Author Topic: Eutelsat OneWeb: Constellation - General Thread  (Read 682245 times)

Offline Rondaz

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27059
  • Liked: 5301
  • Likes Given: 169
There will likely be massive collisions in the future. Satellite operators should be required to report significant 🛰 anomolies rather than hide endemic failures. The FCC has yet to take a position on this.

https://twitter.com/greg_wyler/status/1168612240062341120

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9104
  • Likes Given: 885
If this was SpaceX there would be 100 articles and tweets about it in 2 hours, but this is OneWeb so nobody pays any attention, but remember this when you see Greg Wyler talks about being responsible in space:

Radio astronomers worried about OneWeb interference

Quote
OneWeb has resumed conversations about potential interference from its planned megaconstellation after talks stalled out three years ago, according to the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), which operates radio telescopes in the United States and its territories.

The observatory raised the issue with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, saying OneWeb shouldn’t be talking about starting operations because the company had not met a commission rule that it first coordinate spectrum it wants to use that is adjacent to where astronomers do research.

“The particular issue with OneWeb and their current plan is they need an operating agreement which they didn’t seek,” Tony Beasley, director of NRAO, told SpaceNews in an interview.

Quote
Beasley said that SpaceX, while a concern to optical astronomers, has not been a source of worry for radio astronomers.

“SpaceX set an excellent example on being responsible and trying to listen and deal with the issues that have come up,” said Beasley. “Full marks to them.”

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13469
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11869
  • Likes Given: 11115
<Wyler's tweet>
FUD.

Discussed in multiple other threads.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Tywin

The Arctic will be her first market...

Quote
London September 4, 2019 – OneWeb, whose goal is to connect everyone everywhere, today announced the details of its Arctic high-speed, low-latency internet service. OneWeb will deliver 375 Gbps of capacity above the 60th parallel North. With service starting in 2020, there will be enough capacity to give fiber-like connectivity to hundreds of thousands of homes, planes, and boats, connecting millions across the Arctic.


https://www.oneweb.world/media-center/oneweb-brings-fiber-like-internet-for-the-arctic-in-2020
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline Mammutti

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 297
  • Liked: 694
  • Likes Given: 2033
https://twitter.com/OneWeb/status/1169567301684928512

Quote from: OneWeb
Preparing the ground at one of our European satellite network portal sites, which will eventually house 15 antennas

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6351
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4223
  • Likes Given: 2
Oops...

https://advanced-television.com/2019/09/19/intelsat-alleges-fraud-at-oneweb-softbank/

Quote
Intelsat alleges fraud at OneWeb/SoftBank

A potentially devastating dispute has broken out between two former “cooperation” joint-venture partners: Intelsat has filed a lawsuit against OneWeb and its financial backer Japan’s SoftBank.

The writ alleges that the OneWeb and SoftBank conspired together in stealing confidential information, because – the writ states – SoftBank no longer believed in the OneWeb project and was seeking to protect its previous investment in OneWeb,
>
DM

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
  • Liked: 2506
  • Likes Given: 10522
Would be interested in seeing the complaint.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6351
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4223
  • Likes Given: 2
Space News writeup

https://spacenews.com/intelsat-sues-oneweb-softbank/

Quote
>
Intelsat’s 2015 investment in OneWeb was contingent upon a commercial agreement giving Intelsat customers access to OneWeb communications services, according to the complaint. The companies signed an agreement in late 2015 that made Intelsat the “sole and exclusive worldwide and regional distributor” of OneWeb communications services to customers in four markets: aviation, maritime, oil and gas, and the U.S. government, the complaint added.
>
In 2016, SoftBank invested nearly $1 billion in OneWeb, acquiring a 40 percent stake in the company, according to the complaint. Then, “in willful breach” of OneWeb’s agreement with Intelsat, OneWeb agreed to let SoftBank purchase 100 percent of its future satellite capacity and appointed SoftBank as its exclusive global distributor of communications services
>
« Last Edit: 09/20/2019 06:51 am by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Swedish chef

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 223
  • Likes Given: 310
Would be interested in seeing the complaint.

I believe the attached pdf is the complaint (INTELSAT US LLC V. WORLDVU DEVELOPMENT LLC D/B/A ONEWEB LTD. ET AL) Found here http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/iscroll/SQLData.jsp?IndexNo=655202-2019

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39463
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 33122
  • Likes Given: 8901
I thought this was interesting.

"The companies signed an agreement in late 2015 that made Intelsat the “sole and exclusive worldwide and regional distributor” of OneWeb communications services to customers in four markets: aviation, maritime, oil and gas, and the U.S. government, the complaint added."

Seems like a bargain for only a $25M investment, since that is likely where most of the money will initially be made, like with Iridium. Softbank later invested $1B and was given all the distribution rights! This might end up with Softbank simply paying Intelsat off, to get them off their backs. Not sure how many multiples of that $25M its going to cost, but I would guess at least two.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline niwax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1428
  • Germany
    • SpaceX Booster List
  • Liked: 2045
  • Likes Given: 166
I thought this was interesting.

"The companies signed an agreement in late 2015 that made Intelsat the “sole and exclusive worldwide and regional distributor” of OneWeb communications services to customers in four markets: aviation, maritime, oil and gas, and the U.S. government, the complaint added."

Seems like a bargain for only a $25M investment, since that is likely where most of the money will initially be made, like with Iridium. Softbank later invested $1B and was given all the distribution rights! This might end up with Softbank simply paying Intelsat off, to get them off their backs. Not sure how many multiples of that $25M its going to cost, but I would guess at least two.

Doesn't seem as much of a bargain when your direct competitor somehow gets the same deal years later while you're stuck in a fraud lawsuit.

I find OneWebs business dealings really hard to judge. On the surface, it always seems like a vaguely good deal. However, they have shown a particular blindness when it comes to consequences for getting quick cash, as the Virgin fiasco showed. Think about how BO might have restricted itself in BE-4 development by selling it early, but with multiple launchers, manufacturers, operators and competitors not just under contract but holding a piece of the pie. Couple that with the fact the CEO seem to be in meltdown mode part-time already and I'm not so hopeful anymore. Not to mention they have to sell starting over the arctic due to their design the same year SpaceX might start early service in the US.
Which booster has the most soot? SpaceX booster launch history! (discussion)

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10435
  • US
  • Liked: 14349
  • Likes Given: 6148
Couple that with the fact the CEO seem to be in meltdown mode part-time already and I'm not so hopeful anymore.

What is Steckel doing that you would consider "meltdown mode"?

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
  • Liked: 2506
  • Likes Given: 10522
Two items of interest from the complaint.

(1) The original business plan called for total constellation cost of $4.5 billion (I assume this includes ground segment).  At 900 satellites originally planned, that's $5 million all-in per satellite.  That strikes me as extremely expensive for the intended purpose.

(2) The original business plan focused on the consumer market.  In the second half of 2018, the business plan was changed to focus on the maritime, aviation, and government sectors.  We know that they scaled down the constellation to 600 satellites.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10435
  • US
  • Liked: 14349
  • Likes Given: 6148
(1) The original business plan called for total constellation cost of $4.5 billion (I assume this includes ground segment).  At 900 satellites originally planned, that's $5 million all-in per satellite.  That strikes me as extremely expensive for the intended purpose.

If you use anything besides SpaceX as comparison it would look like by far the cheapest satellites ever made for that level of capability.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
  • Liked: 2506
  • Likes Given: 10522
I wonder how this breaks down.  $1 million for the sat.  $2.5 million for the launch.  $1.5 million for the ground segment?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10435
  • US
  • Liked: 14349
  • Likes Given: 6148
They were aiming for <= $1M per sat but I don't think they quite reached that level.  They haven't publicly given the final costs that I'm aware of.

Offline niwax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1428
  • Germany
    • SpaceX Booster List
  • Liked: 2045
  • Likes Given: 166
Couple that with the fact the CEO seem to be in meltdown mode part-time already and I'm not so hopeful anymore.

What is Steckel doing that you would consider "meltdown mode"?

Sorry, strike that. For some reason I had Wyler as the CEO. He's been behaving oddly a couple of times over the last weeks, the latest one being his "professional opinions" on the SpaceX/ESA thing.
Which booster has the most soot? SpaceX booster launch history! (discussion)

Offline Rondaz

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27059
  • Liked: 5301
  • Likes Given: 169
A @rianru article argues approval of @OneWeb gateways in Russia would give Moscow control over the service in its own territory and that of its neighbours, bridge gap until a domestic system is available and says refusal would not eliminate security risks.

https://twitter.com/Megaconstellati/status/1178050304379703301

Offline Rondaz

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27059
  • Liked: 5301
  • Likes Given: 169
And... here's @OneWeb's @FCC application for its electronically-steered antenna user terminals - 1.5 million devices in the US, 10.7-12.7 GHz band (downlink) and the 14.0-14.5 GHz band (uplink)..

https://twitter.com/meharris/status/1179054749649231873

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10435
  • US
  • Liked: 14349
  • Likes Given: 6148
They filed license applications for two different kinds of user terminals:
400,000 dual-parabolic SES-LIC-INTR2019-03436
1.5M electronically steered antenna SES-LIC-20190930-01217
« Last Edit: 10/02/2019 03:34 am by gongora »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1