4 ms·

The terms of their FCC license require them to have half their presently licensed constellation, roughly 1600 satellites, in orbit by July of 2026. They're alm

The terms of their FCC license require them to have half their presently licensed constellation, roughly 1600 satellites, in orbit by July of 2026. They're almost certainly not going to make it, but I would be very surprised if the FCC doesn't grant them an extension if they can show they're making serious progress and aren't just squatting on that spectrum. The curveball is Trump/Musk influencing the FCC's decision making processes, which is definitely possible. On the other hand, the FCC must know that they will be accused of being corrupt if they don't grant an extension.

philipwhiuk 2y ago
> The terms of their FCC license require them to have half their presently licensed constellation, roughly 1600 satellites, in orbit by July of 2026. They're almost certainly not going to make it, but I would be very surprised if the FCC doesn't grant them an extension if they can show they're making serious progress and aren't just squatting on that spectrum. I agree. > On the other hand, the FCC must know that they will be accused of being corrupt if they don't grant an extension. Score:5, Funny
willglynn 2y ago
This is not discretionary for the FCC: > A station authorization shall be automatically terminated in whole or in part without further notice to the licensee upon: > … > (d) The failure to maintain 50 percent of the maximum number of NGSO space stations authorized for service following the 9-year milestone period as functional space stations in authorized orbits, which failure will result in the termination of authority for the space stations not in orbit as of the date of noncompliance, but allow for technically identical replacements. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-25/subpart-B/subject-group-ECFR3e61a02158c60ca/section-25.161 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-B... _Congress_ can change this, but as written, Federal law compels the FCC to automatically terminate the authorization for failing to deploy half the satellites under 47 CFR § 25.161(d), just as they must automatically terminate the authorization when the license expires under 47 CFR § 25.161(b).
- amanaplanacanal 2y ago
  Is this another case where it could be overridden in case of "national emergency"? That seems to be how the administration does things nowadays.
- meragrin_ 2y ago
  Bureaucrats write what falls under the CFR. Congress writes the US Code. Unless there is something in the US Code which specifies the period in which the licensee must have 50% of the satellites in place, the bureaucrats can change the rules in the CFR. Somehow I doubt Congress was that detailed. They likely just passed the buck to let the bureaucrats specify the details.
  - axus 2y ago
    There could be a lawsuit because now the courts get to decide the details, instead of the bureaucrats.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

philipwhiuk 2y ago

> The terms of their FCC license require them to have half their presently licensed constellation, roughly 1600 satellites, in orbit by July of 2026. They're almost certainly not going to make it, but I would be very surprised if the FCC doesn't grant them an extension if they can show they're making serious progress and aren't just squatting on that spectrum. I agree. > On the other hand, the FCC must know that they will be accused of being corrupt if they don't grant an extension. Score:5, Funny

willglynn 2y ago

This is not discretionary for the FCC: > A station authorization shall be automatically terminated in whole or in part without further notice to the licensee upon: > … > (d) The failure to maintain 50 percent of the maximum number of NGSO space stations authorized for service following the 9-year milestone period as functional space stations in authorized orbits, which failure will result in the termination of authority for the space stations not in orbit as of the date of noncompliance, but allow for technically identical replacements. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-25/subpart-B/subject-group-ECFR3e61a02158c60ca/section-25.161 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-B... _Congress_ can change this, but as written, Federal law compels the FCC to automatically terminate the authorization for failing to deploy half the satellites under 47 CFR § 25.161(d), just as they must automatically terminate the authorization when the license expires under 47 CFR § 25.161(b).

amanaplanacanal 2y ago
Is this another case where it could be overridden in case of "national emergency"? That seems to be how the administration does things nowadays.
meragrin_ 2y ago
Bureaucrats write what falls under the CFR. Congress writes the US Code. Unless there is something in the US Code which specifies the period in which the licensee must have 50% of the satellites in place, the bureaucrats can change the rules in the CFR. Somehow I doubt Congress was that detailed. They likely just passed the buck to let the bureaucrats specify the details.
- axus 2y ago
  There could be a lawsuit because now the courts get to decide the details, instead of the bureaucrats.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]