Author Topic: Boeing Smallsat Constellation  (Read 17646 times)

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3479
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1891
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #40 on: 12/09/2017 09:33 PM »
This sounds a lot like the agreement that OneWeb has with Airbus Defense and Space to build and launch the sats while OneWeb then operates them.

Boeing would be the builder/launch agent but not the operator.

In both cases as long as the constellation is making money the builders would see a constant income form building sats.

At some point the two would be operated by a single entity even though there are two sat manufactures for the two different sats.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3809
  • US
  • Liked: 3164
  • Likes Given: 1854
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #41 on: 01/02/2018 02:38 AM »
I hadn't noticed that Boeing filed amendments to transfer two of their proposed constellations to Greg Wyler.  One was shown above, and here is the other:

SAT-AMD-20171206-00168 (for original filing SAT-LOA-20161115-00109, a 60 satellite Ka band constellation)

SpaceX and O3B/SES have filed papers registering themselves as interested parties in these proceedings.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6236
  • Liked: 4057
  • Likes Given: 5570
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #42 on: 01/03/2018 01:53 PM »
I hadn't noticed that Boeing filed amendments to transfer two of their proposed constellations to Greg Wyler.  One was shown above, and here is the other:

SAT-AMD-20171206-00168 (for original filing SAT-LOA-20161115-00109, a 60 satellite Ka band constellation)

SpaceX and O3B/SES have filed papers registering themselves as interested parties in these proceedings.

Would it make sense to have multiple different satellite vendors/configurations in an integrated constellation?  Is this the intent, or is the licensing of the spectrum only on the table, and OneWeb would be able to fill it with whatever sats it chose (or would Boeing still be the satellite designer/builder and possibly launcher)?
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3809
  • US
  • Liked: 3164
  • Likes Given: 1854
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #43 on: 01/03/2018 02:01 PM »
I hadn't noticed that Boeing filed amendments to transfer two of their proposed constellations to Greg Wyler.  One was shown above, and here is the other:

SAT-AMD-20171206-00168 (for original filing SAT-LOA-20161115-00109, a 60 satellite Ka band constellation)

SpaceX and O3B/SES have filed papers registering themselves as interested parties in these proceedings.

Would it make sense to have multiple different satellite vendors/configurations in an integrated constellation?  Is this the intent, or is the licensing of the spectrum only on the table, and OneWeb would be able to fill it with whatever sats it chose (or would Boeing still be the satellite designer/builder and possibly launcher)?

Another document filed by Boeing/Wyler went to great lengths pointing out this transfer is not to OneWeb.  Personally I'd guess that Wyler would eventually transfer the ownership to OneWeb when they got to a point in the process where the rules would permit it.  It doesn't seem even remotely reasonable that Wyler would use these outside of OneWeb.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3809
  • US
  • Liked: 3164
  • Likes Given: 1854
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #44 on: 02/23/2018 04:42 PM »
Eric Berger wrote an article about these strange proposed transfers.

[Ars Technica] There’s something strange going on amid the satellite Internet rush

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3809
  • US
  • Liked: 3164
  • Likes Given: 1854
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #45 on: 07/30/2018 06:02 PM »
Quote
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF AMENDMENTS

The Boeing Company and SOM1101, LLC (the “Parties”), by their undersigned counsel,
hereby withdraw the: (1) Amendment of the Boeing Company, File No. SAT-AMD-20171206-
00167 to File No. SAT-LOA-20160622-00058, Call Sign S2966; and (2) Amendment of the
Boeing Company, File No. SAT-ADM-20171206-00168 to File No. SAT-LOA-20161115-
00109, Call Sign S2977 (together, the “Amendments”) in the above caption and all pleadings and
correspondence filed in support thereof. The Parties no longer wish to pursue the Amendments.

Offline Ragmar

  • Member
  • Posts: 89
  • Space is the Place
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #46 on: 08/01/2018 06:30 PM »
Are these the amendments that proposed transferring some of the rights to Greg Wyler?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3809
  • US
  • Liked: 3164
  • Likes Given: 1854
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #47 on: 08/01/2018 06:33 PM »
Are these the amendments that proposed transferring some of the rights to Greg Wyler?

Yes.

Offline Ragmar

  • Member
  • Posts: 89
  • Space is the Place
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #48 on: 08/02/2018 07:38 PM »
So Boeing is now not transferring anything to Greg Wyler?  That's crazy news if true; surprised it hasn't been reported on yet.

Online DigitalMan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 551
  • Liked: 99
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Boeing Smallsat Constellation
« Reply #49 on: 08/02/2018 08:56 PM »
I wonder did the talks fall apart or does Boeing now have plans to build and launch a constellation?  What are the deadlines for action?

Tags: