5 ms·

This much more likely to be something that had been in the long term plan for many years. Amazon is announcing stuff because they are spending 10e of billions

This much more likely to be something that had been in the long term plan for many years. Amazon is announcing stuff because they are spending 10e of billions and have nothing to show for it, and wont have anything for years. They need to show progress to the quarter to quarter investor. Frankly the idea that Starlink is passivly reacting to Amazon annoucments is a bit silly. The difficult part is to actually produce these terminals at high volume cheaply, not releasing a few renders.

adolph 2y ago
They have at least three Kuiper launches booked in mid-2025, that’s not far off! It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon-project-kuiper-spacex-launch https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon...
- lazide 2y ago
  A year away might as well be a decade in vaporware terms.
- rlt 2y ago
  > It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. Except that likely is Falcon 9, and SpaceX gets launches at cost.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  3 launches in mid-2025 isn't really all that promising an indicator for a constellation that needs to launch thousands of satellites. They'd need signs of an extreme ramp up in launches coming, particularly since so many of these earlier launches will have to be on external providers like ULA and ArianeSpace, who are already running delays, need to build entire rockets each time and have little experience with high launch cadences. At least whenever Blue Origin finally gets to flying New Glenn, they'll be able to avoid having to build a brand new booster each time. The most reliable and flight proven launcher, F9, usually gets in a launch every 3 days and it's still going to have to keep that pace up until Starship is ready to dump hundreds of starlinks into orbit in one launch.
  - cubefox 2y ago
    They indicated previously they changed their mind about using Falcon 9 and Starship.
    - dotnet00 2y ago
      By 'they' do you mean Amazon?
      - cubefox 2y ago
        Yes. See https://spacenews.com/as-clock-ticks-on-amazons-constellation-buying-starship-launches-not-out-of-the-question/ https://spacenews.com/as-clock-ticks-on-amazons-constellatio...
        dotnet00 2y ago
        Oh, interesting!
  - adolph 2y ago
    > a constellation that needs to launch thousands of satellites. If I were the folks at Kuiper or any other would-be LEO RF communication constellation: * Starlink is proving the value prop to investors and consumers * This is an early stage this sector--there will be tech improvements * Improvements in satellites mean competitors can enter at vN+1 * SpaceX/Starlink has some anti-trust risk--they might throw a bone to a weak "competitor" a la Apple/Microsoft 1997 [0] 0. https://youtu.be/WxOp5mBY9IY?t=44 https://youtu.be/WxOp5mBY9IY?t=44
    - yencabulator 2y ago
      SpaceX satellites have a designed lifespan of approximately 5 years. They'll sustain their launch pace just to keep up the constellation. There's no real vN+1 advantage for competition.
      - 2y ago
- panick21_ 2y ago
  3 launches don't make a constellation. > It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners In theory yes, in practice it isn't because they can't really use SpaceX (fully) and the other options aren't nearly as good. > can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. I'm not sure if you know anything about rockets. They bought some old Atlas 5s, but those are finished production. After that they have to buy unproven new designs. And again, Falcon 9 is the most reliable and flight proven rocket in the world and they are simply not gone use Falcon 9 beyond the minimal.
- SXX 2y ago
  Starlink just had launch #173 and like 70 of them was only in 2023: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshield_launches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshiel...
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. Does Starlink not have that option? Do you think other launch providers would refuse to take SpaceX's money? Also this isn't a situation where you need reliable and proven. If option A has 99.9% reliability and costs $80M to launch $20M of satellites, and option B has 95% reliability but costs $60M to launch $20M of satellites, then you should go with option B for your fleet.
  - adolph 2y ago
    > Does Starlink not have that option? Starlink already uses "the most reliable and flight proven technology" (imho) so, yes, they have that option. And yes, I should have added something about cost effective.
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      When you said "It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology." I thought you were listing that as an advantage they have compared to Starlink. If every competitor has the same flexibility, then why bring it up?
      - adolph 2y ago
        It was a tongue in cheek comment that was maybe a wee too subtle. To the extent that Amazon launching Kuiper is tied to (maybe still?) majority owner Bezos' interest in building supportive business for Blue Origin, then Kuiper launching on SpaceX is an irony that cannot go unobserved. One might even say Blue Origin as an orbital launch provider is more "vaporware" than Kuiper itself given the latter's test existence in orbit.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  > It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology Heh, Amazon was going to forgo that for petty/corrupt reasons, but were sued by their shareholders. https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/a-bitter-pill-amazon-calls-on-rival-spacex-to-launch-internet-satellites/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/a-bitter-pill-amazon-c...
  - adolph 2y ago
    Capitalism at its finest. Tell that billionaire he can't blow all the vapor all the time.

adolph 2y ago

They have at least three Kuiper launches booked in mid-2025, that’s not far off! It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon-project-kuiper-spacex-launch https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon...

lazide 2y ago
A year away might as well be a decade in vaporware terms.
rlt 2y ago
> It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. Except that likely is Falcon 9, and SpaceX gets launches at cost.
dotnet00 2y ago
3 launches in mid-2025 isn't really all that promising an indicator for a constellation that needs to launch thousands of satellites. They'd need signs of an extreme ramp up in launches coming, particularly since so many of these earlier launches will have to be on external providers like ULA and ArianeSpace, who are already running delays, need to build entire rockets each time and have little experience with high launch cadences. At least whenever Blue Origin finally gets to flying New Glenn, they'll be able to avoid having to build a brand new booster each time. The most reliable and flight proven launcher, F9, usually gets in a launch every 3 days and it's still going to have to keep that pace up until Starship is ready to dump hundreds of starlinks into orbit in one launch.
- cubefox 2y ago
  They indicated previously they changed their mind about using Falcon 9 and Starship.
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    By 'they' do you mean Amazon?
    - cubefox 2y ago
      Yes. See https://spacenews.com/as-clock-ticks-on-amazons-constellation-buying-starship-launches-not-out-of-the-question/ https://spacenews.com/as-clock-ticks-on-amazons-constellatio...
      - dotnet00 2y ago
        Oh, interesting!
- adolph 2y ago
  > a constellation that needs to launch thousands of satellites. If I were the folks at Kuiper or any other would-be LEO RF communication constellation: * Starlink is proving the value prop to investors and consumers * This is an early stage this sector--there will be tech improvements * Improvements in satellites mean competitors can enter at vN+1 * SpaceX/Starlink has some anti-trust risk--they might throw a bone to a weak "competitor" a la Apple/Microsoft 1997 [0] 0. https://youtu.be/WxOp5mBY9IY?t=44 https://youtu.be/WxOp5mBY9IY?t=44
  - yencabulator 2y ago
    SpaceX satellites have a designed lifespan of approximately 5 years. They'll sustain their launch pace just to keep up the constellation. There's no real vN+1 advantage for competition.
    - 2y ago
panick21_ 2y ago
3 launches don't make a constellation. > It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners In theory yes, in practice it isn't because they can't really use SpaceX (fully) and the other options aren't nearly as good. > can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. I'm not sure if you know anything about rockets. They bought some old Atlas 5s, but those are finished production. After that they have to buy unproven new designs. And again, Falcon 9 is the most reliable and flight proven rocket in the world and they are simply not gone use Falcon 9 beyond the minimal.
SXX 2y ago
Starlink just had launch #173 and like 70 of them was only in 2023: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshield_launches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshiel...
Dylan16807 2y ago
> It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology. Does Starlink not have that option? Do you think other launch providers would refuse to take SpaceX's money? Also this isn't a situation where you need reliable and proven. If option A has 99.9% reliability and costs $80M to launch $20M of satellites, and option B has 95% reliability but costs $60M to launch $20M of satellites, then you should go with option B for your fleet.
- adolph 2y ago
  > Does Starlink not have that option? Starlink already uses "the most reliable and flight proven technology" (imho) so, yes, they have that option. And yes, I should have added something about cost effective.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    When you said "It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology." I thought you were listing that as an advantage they have compared to Starlink. If every competitor has the same flexibility, then why bring it up?
    - adolph 2y ago
      It was a tongue in cheek comment that was maybe a wee too subtle. To the extent that Amazon launching Kuiper is tied to (maybe still?) majority owner Bezos' interest in building supportive business for Blue Origin, then Kuiper launching on SpaceX is an irony that cannot go unobserved. One might even say Blue Origin as an orbital launch provider is more "vaporware" than Kuiper itself given the latter's test existence in orbit.
lupusreal 2y ago
> It’s awesome that they have the flexibility to choose different launch partners and can use the most reliable and flight proven technology Heh, Amazon was going to forgo that for petty/corrupt reasons, but were sued by their shareholders. https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/a-bitter-pill-amazon-calls-on-rival-spacex-to-launch-internet-satellites/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/a-bitter-pill-amazon-c...
- adolph 2y ago
  Capitalism at its finest. Tell that billionaire he can't blow all the vapor all the time.