SpaceX Internet Satellite Network: Starlink

[ecarfan]

Apple's next.

Hmm...I’ll believe that when I see it.

Apple has its hands full; apparently restarting its electric vehicle program (https://electrek.co/2019/03/30/apple-car-tesla-electric-powertrain/), trying to figure out how to sell more iPhones, trying to make Siri actually useful, preparing to launch a streaming TV service, preparing to launch a pretty revolutionary credit card and expanding Apple Pay, and a lot else.

Apple getting into the internet satellite constellation market, something completely different from anything they have ever done? I don’t think so.

I understand why Amazon is entering that market, in part because Bezos thinks he can do pretty much anything, loves space, and has galactic-scale ambition and the money to make it happen.

Tim Cook has a more realistic view of what Apple can and cannot do. Though I think Apple should give up on their electric vehicle ambitions.

 

[bxr140]

Apple getting into the internet satellite constellation market, something completely different from anything they have ever done? I don’t think so.

To be clear, “Apple’s next” wasn’t a hypothetical. They’ve been working on it for ~2 years.

 

[ecarfan]

To be clear, “Apple’s next” wasn’t a hypothetical. They’ve been working on it for ~2 years.

I was not aware of that. Reference?

Apple has also been working on electric vehicles for a few years, but I’m not convinced they will ever market one.

 

[bxr140]

I was not aware of that. Reference?

First, let me be crystal on this: No former, prospective, or active Apple employee has ever confirmed or denied the notion of Apple having any kind of interest/team/program/charter/exploration in a satellite constellation. That's honest truth. (I realize that's exactly what someone would say if they were being dishonest but...honest. Trust me. )

Second, I am not a former, prospective, or active Apple employee. You can be damn sure I'd keep my mouth shut if I was. Apple is a solid gig and their gulag is apparently very unfavorable to the disobedient.

Third, there were some high profile satellite hirings about two years ago by Apple (a search will turn up some articles) and then those of us in the industry know there was a subsequent hiring cycle that targeted folks with satellite experience.

Fourth, all of FAANGM (except Netflix, to my knowledge anyway) is involved to some degree with global internet and, if we're all honest with ourselves, Apple's motivation is most obvious of all. They have a history of disruptive products (some that worked, some that didn't) and satellite internet done right will certainly be disruptive...and, much more importantly at this point, controlling actual data haul is right in line with their corporate charter to hyper-control every element of the user experience.

 

[ecarfan]

and, if we're all honest with ourselves, Apple's motivation is most obvious of all.

I would say that their motivation is just as clear as SpaceX and Amazon and others. I’m just skeptical that Apple will actually get into the field, “high profile satellite hirings” or not, just as I am skeptical that Apple will actually produce an electric vehicle (even though they have in the past hired many experienced automotive engineers — then let them go — and recently hired a drivetrain engineer away from Tesla). Those two fields are too far outside of Apple’s core competence and I think it would be a mistake.

But I could be wrong.

 

[bxr140]

I would say that their motivation is just as clear as SpaceX and Amazon and others.

Motivation for all the players is pretty straightforward but, to your point, there’s certainly plenty of skepticism on the table with respect to any of the players' commitment and probability of execution. Right now there’s only one clear leader (Wyler) that’s steaming toward what they said they’d do, with funding really being the only real roadblock. Elon is clearly in #2, with basically the same funding roadblock (though Elon is much better at fundraising) but with an additional hurdle to overcome (past performance on promises).

On the opposite end, Apple and Amazon have plenty of cash. As you note Apple also has a past-performance issue--in this case pulling the plug on high profile [ahem...] non-projects--but there's really nothing in the way of Amazon making a constellation happen. Honestly, I could see the biggest roadblock being based on some kind of national security concern, because you know Bezos would rather go to the Chinese for something like this...

 

[mongo]

Motivation for all the players is pretty straightforward but, to your point, there’s certainly plenty of skepticism on the table with respect to any of the players' commitment and probability of execution. Right now there’s only one clear leader (Wyler) that’s steaming toward what they said they’d do, with funding really being the only real roadblock. Elon is clearly in #2, with basically the same funding roadblock (though Elon is much better at fundraising) but with an additional hurdle to overcome (past performance on promises).

On the opposite end, Apple and Amazon have plenty of cash. As you note Apple also has a past-performance issue--in this case pulling the plug on high profile [ahem...] non-projects--but there's really nothing in the way of Amazon making a constellation happen. Honestly, I could see the biggest roadblock being based on some kind of national security concern, because you know Bezos would rather go to the Chinese for something like this...

Didn't SpaceX just raise funds? And can't they get lauch services at cost? Not really seeing the funding roadblock, especially since a partial network can generate revenue...

 

[bxr140]

Didn't SpaceX just raise funds? And can't they get lauch services at cost? Not really seeing the funding roadblock, especially since a partial network can generate revenue...

It's more complicated than that. It takes a LOT of money to build out a huge constellation, and SpaceX certainly did not receive that much. There's also the unfortunate factor where, because of the supply chain, you need to commit a LOT of cash pretty early on, and few on the receiving side are going to accept that committal if there's not proof that the actual funds exist. That's exacerbated by the fact that because the constellation is SOOO huge, there's an unprecedented amount of industrialization (relative to Space) required to make it all close.

Musk also has to factor in distribution of development budget across not just the satellite side but also the launcher side--a side that's uber important in closing the business case of starlink. And, while nobody would make the case that they're worse off for at-cost launches, it doesn't help as much as one might think because launching at cost assets with an at cost booster means zero profit, which means zero interim cashflow.

Finally, a partial network, unfortunately, doesn't actually generate significant revenue. Especially early on. You kind of need enough planes to provide global (or at least ~ -60 to 60deg coverage) so you can provide consistent service. Once you get there building out can become a matter of scaling capacity demand to customer supply.


To be clear, I'm not making the case that its going to tank. I'm just making the case that, similar to other SpaceX predictions that fell a little flat, its going to be a long and changing road to get from here to Starlink.

 

[mongo]

Conversationally (not adversarially)

It's more complicated than that. It takes a LOT of money to build out a huge constellation, and SpaceX certainly did not receive that much. There's also the unfortunate factor where, because of the supply chain, you need to commit a LOT of cash pretty early on, and few on the receiving side are going to accept that committal if there's not proof that the actual funds exist. That's exacerbated by the fact that because the constellation is SOOO huge, there's an unprecedented amount of industrialization (relative to Space) required to make it all close.

Sure, however there is some good mass manufacturing expertise available to SpaceX. The new 5 year orbital life and zero parts surviving re-entry may be part of a super low cost satellite platform (space bamboo?)

Musk also has to factor in distribution of development budget across not just the satellite side but also the launcher side--a side that's uber important in closing the business case of starlink. And, while nobody would make the case that they're worse off for at-cost launches, it doesn't help as much as one might think because launching at cost assets with an at cost booster means zero profit, which means zero interim cashflow.

Zero cost is still better than negative cost (in terms of comparing SpaceX to others, not the challenge SpaceX faces). Starship will be key, huge capacity, 100% reuse, no Helium.

Finally, a partial network, unfortunately, doesn't actually generate significant revenue. Especially early on. You kind of need enough planes to provide global (or at least ~ -60 to 60deg coverage) so you can provide consistent service. Once you get there building out can become a matter of scaling capacity demand to customer supply.

There are use cases that work with intermittent connection (remote sensing for instance), depending on bandwidth, they could also burst download data to sites.

To be clear, I'm not making the case that its going to tank. I'm just making the case that, similar to other SpaceX predictions that fell a little flat, its going to be a long and changing road to get from here to Starlink.

Yah, it's not simple. Will be cool to watch the deployment progress!

 

[bxr140]

Conversationally (not adversarially)

Always!

Sure, however there is some good mass manufacturing expertise available to SpaceX.

Sort of. They have low volume space production on lock with their booster production, and certainly some good stuff in their engine production line that has slightly higher volume. The issue is that what they're shooting for is truly unprecedented volume in the space industry, and that's all the way down the supply chain, not just at system level. They need 35,000 torque rods and most likely 45,000 reaction wheels. The entire space industry [including cubesats] probably hasn't made that many of those items in the past decade, if not longer, and you'd be hard pressed to find any aerospace supplier providing higher function gizmos at that volume, and certainly not at Starlink's required rate. And...because most of what's out there hasn't been designed to be built at such massive volumes, its really hard to just say "we'll invest in Industry 4.0 and build what you need"...you almost need to white page everything.

The new 5 year orbital life and zero parts surviving re-entry may be part of a super low cost satellite platform (space bamboo?)

Yeah, especially the 5 year mission life (the burn-up thing is a bit oversold--a lot of smaller spacecraft completely burn up, and re-entry analysis is a required thing for everyone). Anyway, 5 years in LEO (maybe 6) is right about where the reliability curve knees up into really needing class S parts; keeping the planned mission life short makes it easier to use significantly cheaper COTS parts and still manage radiation degradation. The hard part is finding the balance: First order, if you're dropping from 7 years to 5 years so you can use cheaper parts, that means your cost reduction has to be at least 30% to make up for the 'lost' revenue.

There are use cases that work with intermittent connection (remote sensing for instance), depending on bandwidth, they could also burst download data to sites.

For sure, its not like there's going to be a useless constellation up there waiting to get turned on. its just that those early adopters aren't going to be the ones that pay for the rest of the buildout. For instance, by the time the constellation is turned on that reaction wheel supplier (whether internal to SpaceX or external) will have long committed capex to industrializing production to build those tens of thousands of wheels.

In reality, those early adopters are mostly going to be there to demonstrate the capability of the growing constellation, probably on the back of a pretty sweetheart deal. Then as more anchor customers sign on for service more funds will be released to keep the production machine running.

 

[ecarfan]

They have low volume space production on lock with their booster production, and certainly some good stuff in their engine production line that has slightly higher volume. The issue is that what they're shooting for is truly unprecedented volume in the space industry, and that's all the way down the supply chain, not just at system level.

My theory, simply based on Elon’s history at Tesla and SpaceX, is that he wants to create a satellite mass assembly line in-house using Starlink built components as much as possible and only outsourcing those parts he absolutely has to. Not being in the industry, I can only dimly appreciate just how insanely hard that is going to be. But attempting to do something that has never been done before has never stopped him in the past.

Considering what SpaceX has accomplished in the past 17 years, I would not bet against him

 

[bxr140]

My theory, simply based on Elon’s history at Tesla and SpaceX, is that he wants to create a satellite mass assembly line in-house using Starlink built components as much as possible and only outsourcing those parts he absolutely has to.

Yes, of course! Elon's MO of verticalization will certainly lead much of the supply chain development and manufacturing in-house, especially higher level units (he's not setting up a chip foundry, for instance). My point is that the work of developing and industrializing that supply chain still needs to be done--and more importantly, paid for--regardless if its internal or external. Nobody's ever had a need to build tens of thousands of space worthy parts ever let alone in a short amount of time. That's closer to consumer electronics than not with--and I can't stress this enough--the extra burden of having to send those parts into space and then have them generally work reliably for 5 years.

Considering what SpaceX has accomplished in the past 17 years, I would not bet against him

Agree completely. I'm certainly not betting against him. I'm just taking a more pragmatic view of his future, especially in context of having actual competitors this time (a luxury that SpaceX and especially Tesla haven't had to deal with to-date).


Completely unrelated and solely FTW because I'm vain like that, if we're betting on things I'm betting Starlink has a sweeper/undertaker to clean up dead satellites.

 

[ICUDoc]

They need 35,000 torque rods and most likely 45,000 reaction wheels

They sound cool. What are they??

 

[ecarfan]

They sound cool. What are they??

I’m not an expert but I can do a web search. See Reaction wheel - Wikipedia and Magnetorquer - Wikipedia

 

[ICUDoc]

I’m not an expert but I can do a web search. See Reaction wheel - Wikipedia and Magnetorquer - Wikipedia

I can too, but I thought I'd let bxr140 show off his local knowledge!
Great articles- clever ways to manoeuvre without fuel- genius stuff. And now I know why bxr mentioned such big numbers- they are for the Starlink sats, not FH!! My bad, I was caught up in the preflight FH hype

 

[e-FTW]

Sweet Jeebus!

With anywhere from 4400 to nearly 12,000 satellites needed to complete the three major proposed phases of Starlink, SpaceX will have to build and launch more than 2200 satellites in the next five years, averaging 44 high-performance, low-cost spacecraft built and launched every month for the next 60 months.

Someone needs Starship and Super Heavy to launch that many sats...
Source: SpaceX's first dedicated Starlink launch announced as mass production begins
(Includes some good notes on Starlink production hell)

 

[e-FTW]

And: SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says Starlink launch will reuse Falcon Heavy's fairing
Hypothesis about ocean-soaked fairing re-use is that SpaceX built some contamination resistance into Starlink since it is a clean-slate design, once it became obvious catching fairings was not going to happen.

 

[mongo]

And: SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says Starlink launch will reuse Falcon Heavy's fairing
Hypothesis about ocean-soaked fairing re-use is that SpaceX built some contamination resistance into Starlink since it is a clean-slate design, once it became obvious catching fairings was not going to happen.

Soaked may be a little strong. If the wave action was low, they seem to have high enough sides to stay pretty dry.

 

[e-FTW]

Soaked may be a little strong. If the wave action was low, they seem to have high enough sides to stay pretty dry.

For sure. But compared to what appears to be clean-room-fresh hardware to my uneducated senses, those might as well have sunk to the bottom and been dragged up in a fishing net. ;-)

 

[mongo]

For sure. But compared to what appears to be clean-room-fresh hardware to my uneducated senses, those might as well have sunk to the bottom and been dragged up in a fishing net. ;-)

Enh, that sea gull byproduct will buff right out.