I was speaking technologically. Both Starlink and ASTS satellites are technological demonstrations so I would argue only the technology matters. Since ASTS plan

I was speaking technologically. Both Starlink and ASTS satellites are technological demonstrations so I would argue only the technology matters. Since ASTS plans to launch using SpaceX and manufacture through 3rd-party contracts I don't believe Starlink's existing constellation provides any benefits; rather the competition will come down to funding and manufacturing expertise. The 6-1 satellite advantage doesn't necessarily favor Starlink. BlueWalker 3 was launched 15 months before Starlink's first mobile communications satellite and was itself preceded 5 months by BlueWalker 1. However the six Starlink v2-Mini-D2D satellites feature inter-satellite links, so that is a point in favor of Starlink. BlueWalker will be succeeded by five commercial satellites called BlueBirds which are currently under construction. As for technology, I can't find any information about the Starlink direct-to-cell satellites. As far as I can tell they haven't been even given NORAD IDs yet.The entire Jan 2 Group 7-9 launch seems to be classified as 58699/Object-A. Given that the launch lifted 21 rather than the standard 22 satellites we can assume the new design is similar to the Starlink v2-Mini in size and weight - perhaps only 125 kg heavier. This suggest the efficiency/weight ratio favors Starlink. Starlink v2-Mini weighs 800 kg edit: better sources: starlink v2-mini: * antenna array: 11.07 m2 * solar array: 104.96 m2 * magnitude: +7.87 +- 0.09 (mean, distance-adjusted) * weight: ~800 kg starlink v2-mini d2d: * antenna array: 19.98 m2 (1?) * solar array: ? * magnitude: ? * weight: ~970 kg * mobile bandwidth: "~7Mb / beam" (40-100km radius) bluewalker 3: * antenna array: 64 m2 (front side) * solar array: 64 m2 (back side) * magnitude: +3.09 +- 0.04 (mean, distance-adjusted) * weight: ~1500 kg (redacted?) * mobile bandwidth: "14 Mbps" (2) 1. I don't have access to the FCC filings so I multiplied the new bus length by the old width. 2. Per-beam, I assume. From what I gather satellite mass is more correlated with coverage (number of beams) rather than beam efficiency. For the moment, ASTS antennas are just better ($/bandwidth not published). And the new BlueBird satellites are going to be horribly massive and horribly bright compared to BlueWalker-3. P.S. Anyone know what BlueWalker-3-deb represents?