Thanks mate! That article was actually what prompted my post! We all know SpaceX can handle it since they've opened up some flights to additional cargo...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
It would be hilarious if Amazon does end up buying launches from SpaceX and I would be happy to see SpaceX take Jeff’s money. I would not be surprised if it happens: Kuiper plans on 3,236 sats and has yet to get a single one to orbit. Starlink already has nearly that many in LEO right now. Kuiper is way, way behind. If it is to be a viable competitor and not fall to far behind Starlink it needs every launch vehicle it can buy for the foreseeable future. Given how few are currently available, and how far behind schedule New Glenn and Ariane 6 are, it would be foolish for Amazon not to use SpaceX.
Elon is right that there is room for multiple companies in that market.
It's difficult to overstate how good the actual Post interview is (linked in that article). Great questions, great responses. The launch-on-SX thing was probably the most throwaway comment in the whole half hour interview.
Anyway, Kuiper exploring all launch options makes sense. They have a potential deadline to meet. And of course, it also makes sense for SX to not blackball them and instead to collect the commercial revenue ue. "Hilarious" comments are a bit oddly placed though--competitors in the corporate world have been working together since the beginning of time and this is no different.
It's also worth clarifying for folks who are reading too much into this that Amazon--who has already bought 90 rockets to date--is open to the concept of launching on FH/SS, not that they're actually going to launch on SX, or even that they're actively talking to SX about it.
In that interview, Limp (Amazon VP in charge of Kuiper) basically used an analogy to telecom networks in general when answering "Why, when Starlink is so far ahead?". Basically, he says Kuiper approaches the service differently enough to provide solid competition.
OK, but terrestrial networks are different in that there is an unlimited amount of fiber you can lay down. When you get into cellular you find you can't have 20 telecom companies in one region because there is a finite amount of bandwidth.
For satellite it's even worse. Geosats and Starlink are already fighting over the same frequency bands. It is the reason why the east coast of the US and Canada are oversubscribed for Starlink - geosats have more reserved spectrum in that region. Kuiper will just add to that frequency congestion.
That's my big problem with Kuiper - how are they going to address the scarcity of satellite frequencies.
BTW, first launch of Kuiper's two demo satellites will launch on ULA next year sometime as per that interview. Probably 2H23, although they say 1Q23.
Last edited:
Not sure I understand. They have authorization to use certain frequencies at certain power levels, both in the US (via the FCC) and ROW (via ITU), just as SX and every other satellite operator.
Sort of, yeah--there are certain restrictions on various operators, such as NGSO services not broadcasting on GEO shared frequencies at angles that could interfere with the GEO services. Importantly for Kuiper, as with Starlink, those restrictions are not an unknown, or at least in primary markets like the US. Any significant 'scarcity of spectrum' problem is behind them. (And of course, that's not considering any future challenges, a la Dish at 12GHz, or SX's at Globalstar's frequencies). Kuiper's credible business model is based on a credible traffic/throughput model which is based on credible spectrum and power rights. Now, I'm not exactly sure where they stand on the magnitude of spectrum/power relative to, say, Starlink, but its not like Kuiper is in some kind of nebulous "I sure hope we're allowed to broadcast once we get on orbit" zone of uncertainty.
Bit off the main point here, but it's worth reiterating that Kuiper's ace [relative to Starlink] when it comes to ROI is their internal demand.
Not really. The only differentiatior he spoke of is that they would have millisecond closer access to the worldwide AWS backbone. but Starlink uses the Google backbone, so kinda of a wash. And frankly not that important.
Starlink costs are lower since SpaceX launches their own satellites. Kuiper costs will be lower since Amazon owns a worldwide Internet backbone. Whatever…
From that Tweet:
"The first shipset. The first of many. "
I mean, I guess that at one engine every 18 months you could eventually ship "many"...
I was being generous by not saying 1 engine every 2.5 years on averageHey, that's a shipset, so two engines
:
Yeah, in NASA report, SpaceX is making a Raptor a day.
Similar threads
- Article
