utilization numbers higher and shortening payback time.

Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator

Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator

Local electricity rates matter just as much on the cost side. Markets like California carry some of the highest commercial electricity rates in the country, which eats into the margin between what a host pays per kWh and what they charge drivers. At the same time, dense urban areas with high EV adoption tend to support higher retail charging prices, which can offset that cost if demand is strong enough. Weather also plays a role. Cold climates reduce battery efficiency and increase charging frequency, but they can also suppress utilization in winter months if drivers avoid stopping in exposed outdoor locations. Suburban and rural sites face a different problem: lower baseline EV traffic, which means a site with cheaper power and lower operating costs can still take longer to pay back simply because the stalls sit idle more often. Tesla’s calculator uses real fleet data to pre-fill utilization estimates by ZIP code, so businesses can run their specific address against these variables rather than relying on averages.

The program has seen real adoption. Wawa, already the largest host of Tesla Superchargers with over 2,100 stalls across 223 locations, opened its first fully owned and branded site in Alachua, Florida earlier this year. Francis Energy of Oklahoma and the city of Alpharetta, Georgia have also deployed branded stations through the program, as Teslarati covered in January.

Tesla now exceeds 80,000 Supercharger stalls worldwide, and the calculator makes the economic case for accelerating that number through private investment rather than company-owned sites alone.

Continue Reading

News

Elon Musk drops a bomb regarding Tesla Model S, X inventory

After more than a decade on the road, the original flagship sedan and SUV platforms are effectively at the end of the line. Production of new Model S and Model X vehicles has ceased, and custom orders were quietly halted in early April. What remains are roughly a few hundred factory inventory units scattered across the globe, mostly Plaid variants, and they are disappearing fast.

Published

on

lon Musk at the Tesla Model S production launch at the Fremont factory, June 2012. Photo shared by Musk on X, March 2026.
lon Musk at the Tesla Model S production launch at the Fremont factory, June 2012. Photo shared by Musk on X, March 2026.

Elon Musk just dropped a bomb regarding Tesla Model S and X inventory, and as the company is phasing out the flagship vehicles, it sounds like the time to purchase one brand new is almost over.

Musk confirmed on Wednesday that there are “only a few hundred Tesla Model S & X cars left in inventory. Order now if you want one.”

Tesla is running out of units rather quickly.

The message from Musk reads like a final call for two of the company’s most storied vehicles.

After more than a decade on the road, the original flagship sedan and SUV platforms are effectively at the end of the line. Production of new Model S and Model X vehicles has ceased, and custom orders were quietly halted in early April. What remains are roughly a few hundred factory inventory units scattered across the globe, mostly Plaid variants, and they are disappearing fast.

The news marks the close of a remarkable 14-year chapter. Launched in 2012, the Model S redefined the electric vehicle with blistering acceleration, over-the-air updates, and a luxury interior that embarrassed traditional sedans.

The Model X followed in 2015, turning heads with its Falcon-wing doors and seating for seven.

Together, the Model S and Model X proved EVs could be desirable halo cars, not just eco-friendly commuters. Their departure clears factory space at Tesla’s Fremont plant for something the mass production of the Optimus humanoid robot, which Musk believes will be the greatest contributor to the company’s value.

Musk has repeatedly signaled that Tesla’s future lies beyond passenger cars. Resources once devoted to low-volume flagships are shifting toward autonomy, Robotaxis, and AI hardware. Optimus, the company’s general-purpose robot, is expected to handle manufacturing, household chores, and eventually complex labor.

In the short term, the scarcity has already driven prices on remaining inventory up by about $15,000, turning the last Model S and X into instant collector’s items.

Tesla uses Model S and X ‘sentimental’ value to enforce massive pricing move

 

The announcement underscores Tesla’s relentless pivot. While the Model Y continues to hold strong sales, the legacy S and X represented an earlier era of pure performance luxury.

The future has been paved by Tesla and Musk’s focus on autonomy, at least in the United States. Customers continue to call for a large SUV, which might be on the way after a recent nudge from Musk on X. 

However, whatever the future holds, it has been forged by Tesla’s two flagship vehicles.

Once these final cars are gone, the Model S and Model X will live on only in driveways, forums, and the rear-view mirror of automotive history.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab production ignites with 60 units spotted at Giga Texas

Designed exclusively for unsupervised Full Self-Driving, the Cybercab promises to deliver safe, affordable, on-demand mobility without human drivers. Early units with temporary controls allow engineers to refine hardware and software in controlled settings before full autonomous fleets hit the roads.

Published

on

Credit: Joe Tegtmeyer

Tesla Cybercab production at Giga Texas seems to have ignited, as 60 units were spotted outside of the production facility on Wednesday, with speculation hinting the all-electric ride-hailing vehicle could be headed to the lineup sooner rather than later.

Interestingly, they were also spotted with steering wheels, which Tesla said the car would be void of.

Giga Texas observer and drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer shared on X a new post that revealed approximately 60 Cybercabs parked in two organized groups in the factory’s outbound lot—the largest concentration observed to date.

Tegtmeyer noted white seats inside several vehicles and clearly visible steering wheels on most. These are not yet the final steering-wheel-free production versions unveiled in 2024, but early units are likely undergoing validation testing for new features and real-world robotaxi operations across the country.

The timing could not be more symbolic. Tesla has consistently affirmed that mass manufacturing of the Cybercab would begin this month.

CEO Elon Musk has reiterated the April 2026 target multiple times, emphasizing that while initial output will be slow, following the classic S-curve of new-vehicle ramps, the Giga Texas line is being prepared to produce hundreds of units per week.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlines expectations for Cybercab production

The first Cybercab already rolled off the line in February, but April marks the official shift to volume production of this purpose-built, pedal- and steering-wheel-free autonomous vehicle.

These 60 Cybercabs signal far more than parked prototypes. They represent tangible proof that Tesla is executing on its ambitious robotaxi roadmap.

Designed exclusively for unsupervised Full Self-Driving, the Cybercab promises to deliver safe, affordable, on-demand mobility without human drivers. Early units with temporary controls allow engineers to refine hardware and software in controlled settings before full autonomous fleets hit the roads.

As production scales, Giga Texas, already home to Cybertruck production, will become the epicenter of Tesla’s autonomous revolution, targeting millions of vehicles annually in the years ahead.

For Tesla and its investors, this sighting underscores manufacturing excellence and timeline discipline. It counters skepticism about the company’s ability to deliver on next-generation vehicles amid a competitive autonomous landscape.

Broader implications are profound: lower transportation costs, reduced emissions, and safer roads as robotaxis proliferate. Musk’s vision of a future where Cybercabs operate 24/7, generating revenue for owners and riders alike, is now visibly underway.

With mass production officially ramping in April, today’s images are not just a snapshot of parked vehicles; they are the first frames of a mobility transformation. Tesla is not only meeting its commitments; it is accelerating toward an era where autonomy reshapes daily life. The Cybercab era has begun.

Continue Reading