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

News

Tesla Cabin Camera gets an incredible new feature for added driver safety

The company quietly expanded the capabilities of its in-cabin camera with the rollout of Software Update 2026.8.6. Tesla hacker greentheonly revealed that coding for the software version provides details on now tracking the age of the driver.

Published

on

tesla cabin facing camera
Tesla's Cabin-facing camera is used to monitor driver attentiveness. (Credit: Andy Slye/YouTube)

Tesla’s interior Cabin-facing Camera just got a brand new feature that is an incredible addition, as it provides yet another layer of added safety.

The company quietly expanded the capabilities of its in-cabin camera with the rollout of Software Update 2026.8.6. Tesla hacker greentheonly revealed that coding for the software version provides details on now tracking the age of the driver.

The camera, which is positioned just above the rearview mirror, is now performing facial analysis to estimate the driver’s age. While not yet user-facing, the feature is the latest example of Tesla’s ongoing push to refine its driver monitoring system for both everyday safety and future Robotaxi operations.

The cabin camera already processes images entirely onboard the vehicle for privacy, sharing data with Tesla only if owners enable it during safety-critical events.

Age estimation likely uses computer vision to classify facial features, similar to existing attention-tracking algorithms. Potential applications include preventing underage drivers from engaging Full Self-Driving (FSD) or shifting into drive, acting as a secondary safety lock.

It could also be linked to Robotaxi readiness: the upcoming Cybercab will need robust occupant verification to ensure children cannot hail or ride unsupervised.

In consumer vehicles, it could enable tailored FSD behaviors—more conservative acceleration and braking for elderly drivers, for instance—or simply block unauthorized use by minors.

Beyond age checks, the cabin camera powers Tesla’s comprehensive driver monitoring system, introduced years earlier and continuously improved. It first gained prominence for detecting inattentiveness. When Autopilot or FSD is active, the camera tracks eye gaze, head position, and steering inputs in real time.

If the driver looks away too long or fails to keep their hands ready, the system issues escalating visual and audible alerts before disengaging assistance. This has dramatically reduced misuse cases and helped Tesla meet stricter regulatory demands for hands-on supervision.

The camera also monitors for drowsiness. Activated above roughly 40 mph (65 km/h) after at least 10 minutes of manual driving, the Driver Drowsiness Warning analyzes facial cues—frequency of yawns and blinks—alongside driving patterns like lane drifting or erratic steering.

When fatigue is detected, a clear on-screen message and chime prompt the driver to pull over and rest, or even to activate Full Self-Driving. Tesla explicitly states this feature enhances active safety without relying on facial recognition for identity.

These layered capabilities create a robust safety net. Inattentiveness detection alone has curbed distracted driving during assisted operation. Drowsiness alerts address a leading cause of highway crashes by intervening before impairment escalates.

Adding age verification extends this protection: it could flag inexperienced young drivers for extra caution or restrict high-autonomy features, while preparing vehicles for a future where robotaxis must safely manage passengers of all ages.

With privacy safeguards intact and processing done locally, Tesla’s cabin camera continues evolving from a simple attention monitor into a sophisticated guardian—advancing safer roads today and autonomous mobility tomorrow.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla’s Semi truck factory is open with a detail that changes everything

Tesla’s dedicated Nevada Semi factory has opened, targeting 50,000 trucks per year as fleet adoptions accelerate nationwide.

Published

on

By

Nearly nine years after Elon Musk unveiled the Tesla Semi in November 2017, the company is now opening a dedicated factory just outside of Reno, Nevada, and ramping toward mass production of 50,000 trucks per year.

Volume production began in March 2026 at the new Tesla Semi factory, with the competitive advantage not being the factory itself. Rather, it’s where Tesla built it. By constructing the 1.7 million square foot facility directly adjacent to Gigafactory Nevada in Sparks, Tesla closed the one supply chain loop that had delayed the Semi program for years. The 4680 battery cells that power the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, which significantly streamlines supply logistics. That single decision eliminates the bottleneck that forced Tesla to prioritize battery supply for passenger cars over the Semi throughout 2020, 2021, and 2022, which is precisely why the first deliveries slipped three years past the original target. Every other electric truck manufacturer sources its battery cells from a separate supplier, ships them to a separate factory, and absorbs the cost and delay that comes with that. Tesla built its Semi factory around its battery factory, and that vertical integration is what makes 50,000 trucks per year a realistic number rather than an aspirational one.

At the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, Musk was direct about where things stood, stating “Starting next year, we will manufacture the Tesla Semi. We already have a lot of prototype Semis in operation – PepsiCo and other companies have been using them for some time. But in 2026, we’ll begin volume production at our Northern Nevada factory.” Full ramp to volume output is targeted before June 30, 2026.


The first limited deliveries happened in December 2022 to PepsiCo, which eventually doubled its fleet to 50 trucks out of its California distribution facility. Since then the Semi has been showing up in more corporate fleets. As Teslarati noted in March, a Ralph’s Supermarkets branded Semi was spotted on a Los Angeles highway, confirming Kroger’s partnership with Tesla to deploy up to 500 electric Semis. Walmart, Costco, Sysco, US Foods, DHL, Hight Logistics and WattEV are among the companies actively running or receiving units. DHL logged real-world efficiency of 1.72 kWh per mile under a full 75,000 pound load over 388 miles, matching Tesla’s targets closely.

The 2026 production model arrives with meaningful upgrades over the original, with a 1,000 pound weight reduction, updated aerodynamics, and support for 1.2 MW Megacharger speeds that can restore 60% of range in around 30 minutes during a mandatory driver rest break. Tesla opened its first public Megacharger in Ontario, California in March, positioned near the I-10 and I-15 interchange serving the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The company plans 37 Megacharger sites by end of 2026 and 66 total across 15 states by early 2027, with construction beginning at the nation’s largest truck stop operator in the first half of this year.

Tesla reveals various improvements to the Semi in new piece with Jay Leno

Musk has described the Semi’s economics as a straightforward case. “The Semi is a TCO no-brainer,” he said, noting the total cost of ownership is “much, much cheaper than any other transportation you could have.” At under $300,000, the truck costs roughly double a comparable diesel, but California’s $200,000 per vehicle subsidy has driven over 1,000 state orders alone. As Teslarati has tracked, the prototype fleet accumulated over 13.5 million miles with 95% fleet uptime before production ever scaled. The factory opening now turns that proof of concept into a production program.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving gets first-ever European approval

Tesla owners in the Netherlands with a Full Self-Driving subscription will receive a software update “shortly,” the company said, activating the operation of the company’s semi-autonomous driving tech for the first time in Europe.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla AI | X

Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised) got its first-ever European approval, as the Netherlands gave the suite the green light to begin operation.

Tesla owners in the Netherlands with a Full Self-Driving subscription will receive a software update “shortly,” the company said, activating the operation of the company’s semi-autonomous driving tech for the first time in Europe.

The Dutch vehicle authority RDW granted the type approval after more than 18 months of rigorous testing on both closed tracks and public roads. FSD Supervised complies with UN R-171 standards and benefits from Article 39 exemptions under EU Regulation 2018/858. Importantly, it is not a fully autonomous vehicle.

The RDW stressed that the driver remains fully responsible and must maintain attention at all times. “Safety is paramount for the RDW,” the authority stated. “Proper use of this driver assistance system contributes positively to road safety.” Sensors monitor driver alertness, issuing warnings if eyes leave the road or hands are unavailable to take control immediately.

CEO Elon Musk also commented on the approval in a post on X, saying:

“First (supervised) FSD approval in Europe! Congratulations to the Tesla team and thank you to the regulatory authorities in the Netherlands for all of the hard work required to make this happen.”

Trained on billions of kilometers of real-world driving data, FSD Supervised allows the vehicle to handle residential streets, dense city traffic, and highways under constant supervision. Tesla’s post declared:

“It can drive you almost anywhere under your supervision – from residential roads to city streets & highways. No other vehicle can do this.”

The company added that it is “excited to bring FSD Supervised to more European countries soon.”

This national approval paves the way for broader EU adoption. Other member states can recognize the Dutch certification individually, with a potential bloc-wide rollout via European Commission committee vote anticipated by this Summer. The decision underscores Europe’s stricter safety and documentation requirements compared to U.S. self-certification.

Tesla Europe shares FSD test video weeks ahead of launch target

The Netherlands’ approval represents a pivotal step for Tesla in Europe, where complex regulations and mixed traffic have delayed rollout. Musk added that the RDW was “rigorous” in its assessment of FSD.

By proving the system’s safety in one of the continent’s most bicycle- and tram-heavy nations, Tesla positions itself to transform mobility across the EU—delivering greater convenience while keeping drivers firmly in control.

As the first domino falls, anticipation builds for FSD Supervised to reach additional countries soon.

Continue Reading