4 ms·

Project Kuiper is so far behind Starlink at this point that this kind of regulatory maneuvering is pretty laughable. (As compared to regulating the brightness o

Project Kuiper is so far behind Starlink at this point that this kind of regulatory maneuvering is pretty laughable. (As compared to regulating the brightness of LEO satellites, which is very much needed. In this regard, allowing SpaceX to lower the orbit of these satellites is actually good for astronomy. We talk about this stuff pretty frequently in Orbital Index [https://orbitalindex.com https://orbitalindex.com].)

gnzoidberg 6y ago
Amazon is not Blue Origin. The amount of ignorance in these threads is baffling.
- tectonic 6y ago
  Where did I say that it was?
ABeeSea 6y ago
The head of Kuiper and most of the senior team led Starlink until Musk allegedly fired them for moving too slow and being too cautious. So Amazon being operationally behind isn't exactly surprising. >Musk had fired at least seven members of the program's senior management team at the Redmond, Washington, office, the culmination of disagreements over the pace at which the team was developing and testing its Starlink satellites, according to the two SpaceX employees with direct knowledge of the situation. https://www.businessinsider.com/r-musk-shakes-up-spacex-in-race-to-make-satellite-launch-window-sources-2018-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/r-musk-shakes-up-spacex-in-r...
- brianwawok 6y ago
  Gotta move at Musk speed, makes sense.
  - meibo 6y ago
    If anything, it seems to work out for him at SpaceX. Speed and latency measured with the Starlink beta/GA are unparalleled at the moment, yet to see if they worsen with an increase of userbase.
    - brianwawok 6y ago
      And at Tesla. Unclear why my statement was controversial but hey...
- ignoramous 6y ago
  Could also be SpaceX trying to put a different spin on the story? Bezos might have poached them from right under Musk's nose for all we know.
  - NortySpock 6y ago
    Maybe, but my sense as an outsider was that Starlink was moving at a snail's pace and was essentially PR vaporware prior to these firings. Granted, there's a lot of engineering going on behind the scenes, but the timing is perhaps suggestive... Look at the timeline: Jan 2015 -- announce plans Jan 2017 -- Starlink trademarked Feb 2018 - test flight of two satellites May 2019 - Launch 60 of the v0.9 model June 2019 - fire 7 people Oct 2019 - this article Nov 2019 - Launch 60 of the v1.0 model 7 Jan 2020 - 60 satellites launched 29 Jan 2020 - 60 satellites launched 17 Feb 2020 - 60 satellites launched 18 Mar 2020 - 60 satellites launched 22 Apr 2020 - 60 satellites launched 04 Jun 2020 - 60 satellites launched etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink
    - lr1970 6y ago
      > Oct 2019 - this article The article was published on Oct 31, 2018 (not 2019).
    - m463 6y ago
      Where do: "Amazon representatives have had "30 meetings to oppose SpaceX" but "no meetings to authorize its own system"" ... those 30 meetings fit into the timeline? :)
    - snapcore 6y ago
      If you just graph the launches that looks like R&D + production ramp-up.
    - qchris 6y ago
      I know that SpaceX has historically had a abnormally high development and deployment cadence, but I think that your second point about behind-the-scenes development is probably closest to the mark. To me, it seems more plausible that they were taking a solid-not-polished design that's been mostly worked through for a few years, doing some team re-org and removing people who aren't working out, and then finished tweaking the design and got ready for scaling to higher production over the next few months than it does they were scraping by on the skin of their teeth for almost four years and suddenly managed to catch up on everything (and have it work!) in those same last few months. It's absolutely possible I'm wrong, but if the Starklink team truly managed a timeline of 6 months from "vaporware" to functionally the world's first mega-constellation, I'd be absolutely floored.
gamblor956 6y ago
You have it exactly backwards. Starlink is attempting to block competition by moving into orbits not assigned to it but which have been targeted by competitors. Starlink had the option of using the lower orbit when it designed its system, and chose not to even consider that orbit until Kuiper was announced. Every other company in the space is opposed to this move, because Starlink's unilateral reconfiguration would interfere with nearly every other company's operations. Part of the FCC's mandate is to prevent that from occurring, and SpaceX absolutely deserves to be slapped down for its anticompetitive behavior.
- m463 6y ago
  Come on, starlink already has 1000 satellites in the lower orbit.
cozzyd 6y ago
I'm sure Starlink could try to purchase the regulatory allotments from Kuiper/Kepler/etc. if they so wanted.

gnzoidberg 6y ago

Amazon is not Blue Origin. The amount of ignorance in these threads is baffling.

tectonic 6y ago
Where did I say that it was?

ABeeSea 6y ago

The head of Kuiper and most of the senior team led Starlink until Musk allegedly fired them for moving too slow and being too cautious. So Amazon being operationally behind isn't exactly surprising. >Musk had fired at least seven members of the program's senior management team at the Redmond, Washington, office, the culmination of disagreements over the pace at which the team was developing and testing its Starlink satellites, according to the two SpaceX employees with direct knowledge of the situation. https://www.businessinsider.com/r-musk-shakes-up-spacex-in-race-to-make-satellite-launch-window-sources-2018-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/r-musk-shakes-up-spacex-in-r...

brianwawok 6y ago
Gotta move at Musk speed, makes sense.
- meibo 6y ago
  If anything, it seems to work out for him at SpaceX. Speed and latency measured with the Starlink beta/GA are unparalleled at the moment, yet to see if they worsen with an increase of userbase.
  - brianwawok 6y ago
    And at Tesla. Unclear why my statement was controversial but hey...
ignoramous 6y ago
Could also be SpaceX trying to put a different spin on the story? Bezos might have poached them from right under Musk's nose for all we know.
- NortySpock 6y ago
  Maybe, but my sense as an outsider was that Starlink was moving at a snail's pace and was essentially PR vaporware prior to these firings. Granted, there's a lot of engineering going on behind the scenes, but the timing is perhaps suggestive... Look at the timeline: Jan 2015 -- announce plans Jan 2017 -- Starlink trademarked Feb 2018 - test flight of two satellites May 2019 - Launch 60 of the v0.9 model June 2019 - fire 7 people Oct 2019 - this article Nov 2019 - Launch 60 of the v1.0 model 7 Jan 2020 - 60 satellites launched 29 Jan 2020 - 60 satellites launched 17 Feb 2020 - 60 satellites launched 18 Mar 2020 - 60 satellites launched 22 Apr 2020 - 60 satellites launched 04 Jun 2020 - 60 satellites launched etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink
  - lr1970 6y ago
    > Oct 2019 - this article The article was published on Oct 31, 2018 (not 2019).
  - m463 6y ago
    Where do: "Amazon representatives have had "30 meetings to oppose SpaceX" but "no meetings to authorize its own system"" ... those 30 meetings fit into the timeline? :)
  - snapcore 6y ago
    If you just graph the launches that looks like R&D + production ramp-up.
  - qchris 6y ago
    I know that SpaceX has historically had a abnormally high development and deployment cadence, but I think that your second point about behind-the-scenes development is probably closest to the mark. To me, it seems more plausible that they were taking a solid-not-polished design that's been mostly worked through for a few years, doing some team re-org and removing people who aren't working out, and then finished tweaking the design and got ready for scaling to higher production over the next few months than it does they were scraping by on the skin of their teeth for almost four years and suddenly managed to catch up on everything (and have it work!) in those same last few months. It's absolutely possible I'm wrong, but if the Starklink team truly managed a timeline of 6 months from "vaporware" to functionally the world's first mega-constellation, I'd be absolutely floored.

gamblor956 6y ago

You have it exactly backwards. Starlink is attempting to block competition by moving into orbits not assigned to it but which have been targeted by competitors. Starlink had the option of using the lower orbit when it designed its system, and chose not to even consider that orbit until Kuiper was announced. Every other company in the space is opposed to this move, because Starlink's unilateral reconfiguration would interfere with nearly every other company's operations. Part of the FCC's mandate is to prevent that from occurring, and SpaceX absolutely deserves to be slapped down for its anticompetitive behavior.

m463 6y ago
Come on, starlink already has 1000 satellites in the lower orbit.

cozzyd 6y ago

I'm sure Starlink could try to purchase the regulatory allotments from Kuiper/Kepler/etc. if they so wanted.