Eutelsat OneWeb: Constellation - General Thread

[ulm_atms]

I firmly believe that what happens with OneWeb is dependent on how much if any modification for the FCC licenses could happen...

The only way they could do what is required to keep the licenses currently is if someone with large pockets comes in and continues doing what is required to keep the license.  AKA lots of VC $$$$ and lots more sats launched.

Anything other then lots of $$$ and I don't see how they keep the FCC license as is.

So my bigger questions is....how much can bankruptcy change the FCC license....if any?  I think that will answer what happens more then anything at this point.

[anik]

If my count is correct, 17 of the remaining launches were for Soyuz and the final launch was planned for the debut launch of Ariane 6

3 of 21 Soyuz launches were performed plus one Ariane-6 planned.

I suspect there are lot of partially finished Soyuz rockets somewhere available for discount launches

There are more than 10 finished Soyuz rockets with Fregat upper stages.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

For completeness:

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1244033518365179906

Arianespace, owed about $238 million by OneWeb, says it will “monitor the progress” of the bankruptcy procedure “and has no further comment to make at this time.”

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/bbcamos/status/1244035872732913667

.@Arianespace releases a short statement about @OneWeb’s collapse. According to the bankruptcy filing, the rocket operator is the largest creditor ($238m).

[Steven Pietrobon]

I don't think it would help SpaceX in any way.

Having the satellites in their possession would allow them to be deorbited, thus eliminating a major competitor.

[ChrisWilson68]

I don't think it would help SpaceX in any way.

Having the satellites in their possession would allow them to be deorbited, thus eliminating a major competitor.

It sort of looks like that major competitor doesn't need much help being eliminated.

[RocketGoBoom]

I don't think it would help SpaceX in any way.

Having the satellites in their possession would allow them to be deorbited, thus eliminating a major competitor.

It sort of looks like that major competitor doesn't need much help being eliminated.

If the bankruptcy court trustee does not find any bidders for the assets, the company will go into liquidation. That will likely include an order from the court to de-orbit the satellites while they are still under control. Outside 3rd parties, such as astronomers or maybe even the US military, will likely present a motion to the court asking for that type of court order as a resolution to OneWeb.

Nobody wants fully fueled satellites in LEO and with nobody controlling them.

[ZachS09]

I know that Soyuz has always been the launcher for OneWeb, but I was thinking about whether a Falcon 9 rocket would do the job.

Each OneWeb sat is 147.5 kilograms, and the dispenser is 674 kilograms. With the maximum 36 satellites on the dispenser, the total payload mass is 5,984 kilograms.

I ran an Orbiter 2016 scenario with a test payload of the same mass to a 450 km orbit inclined 87.4 degrees (the typical OneWeb parking orbit) from Vandenberg and had Stage 1 land at LZ-4 while Stage 2 did two burns to achieve the planned orbit.

It turned out that F9 in the simulator had plenty of performance to do an RTLS landing, insert the OneWeb sats into orbit, and deorbit Stage 2 all in the same mission.

The question now is: could SpaceX have done a similar thing if asked to launch the OneWeb sats?

[gongora]

The question now is: could SpaceX have done a similar thing if asked to launch the OneWeb sats?

I don't really understand the point of your question.  Of course F9 is capable of launching the satellites.  So are many other launchers.  In that case the dispenser would have been customized for F9 instead of Soyuz so the number of sats could vary.  At the time the contract was signed (mid-2015), Soyuz wasn't a completely unreasonable choice, especially when there was quite a bit of enmity between OneWeb and SpaceX.  (SpaceX hadn't hit their stride yet.  For those who've forgotten, SpaceX didn't hit a rate of 10+ missions in a year until 2017.)

[CorvusCorax]

I think one player we shouldn't forget in this play is Airbus.

The OneWeb factory that produces the satellite belongs to "One web satellites" which is a joint venture between OneWeb and Airbus Defense and Space

At the same time, Oneweb's largest debtee is Arianespace, which is a subsidiary of Ariane Group, which in turn is a joint venture between French Safran and Airbus Defense and Space

so one could argue both the majority of assets and the majority of debt of Oneweb belongs - indirectly - to Airbus.

It's therefore more or less Airbus decision whether they want to
1. continue building the constellation, launch it, and own it or
2. abandon the entire operation, at which point they sit on a lot of built rockets without a customer and a worthless satellite factory (selling it in the current economical situation would not even cover its scrap value)

they have therefore three options.

variant one: Someone who is seriously interested in building and launching the constellation jumps in and bankrolls the procedure. That would be ideal for Airbus because they have the profits without any of the risks. This would have been the case if Oneweb's financing rounds had been successful.
variant two: Use Oneweb's bankruptcy as an opportunity to become the de-facto owner of Oneweb - build and launch at Airbus own risk, but in turn own the constellation and all the profits. Get rid of all the other Oneweb investors.

variant three: Oneweb dies, Airbus loses all the money and sits on a lot of useless sat building hardware and launchers without a payload. - that doesn't look like the prefered choice.

Airbus won't have problems financing oneweb, thank's to Boeing's epic fail in 2019, their order books are full even despite Covid19

My personal guess is, we'll see Oneweb launched, and it will be owned and operated by a Airbus subsidiary. Probably a joint venture, but with a controlling interest by Airbus.

[ZachS09]

The question now is: could SpaceX have done a similar thing if asked to launch the OneWeb sats?

I don't really understand the point of your question.  Of course F9 is capable of launching the satellites.  So are many other launchers.  In that case the dispenser would have been customized for F9 instead of Soyuz so the number of sats could vary.  At the time the contract was signed (mid-2015), Soyuz wasn't a completely unreasonable choice, especially when there was quite a bit of enmity between OneWeb and SpaceX.  (SpaceX hadn't hit their stride yet.  For those who've forgotten, SpaceX didn't hit a rate of 10+ missions in a year until 2017.)

I meant to talk about the recovery mode. Could F9 in real life have landed Stage 1 at LZ-4 and launched 36 OneWeb satellites just like in the simulator?

[ZachF]

I think one player we shouldn't forget in this play is Airbus.

The OneWeb factory that produces the satellite belongs to "One web satellites" which is a joint venture between OneWeb and Airbus Defense and Space

At the same time, Oneweb's largest debtee is Arianespace, which is a subsidiary of Ariane Group, which in turn is a joint venture between French Safran and Airbus Defense and Space

so one could argue both the majority of assets and the majority of debt of Oneweb belongs - indirectly - to Airbus.

It's therefore more or less Airbus decision whether they want to
1. continue building the constellation, launch it, and own it or
2. abandon the entire operation, at which point they sit on a lot of built rockets without a customer and a worthless satellite factory (selling it in the current economical situation would not even cover its scrap value)

they have therefore three options.

variant one: Someone who is seriously interested in building and launching the constellation jumps in and bankrolls the procedure. That would be ideal for Airbus because they have the profits without any of the risks. This would have been the case if Oneweb's financing rounds had been successful.
variant two: Use Oneweb's bankruptcy as an opportunity to become the de-facto owner of Oneweb - build and launch at Airbus own risk, but in turn own the constellation and all the profits. Get rid of all the other Oneweb investors.

variant three: Oneweb dies, Airbus loses all the money and sits on a lot of useless sat building hardware and launchers without a payload. - that doesn't look like the prefered choice.

Airbus won't have problems financing oneweb, thank's to Boeing's epic fail in 2019, their order books are full even despite Covid19

My personal guess is, we'll see Oneweb launched, and it will be owned and operated by a Airbus subsidiary. Probably a joint venture, but with a controlling interest by Airbus.

I wouldn't rely on Airbus' deep pockets too much... Aircraft orders will probably take a huge hit soon, and see many cancellations and delays on existing ones. Their customer (the airline industry) it taking a huge outsized hit right now.

[ChrisWilson68]

I think one player we shouldn't forget in this play is Airbus.

The OneWeb factory that produces the satellite belongs to "One web satellites" which is a joint venture between OneWeb and Airbus Defense and Space

At the same time, Oneweb's largest debtee is Arianespace, which is a subsidiary of Ariane Group, which in turn is a joint venture between French Safran and Airbus Defense and Space

so one could argue both the majority of assets and the majority of debt of Oneweb belongs - indirectly - to Airbus.

That is incorrect.

The Chapter 11 filing estimates that liabilities are over $1 billion.  What is owed to Airbus is just of $238 million.  That means that Airbus does definitely not own the majority of the debt.  It is the largest single minority owner of debt, but that still means that the other creditors together outvote Airbus on the creditors' committee.

As to Airbus owning the majority of OneWeb's assets -- that's not true either.  OneWeb is the only entity that owns OneWeb's assets.  That's the definition of an asset.  One of those assets is 50% of the satellite factory.  That Airbus owns the other 50% of that is irrelevant, because that other 50% isn't OneWeb's asset.  In terms of OneWeb equity, Airbus only has a minority stake.  Airbus isn't even the largest single holder of OneWeb equity.  That's Softbank.

[By the way, debtee is not a word.  The word you're looking for is creditor.]

It's therefore more or less Airbus decision whether they want to
1. continue building the constellation, launch it, and own it or
2. abandon the entire operation, at which point they sit on a lot of built rockets without a customer and a worthless satellite factory (selling it in the current economical situation would not even cover its scrap value)

It is most definitely not Airbus's decision.

Ultimately, it's the judge that has the last word.  The judge is charged with making sure the company does the best it can to make all the creditors whole, not just Airbus.

Creditors normally form a committee in bankruptcy to advocate to the judge for their interests.  Airbus will have a vote on that committee, but far from a controlling vote.

variant two: Use Oneweb's bankruptcy as an opportunity to become the de-facto owner of Oneweb - build and launch at Airbus own risk, but in turn own the constellation and all the profits. Get rid of all the other Oneweb investors.

Airbus would have to bid for the assets of OneWeb against anyone else interested in those assets.  Airbus has no special advantage over anyone else in that bidding.  The bankruptcy court is charged with getting the maximum value out of the company to make the debtors whole and, if they can all be made whole, maximizing the value for all the original shareholders.

variant three: Oneweb dies, Airbus loses all the money and sits on a lot of useless sat building hardware and launchers without a payload. - that doesn't look like the prefered choice.

The money Airbus has already put in is lost.  It's a sunk cost.  It won't affect the bankruptcy process.

Also, the launchers are likely not owned by Airbus.  They're likely owned by the Russians who are building them.  Airbus is really just a sales agent for these launches.

Airbus won't have problems financing oneweb, thank's to Boeing's epic fail in 2019, their order books are full even despite Covid19

We haven't begun to see the actual effects of COVID-19 on their order book.  This has been, and is continuing to be, a stunning disaster for airlines.  Airbus is virtually certain to be facing years of lean orders.  They are going to be looking to save money anywhere they can.

My personal guess is, we'll see Oneweb launched, and it will be owned and operated by a Airbus subsidiary. Probably a joint venture, but with a controlling interest by Airbus.

I think that's possible, but highly unlikely.  If it happens, it will be because the French government is printing lots of money to try to stimulate the economy and throws a huge amount of it at Airbus.

[ChrisWilson68]

Airbus won't have problems financing oneweb, thank's to Boeing's epic fail in 2019, their order books are full even despite Covid19

While Boeing has had its problems, so has Airbus.  The A380 has been a massive failure for Airbus.  While the 737MAX's problems seem to be fixable, the same is not true for the A380, which has been cancelled.

[noogie]

China looks like it will emerge from this crisis in a reasonable condition and in my local media (Australia) there is already speculation that cashed up Chinese firms may seek to buy local distressed business.
It is possible for a Chinese firm to buy up OneWeb? ITAR will of course be a massive issue but could they simply buy it for the spectrum and ditch everything else?

[ChrisWilson68]

I think we are going heavily of topic with this, but I can't let this stand.

It is off-topic, so I'll just say I disagree and not continue further off topic.

[Kryten]

China looks like it will emerge from this crisis in a reasonable condition and in my local media (Australia) there is already speculation that cashed up Chinese firms may seek to buy local distressed business.
It is possible for a Chinese firm to buy up OneWeb? ITAR will of course be a massive issue but could they simply buy it for the spectrum and ditch everything else?

There have been vague reports that 'a private company in Zhejiang' is interested in acquiring oneweb.

[Robotbeat]

China looks like it will emerge from this crisis in a reasonable condition and in my local media (Australia) there is already speculation that cashed up Chinese firms may seek to buy local distressed business.
It is possible for a Chinese firm to buy up OneWeb? ITAR will of course be a massive issue but could they simply buy it for the spectrum and ditch everything else?

There have been vague reports that 'a private company in Zhejiang' is interested in acquiring oneweb.

FFS, have we learned nothing? I hope somebody in the State Department (or whoever monitors these things) is paying attention.

OneWeb ought to be rescued somehow without being sold to China.

(And no offense at all to anyone Chinese. It's about the government, not you. People are awesome.)

[ChrisWilson68]

I think it is likely China will compete against Starlink in the massive LEO constellation communications market.  But I think they'll do it with their own hardware that they launch on their own launchers, both to develop their domestic industry and for their own national security reasons.

[CorvusCorax]

I think it is likely China will compete against Starlink in the massive LEO constellation communications market.  But I think they'll do it with their own hardware that they launch on their own launchers, both to develop their domestic industry and for their own national security reasons.

Yeah, I think so too.

I'm sure some companies in China might be interested in "buying" Oneweb - if they can get it real cheap due to the chapter 11 - but if so, they probably wouldn't be able to complete the constellation as is, due to both ITAR and neither Airbus nor the Russians being willing to cooperate with them. But there's still intellectual property, patents, and most importantly frequency assignments that would be worth the investment. But they would have to launch their own sats with their own launchers.

And let's face it, China doesn't have an equivalent to Falcon9 - or even Soyuz yet. The only way they launching the constellation with Chinese launchers at this time would be with massive investment from the Chinese government in form of a "get 50 launches on long march for free" license.

And since the frequency assignment apparently expires if it remains unused, this would have to happen quick, too.

How likely is that to happen? How likely is an intervention from a western gov backed entity to invest to prevent it from happening?

Al in all, I don't think we'll see Oneweb become Chinese. But in the mid term I do think we will likely see a Chinese LEO constellation.

[RocketGoBoom]

I think it is likely China will compete against Starlink in the massive LEO constellation communications market.  But I think they'll do it with their own hardware that they launch on their own launchers, both to develop their domestic industry and for their own national security reasons.

An LEO constellation only makes sense if you have customers in many parts of the world. The satellites spend so much time over the ocean and other countries that the utilization rate is incredibly low unless you have customers on every continent.

I doubt that a Chinese government owned LEO constellation will be allowed to offer that type of satellite data network service in much of Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, etc. Look at the political difficulties just to use Huawei equipment in 5G networks. Do you really think any of those countries are going to allow the entire network be owned by the Chinese government and allowed to gain customers (business customers) throughout the west? That is practically begging China to steal 100% of your corporate and scientific intellectual property.

Would anyone in the quasi-free world want to buy internet data service from the Chinese government and be subject to the censorship of the communist dictatorship. That would give the Chinese dictatorship the ability to censor data worldwide if their LEO constellation became widely used. Why would anyone buy it with that risk?

After all of the problems the Chinese government has caused with this virus, I think there is going to be a very hostile attitude towards the ambitions of the Chinese government for many years to come.

If there is no realistic prospect of gaining international customers with a Chinese government owned LEO constellation, I seriously doubt it will be built. China doesn't really need a LEO constellation just to provide broadband in China. They can achieve that with regular terrestrial networks.

Starlink will have a significant first mover advantage over just about every other constellation. And Starlink doesn't really pose the same risk as a LEO constellation owned by the Chinese government. So Starlink is more likely to be the preferred service most other countries and businesses would rather purchase service from.