Quote from: Robotbeat on 06/24/2017 12:00 amI think SpaceX would be open to receiving investment from the likes of SES for the constellation, but SpaceX (with Google's help) is willing to do this alone if they have to.And I wouldn't assume that "those who matter already know" SpaceX is going to do the constellation. SpaceX has already mentioned it, yes, but what SpaceX is attempting to do, the bandwidth per satellite, the incredibly ambitious phased array, the non-rad-hard electronics, the raw scale, the extremely low latencies, the laser interconnects, the high bandwidth and low cost per end user, and the envisioned extremely low cost of both launch and manufacture of the satellites (with ambitious electric propulsion especially for the VLEO ones), is easily ambitious enough to get basically anyone to scoff, maybe ESPECIALLY those who are deeply experienced in the industry.Like NASA views ITS, the captains of the commsat industry still haven't stopped laughing. SpaceX is allowing them that luxury on purpose.The scale of vertical integration is again quite unlike anything in the industry. Not sure it would fit any better than partnering with Orbital ATK or AJR for launch business.They plan to design, build, launch, and operate the constellation. Not much room for teaming arrangements.
I think SpaceX would be open to receiving investment from the likes of SES for the constellation, but SpaceX (with Google's help) is willing to do this alone if they have to.And I wouldn't assume that "those who matter already know" SpaceX is going to do the constellation. SpaceX has already mentioned it, yes, but what SpaceX is attempting to do, the bandwidth per satellite, the incredibly ambitious phased array, the non-rad-hard electronics, the raw scale, the extremely low latencies, the laser interconnects, the high bandwidth and low cost per end user, and the envisioned extremely low cost of both launch and manufacture of the satellites (with ambitious electric propulsion especially for the VLEO ones), is easily ambitious enough to get basically anyone to scoff, maybe ESPECIALLY those who are deeply experienced in the industry.Like NASA views ITS, the captains of the commsat industry still haven't stopped laughing. SpaceX is allowing them that luxury on purpose.
Them missing bit is local market access.Do you really want to deal with (for example) Malaysia's department of communication, and learn to understand Malaysia's culture well enough to market there (whether B2B or B2C?) or do you want to partner with a/the local communication players, so that you provide the technology, and they provide the market interface?
Quote from: meekGee on 06/24/2017 06:58 pmThem missing bit is local market access.Do you really want to deal with (for example) Malaysia's department of communication, and learn to understand Malaysia's culture well enough to market there (whether B2B or B2C?) or do you want to partner with a/the local communication players, so that you provide the technology, and they provide the market interface?In his Seattle speech Elon Musk said explicitly that they want to cooperate with local providers to avoid the problem of local regulations. I would not take that as gospel though. When local providers are not cooperative, say in the USA, they may do it differently.
SES isn't a local provider though. Don't they themselves work with local providers?
Based in San Francisco, Webpass focuses on providing blazing fast internet connections for residential and commercial buildings in the US using point-to-point wireless technology.
I think, with EM was referring to is negotiating what is commonly called landing rights. These aren't for airplanes or even rockets. It is the local countries regulatory authority to operate radiofrequency equipment that receive/transmit signals to satellites. If SpaceX is granted FCC authority that gives them the equivalent of landing rights in the USA. Part of this whole process is to get permission to use these frequencies worldwide. But just having worldwide authorization to use these frequencies doesn't mean that you have permission in an individual country. For that, you need to negotiate landing rights.
Quote from: DAZ on 06/24/2017 09:40 pmI think, with EM was referring to is negotiating what is commonly called landing rights. These aren't for airplanes or even rockets. It is the local countries regulatory authority to operate radiofrequency equipment that receive/transmit signals to satellites. If SpaceX is granted FCC authority that gives them the equivalent of landing rights in the USA. Part of this whole process is to get permission to use these frequencies worldwide. But just having worldwide authorization to use these frequencies doesn't mean that you have permission in an individual country. For that, you need to negotiate landing rights.In one of his articles Peter B de Selding speculated that none of these proposed constellations are likely to get landing rights in China or India. Getting landing rights around the world is going to be a huge pain.
Betcha SpaceX could get landing rights in India. China is tough due to censorship.
Something a low-latency 4425 satellite constellation could do very well?Manage a global cloud computer/swarm intelligence for millions of autonomous electric vehicles...Just saying...
Quote from: ZachF on 07/03/2017 06:04 pmSomething a low-latency 4425 satellite constellation could do very well?Manage a global cloud computer/swarm intelligence for millions of autonomous electric vehicles...Just saying...Id be kinda surprised if every Tesla didn't start having a phased array antenna embedded well before the Constellation is even up and running. Might not work well with a glass roof so maybe under the frunk.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 07/06/2017 02:48 amBetcha SpaceX could get landing rights in India. China is tough due to censorship.Odds on all Tesla's coming with it built in.Then Musk can say: "We can't customize Tesla for your market. This network is an integral part of AutoDrive and Support."
Then Chinese government can ask Tesla to go to hell, like they do with Google.