Been waiting for this one...QuoteDue to SpaceX’s decision to minimize risk by using the low injection altitude of 350 km, in the unlikely event any satellites after the initial launch experience immediate failure upon deployment, they would decay to the point of demise very quickly – as little as two weeks to at most eight months depending on the solar cycle....As discussed in its application, SpaceX plans to deploy two versions of its initial satellites with configurations that include a slightly different set of components. The first version, comprising fewer than 75 satellites, will include an iron thruster and steel reaction wheels on each satellite. As a result of its continuing efforts to attain full demisability, SpaceX now expects to replace the thruster and reaction wheel components in subsequent satellites to use components that will demise fully in the atmosphere. SpaceX no longer intends to deploy any satellites that include the silicon carbide component originally contemplated. Changing the construction of the inter-satellite laser components? It's hard to imagine them getting rid of interconnects altogether.
Due to SpaceX’s decision to minimize risk by using the low injection altitude of 350 km, in the unlikely event any satellites after the initial launch experience immediate failure upon deployment, they would decay to the point of demise very quickly – as little as two weeks to at most eight months depending on the solar cycle....As discussed in its application, SpaceX plans to deploy two versions of its initial satellites with configurations that include a slightly different set of components. The first version, comprising fewer than 75 satellites, will include an iron thruster and steel reaction wheels on each satellite. As a result of its continuing efforts to attain full demisability, SpaceX now expects to replace the thruster and reaction wheel components in subsequent satellites to use components that will demise fully in the atmosphere. SpaceX no longer intends to deploy any satellites that include the silicon carbide component originally contemplated.
The thing that's encouraging about this is that it means that ~75 satellites have already been manufactured...
SpaceX’s Starlink satellite lawyers refute latest “flawed” OneWeb critiqueBy Eric RalphPosted on March 22, 2019After years of relentless legal badgering from internet satellite constellation competitor OneWeb, SpaceX’s regulatory and legal affairs team appears to have begun to (in a professional manner) lose patience with the constant barrage.On February 21st, SpaceX published a withering refutation of OneWeb’s latest criticism that offered a range of no-holds-barred counterarguments, painting the competitor – or at least its legal affairs department – as an entity keen on trying to undermine Starlink with FCC-directed critiques based on flawed reasoning, false assumptions, misinterpretations, and more. Alongside a number of memorable one-liners and retorts, legal counselors William Wiltshire and Paul Caritj and SpaceX executives Patricia Cooper and David Goldman openly “wonder whether OneWeb would be satisfied with SpaceX operating at any altitude whatsoever.”
Quote from: WormPicker959 on 03/22/2019 04:03 amThe thing that's encouraging about this is that it means that ~75 satellites have already been manufactured...or are in the process of being manufactured.
SpaceX Claims To Have Redesigned Its Starlink Satellites To Eliminate Casualty RisksA revised design means dead satellites will burn up completely in the atmosphereBy Mark Harris 21 Mar 2019 | 19:30 GMThttps://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/satellites/spacex-claims-to-have-redesigned-its-starlink-satellites-to-eliminate-casualty-risks
Quote from: gongora on 03/22/2019 10:19 amQuote from: WormPicker959 on 03/22/2019 04:03 amThe thing that's encouraging about this is that it means that ~75 satellites have already been manufactured...or are in the process of being manufactured.Or to turn the pessimism up to 11, 75 of some set of parts have been ordered.They may be confident about being able to do fully demisable components, but looking to refine the production process so doing the first few as only mostly demisable speeds things up or makes them cheaper.The fully manufactured interpretation would be great - launch isn't that far away.
If SpaceX was super early in the design/manufacturing process, tho, they could’ve gone fully demisable from the start. So I agree it’s a (small) confirmation they’ve been making progress.
I will admit up front, I have not followed every posting for this topic, so be gentle if the question is about something previously discussed here ;-)Is the Starlink spacecraft bus designed only for one mission? Can the bus be easily used/adapted for other payloads?
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/22/2019 10:53 pmIf SpaceX was super early in the design/manufacturing process, tho, they could’ve gone fully demisable from the start. So I agree it’s a (small) confirmation they’ve been making progress.Specifying something doesn't mean you know how to build it fast, reliably and cheap.
Thanks Robotbeat and JBF. I'm just wondering who will try to commoditize satellite buses for the small sat market? lots of smaller countries and government agencies would probably love to buy an inexpensive, standard bus that meets the their basic requirement and then just concentrate on designing and building their own payloads. Of course price will be the key.
I don't understand these earth station filings. They only list one antenna per site. With a steerable antenna following satellites in a LEO constellation wouldn't you have multiple antennas? (O3B uses three at their gateways, I think it's two live and one backup). I guess these filings are just for early testing of limited functionality, and the sites will get more antennas later?