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.

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.”

Advertisement
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.

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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

Radical Tesla aero patent may make new Roadster’s ~1-sec 0-60 mph launch feasible

The patent is for a multi-mode active aero system that uses fans and deployable skirts to generate controllable downforce.

Published

on

Credit: @SmokeAwayyy/X

A radical new patent from Tesla has provided a potential hint at a technology that the electric vehicle maker can utilize to meet the new Roadster’s ambitious 0-60 mph targets. If the technology outlined in the patent does come into fruition, it could help the Roadster stay planted on the ground even as it executes extremely rapid and demanding driving maneuvers.

The Roadster’s 0-60 mph time

When the new Roadster was announced way back in late 2017, Elon Musk stated that the upcoming vehicle would have a 0-60 mph time of 1.9 seconds. This was impressive, but the new Roadster has become so late that this metric is no longer industry-leading. Even Tesla’s own Model S Plaid, a large and heavy family sedan, can now hit a 0-60 mph time in 1.99 seconds, all for a price that starts just under $100,000.

Back in February 2024, Elon Musk stated that Tesla “radically increased the design goals for the new Tesla Roadster.” He stated that there will never be another car like the Roadster, if it could even be called a car. Musk also added that Tesla is now looking to achieve a 0-60 mph time in less than one second with the new Roadster, though this would be the “least interesting part” of the vehicle.

Inasmuch as a 0-60 mph time of 1 second or less sounds insane, these figures are achieved by vehicles like top fuel dragsters, which could accelerate well under 1 second. Of course, these vehicles are specialized machines and not road legal by any means, so the Roadster would still be in a class of its own if Tesla does manage to achieve a sub-1-second 0-60 mph time.

Tesla’s new aero patent 

A new patent from Tesla has now outlined a technology that could be a perfect fit for the upcoming all-electric supercar. Tesla’s patent is for a multi-mode active aero system that uses fans and deployable skirts to generate controllable downforce. This should pave the way for optimal vehicle grip and performance across varying conditions, from the track to the drag strip.

Advertisement

Tesla describes the patent’s technology as follows: 

“The system operates by creating bounded (e.g., sealed or partially-sealed) regions beneath the vehicle through the selective deployment of skirts that interact with the ground surface. Fans positioned in airflow pathways that extend to these bounded regions generate low pressure within these areas by extracting air, creating downforce that enhances vehicle grip and stability (e.g., by creating a vacuum, or partial vacuum in the bounded regions).”

If Tesla could indeed create a fully bounded region under the new Roadster using the technology outlined in the patent, the company could all ensure that the all-electric supercar always has perfect traction when it launches. It could also help the vehicle handle better in corners, which would be useful if the Roadster were to attempt setting records in tracks such as the Nurburgring.

Check out Tesla’s patent below.

Tesla Roadster Patent by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla’s new Robotaxi geofence shape is an FU by Elon Musk to the competition

Maybe it’s all pareidolia. But maybe it’s not. After all, Tesla embraced the first geofence expansion for what it appeared to be.

Published

on

tesla austin robotaxi geofence and elon musk laugh from meme review

Tesla expanded its Robotaxi geofence in Austin once again early Sunday morning. The new shape seems to be somewhat of a proverbial, and potentially literal, middle finger to the competition.

If you thought the first expansion was a message to the competition and doubters of the company’s ride-hailing service, you probably will believe the second expansion is an even stronger gesture.

Tesla’s first expansion did not go unnoticed, as its shape was particularly recognizable. The company has always operated with a sense of humor, and it embraced what it did. Some, including me, took it as a message to competitors: We can expand in any direction, in any size, at any time. We’ll prove it.”

They picked a shape and went with it:

Tesla’s Robotaxi expansion wasn’t a joke, it was a warning to competitors

It is evident that Tesla is keeping its humor up to continue to show a few things. The first is that it really can expand in any direction it wants and that’s how it is choosing to show it.

The second, well, maybe it’s an edgier way to show doubters that it is really executing on Robotaxi:

Maybe it’s all pareidolia. But maybe it’s not. After all, Tesla embraced the first geofence expansion for what it appeared to be. This might be a similar occurrence, and it might be sending another message to the competition, critics, and doubters.

The expansion was a near-doubling of the geofence Tesla offered previously. After the initial geofence covered just about 20 square miles, Tesla was able to more than double it to 42 square miles with the first growth. This new geofence shape was just under double, and is about 80 square miles.

Tesla’s rapid expansion has impressed many, especially considering the service area has roughly doubled for the second time in well under two months. The Robotaxi service was first offered on June 22.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla executes ‘a must’ with Musk as race to AI supremacy goes on: Wedbush

Dan Ives of Wedbush says Tesla made the right move getting Elon Musk his pay package.

Published

on

elon musk
Steve Jurvetson, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) executed what Wedbush’s Dan Ives called “a must” this morning as it finalized a new pay package for its CEO Elon Musk.

The move helped give Musk his first meaningful compensation at Tesla since 2017, when the company offered a pay package that was based on performance and proven growth. That package was approved by shareholders on two separate occasions, but was denied to Musk both times by the Delaware Chancery Court.

On Monday, Tesla announced on X that it had created a new package that would give 96 million shares of restricted stock to Musk to compensate him for the “immense value generated for Tesla and all our shareholders.”

The details of the pay package are designed to retain Musk, who has voiced some concerns about his control of Tesla, as “activist shareholders” have used lawsuits to disrupt the previously approved package.

You can read all the details of it here:

Tesla rewards CEO Elon Musk with massive, restricted stock package

Ives says Musk’s retention is ‘a must’

Ives said in a note to investors on Monday that with the raging AI talent war that Tesla made a smart move by doing what it could to retain Musk.

He wrote:

“With the AI talent war now fully underway across Big Tech, we believe this was a strategic move to keep TSLA’s top asset, Musk, would stay focused at the company with his priority being to bolster the company’s growth strategy over the coming years. With this interim award increasing Musk’s voting rights upon this grant, which Musk honed in on and mentioned was increasingly important to incentivize him to stay focused on the matters at hand, this was a strategic move by the Board to solidify Musk as CEO of Tesla over the coming years with this framework for Musk’s pay package and greater voting control removing a major overhang on the story.”

He went on to say:

“While the groundwork is now in place for the next few years, it will be critical for the Tesla Board of Directors to get this long-term compensation strategy in place prior to the company’s November 6th shareholder meeting which would address the elephant in the room and remove a significant overhang on the stock.”

Wedbush maintained its Outperform rating and its $500 price target on the stock.

Continue Reading

Trending