Quote from: ulm_atms on 02/10/2022 12:51 pmSo what is SpaceX supposed to do?Unfortunately the SpaceNews article is less accurate in reflecting the actual content of the filing, it's better to read it yourself instead: https://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=14584341NASA did provide recommendations on what they think SpaceX should do, mostly doing some simulation and analysis, also requested some information so that NASA can do their simulation and analysis.Overall I think NASA and NSF are fairly cordial and are not out to stop this (unlike SpaceX's competitors). I think this letter is more of a reminder to SpaceX that they need to continue to cooperate with NASA and NSF on this matter (as the letter stated, SpaceX is already cooperating with them).
So what is SpaceX supposed to do?
Do we have ANY information on the size, mass, power of the Starlink gen2 satellites?
Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) issued the following statement on new bipartisan draft legislation seeking to promote competition, innovation, national security, the interests of consumers, and American leadership in the thriving commercial satellite communications industry. The discussion drafts work toward modernizing the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) satellite licensing rules and authorities under the Communications Act, with the goal of promoting responsible space management, incentivizing investment and innovation, and advancing U.S. leadership in next-generation, satellite communications networks. With these discussion drafts, Republicans and Democrats are beginning a robust process on these crucial objectives and seeking feedback from all interested stakeholders. “American companies are at the forefront of developing and deploying broadband and other advanced communications services using satellite technologies, which is revolutionizing the communications marketplace as we know it. As leaders of the Energy and Commerce Committee, we must streamline our regulatory processes to usher in a new era of American innovation and investment in this growing sector, particularly as our economic competitors like China race to dominate this industry, and must ensure our laws and regulations fully protect the public. We are pleased to be working together on these discussion drafts as they are an important step towards developing a bipartisan solution, and we encourage all interested parties to engage with our staffs on these concepts as we fully evaluate these proposals.” Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Frank Pallone, Jr. CLICK HERE to read the Satellite And Telecommunications Streamlining Act discussion draft bill. CLICK HERE to read the Secure Space Act discussion draft bill.
The top Democrat and Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee announced a bipartisan effort Feb. 11 to update satellite licensing rules for the rapidly changing space industry.House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) and the ranking member, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), released drafts of two bills they say will better equip the Federal Communications Commission for regulating a surge of non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellites.They said the draft bills — the Satellite and Telecommunications Streamlining Act and Secure Space Act — mark the first step toward an overhaul of the regulator’s satellite licensing rules and authorities.
... because ISLs exist, the amount of earth to satellite for a single satellite does not have to equal the satellite to earth in general. In fact since Starlink is intended to be capable of pure in network routing from one user to another with ISLs, even for the entire constellation, the amount of data from gateways to satellites does not have to equal the amount of data from satellites to users.
On February 8, there was a flurry of petitions and comments on the Starlink Gen2 system. Apparently, that was the deadline for everybody to get these in. Viasat in particular had a huge filing. Orbcomm, RS Access, the Balance Group, Dish, Kuiper, and SES/O3B also submitted Petitions to Deny or comments.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 02/14/2022 12:49 amDo we have ANY information on the size, mass, power of the Starlink gen2 satellites?Reading the application in the FSS Annex S shows that the feeder link in Gen2 will use the E band (4 channels at 5 GHz). Also, for the Ka band, 8 channels are shown each at 1.6 GHz and 8 channels at 0.5 GHz at the same frequencies. That is, in the sum of the feeder link in Generation 2 will be at 36.8 GHz, compared to 4 GHz in Generation 1. To transmit 10 times more information from the satellite to Earth to the user terminals, it will be necessary to increase the area / size of the FAR antennas by 5-8 times and the power of their transmitter, (it should be taken into account that the orbit of Generation 2 is slightly lower than Generation 1), as well as to increase the size of solar panels and batteries and the thermoregulation system accordingly. Very roughly I would expect 50..60% more satellite weight for an additional 100% bandwidth.
permit request for expanded testing of in-flight terminals (still only 5 at a time, but on various aircraft)0190-EX-CN-2022
SpaceX posted a long consolidated reply to all the oppositions and comments with a longer attachment:https://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=14786541https://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=14786542
SpaceX materials engineers have developed and qualified new coatings specifically designed to mitigate diffuse reflectance (brightness). SpaceX continues to work with leading experts in reflectance characterization as well as industry partners with experience in optical signature characterization and thermal control coatings dating back to the Apollo era, and is engaging in co-development projects with companies that have unique manufacturing capability that can help implement resulting advances.
Viasat claims that SpaceX’s autonomous collision avoidance system “does not incorporate any check to ensure that a planned maneuver to avoid one potential collision does not create an unacceptable risk of collision with other space objects.”20 To the contrary, the system pre-screens any planned trajectory against all known secondary conjunctions to ensure that a planned maneuver to avoid one object will not introduce a new risk with another.
Viasat also criticizes SpaceX’s system for failing to build in the capability to coordinate effectively with other satellite operators in near real-time to avoid having both operators take maneuvers that lead to a collision.21 SpaceX’s system assumes maneuver responsibility for conjunction events by default. In the rare cases where the other operator would prefer to handle the maneuver, SpaceX will prevent the Gen2 satellite from planning a maneuver for that conjunction. Indeed, for certain maneuverable satellites with which it has frequent interactions, SpaceX has worked with the other operators to establish a baseline approach to handling conjunctions that largely eliminates the need for additional oversight for such events.
New report to FCC about 3 Starlink satellites failed at operational orbit: https://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=15313330
The Gen 2 application has been pending for a very long time. Does anyone know what kind of timeline is required for this application to be approved or denied? I assume they legally can't just delay it forever.
