Author Topic: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings  (Read 170607 times)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #360 on: 07/28/2021 05:24 pm »
SpaceX filed for a gateway in Elbert, CO, but the accompanying report (and the coordinates that were presumably copied from that report) is for Minneapolis, MN.  So I'm guessing they're looking at putting gateways in both places.

Offline starsilk

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
  • Denver
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 112
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #361 on: 07/28/2021 05:54 pm »
SpaceX filed for a gateway in Elbert, CO, but the accompanying report (and the coordinates that were presumably copied from that report) is for Minneapolis, MN.  So I'm guessing they're looking at putting gateways in both places.

There's a glaring gap in gateway coverage in the Denver-metro area right now, so there's a need for something in the area. My reservation might actually turn into an order finally...

Elbert is a three horse town, perhaps four horses on Sunday mornings - I had no idea there was fiber backhaul anywhere near there. They likely got a huge deal on the property and taxes if true, though, the county is basically bankrupt.

Offline snotis

Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #362 on: 08/03/2021 04:28 pm »
FCC Ex Parte PDF - SpaceX presentation on Gen2 Starlink:

https://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=12105471

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #363 on: 08/03/2021 05:00 pm »
The modification mentioned doesn't appear to have been filed yet.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #364 on: 08/04/2021 05:08 am »
In addition to the slightly smaller second generation user terminal, it looks like they may also have a slightly larger one for HP ESIMs (High Performance Earth Stations in Motion)?

This link will break when the real file number is assigned:
SES-LIC-INTR2021-03015


Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #365 on: 08/18/2021 11:14 pm »
Generation 2 amendment SAT-AMD-20210818-00105: FCC.report / FCC

They're proposing two different configurations, depending on if Starship works in the short term or they need to keep using F9.  They mention single plane deployment with Starship, and it seems 110-120 would be the plane size for those.

Quote
the satellites will be somewhat larger and generate more power, enabling them to support expanded capabilities now and accommodate additional payloads in the future. The Gen2 satellites will have enhanced reliability by building upon the design and operational history of the current deployment. While SpaceX was able to work extensively with the astronomy community to mitigate the reflectivity on its first-generation satellites, it has now taken that experience to design less reflective satellites from the beginning.
...
Both Configurations 1 and 2 will operate within an expanded altitude range of -50km to +70km. This increased altitude range provides the operational flexibility needed in light of the denser atmospheric conditions in which Starlink operates, helping to account for the significant impact of solar cycles.
« Last Edit: 08/18/2021 11:17 pm by gongora »

Offline Kiwi53

  • Member
  • Posts: 82
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 111
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #366 on: 08/27/2021 12:51 am »
Gwynne:

“When responsible operators don’t weaponize licensing, then we can make this work”

Hmm.

Hinting an Old-Space + Old-Comms keiretsu?

"Amazon is urging the Federal Communications Commission to dismiss SpaceX’s revised plans for its second-generation Starlink constellation, saying they are too broad and speculative."

Also New Space

https://spacenews.com/amazon-calls-on-fcc-to-reject-spacexs-revised-second-gen-starlink-plan/

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26221
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 49311
  • Likes Given: 16905
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #367 on: 09/01/2021 04:09 pm »
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1433098903600214018

Quote
SpaceX responds to Amazon's request that the FCC dismiss the Starlink Gen2 amendment, calling it "a continuation of efforts by the Amazon family of companies to hinder competitors" and referencing Blue Origin's lawsuit against NASA:

Highlights mine: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/ib/forms/reports/swr031b.hts?q_set=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number/%3D/SATLOA2020052600055&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #368 on: 09/01/2021 05:58 pm »
I'd like this thread to maintain a high signal to noise ratio.  For those who don't follow these proceedings very often, I can assure you that filings like the recent ones back and forth between Amazon and SpaceX are quite common, and SpaceX's lawyers play some of the same games.  Stuff like Elon's tweets regarding the situation don't need to be in this thread, and neither do posts just complaining about Amazon.

Offline dondar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 392
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 282
  • Likes Given: 224
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #369 on: 09/01/2021 09:01 pm »
What decided ITU  in 2019
https://www.itu.int/en/mediacentre/Pages/2019-PR23.aspx
....
Filings for frequency assignments to NGSO satellite systems composed of hundreds and thousands of satellites have been received by ITU since 2011, in particular in frequency bands allocated to the fixed-satellite service or the mobile-satellite service....

Under the newly adopted regulatory approach these systems will be required to deploy 10 per cent of their constellations within two years from the end of the current period for bringing into use, 50 per cent within five years, and complete the deployment within seven years.


If FCC will copy this rules for USA   approval for V band StarLink`s network will be cancelled  in this year..
Incorrect. I've highlighted the key words.
Hint, from ITU POV Starlink was started at 9 february 2018.
ITU separates intentions and implementation phases.(operators have to start deployment within 7 years from the approval date if I am not mistaken).
"First come first serve" is very critical and somehow is very fair rule.

In any case V band is not regulated really. It is possible they will make full set rules in 2023. It is possible that SpaceX will shift their applications to 71+GHz (I strongly believe that. Because physics demands it).
The resolution with boring frequencies 47-51GHz stipulates that SpaceX should launch first V-Band sat before 22  November 2022.(I don't remember if SpaceX is using exactly this range, but I expect they do).  And they have to complete the V-Band constellation correspondingly before 2029.
There are indeed provisions with possibilities to expand regulatory time of deployment.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #370 on: 09/08/2021 03:21 pm »
Maybe we need a "Bickering between LEO operators" thread

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26221
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 49311
  • Likes Given: 16905
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #371 on: 09/08/2021 04:36 pm »
Maybe we need a "Bickering between LEO operators" thread

Yes agreed, now created:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=54747.msg2287314#msg2287314

Let’s keep this main thread for new and revised application details and the results of the approval process.

Offline vsatman

Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #372 on: 09/08/2021 09:08 pm »

1) ITU separates intentions and implementation phases.(operators have to start deployment within 7 years from the approval date if I am not mistaken).

2) In any case V band is not regulated really. It is possible they will make full set rules in 2023. It is possible that SpaceX will shift their applications to 71+GHz (I strongly believe that. Because physics demands it).

for 1) Thanks, You are right..
for 2) I mean that very important volume of hardware, chips, tranceiver, LNB etc what are produced for each band...May be for 71 GHz  all this in production?

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5587
  • Liked: 8071
  • Likes Given: 766
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #373 on: 12/16/2021 01:52 am »
This year's disposal failure report to FCC, 4 satellites failed at or near operational orbit since April 2nd.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #374 on: 12/18/2021 07:28 pm »
SES-MOD-20211216-01909
Quote
license authorizing operation of next-generation end-user earth stations (“UTs”) for use at fixed locations. In support of that application, SpaceX Services provided an analysis of the non-ionizing radiation levels for its UTs in compliance with the methods described in FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin Number 65 (Edition 97-01) (“Bulletin 65”) as adjusted to account for an updated IEEE standard that Bulletin 65 had relied upon in part.2 Those calculations demonstrated that the UTs will not result in exposure levels exceeding the applicable radiation hazard limits so long as they observe a maximum transmit duty cycle of 10.3 percent.

Bulletin 65 states that it “is not intended to establish mandatory procedures, and other methods and procedures may be acceptable if based on sound engineering.” Moreover, the bulletin recognizes that “n some cases, . . . measurements or a more detailed analysis may be required.” In this case, a fundamental assumption of the IEEE analysis may not apply to the flat planar nature of the SpaceX Services UT.6 Accordingly, SpaceX Services has undertaken to directly measure power density emitted in the near field region—rather than calculate predicted values—to determine whether the UT would comply with the Commission’s radiation limits at a higher duty cycle. As demonstrated below, these measurements show that the UT will comply so long as it observes a maximum transmit duty cycle of 17.5 percent. Accordingly, SpaceX Services requests that its authorization be modified to allow operations up to that duty cycle.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Liked: 1927
  • Likes Given: 8375
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #375 on: 12/27/2021 08:42 pm »
It appears that on December 23, the FCC accepted the filing of SpaceX's Gen2 amendment.  In addition, the FCC asked several questions.

Quote
Dear Mr. Wiltshire:

On May 26, 2020, Space Exploration Holdings, LLC (SpaceX) submitted the above-referenced application for authority to construct, deploy, and operate a constellation in a configuration consisting of approximately 30,000 non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellites operating in low-earth orbit (LEO).

SpaceX amended this application on August 18, 2021. To assist the Satellite Division’s review of the application, as amended, please provide the information requested below.

1. SpaceX describes this satellite system as its “next-generation Gen2 System” and states that its Gen2 system is meant to complement its first generation system.4 Please clarify the relationship between SpaceX’s first generation satellite system and the Gen2 system SpaceX proposes in this application and amendment. Does SpaceX plan to operate both systems simultaneously? Will SpaceX deploy replacement satellites for the first generation system in addition to deploying satellites in this Gen2 system, or will the Gen2 satellites be deployed in lieu of first generation system replacement satellites? Will a customer user terminal be able to access satellites from either system, or will there be separate customer user terminals for each system?

2. Section 25.159 of the Commission’s rules states that applicants for one licensed-but-unbuilt NGSO-like satellite system in a particular frequency band will not be permitted to apply for another NGSO-like satellite system in that frequency band. SpaceX requests frequencies in its Gen2 system application that are the same as frequencies authorized for its first generation system. Please address the applicability of section 25.159, particularly with respect to those frequencies requested in this Gen2 application that overlap with those authorized in the first generation system, given that SpaceX has not yet completed deploying its first generation system, or reached the minimum 50% required by milestone rules. Please address the cadence of launches going forward with respect to the currently authorized system.

3. SpaceX states that it will generally observe a minimum elevation angle as low as 25 degrees, although certain shells may use lower elevations in certain circumstances. In its original application, SpaceX states that satellites in the high inclination shells operating at altitudes of 360 km and 373 km will observe a minimum elevation angle of five degrees for gateways located inside the Polar Regions. Given the amended orbital parameters, please indicate for each alternative orbital configuration which satellites would observe a minimum elevation angle below 25 degrees.

4. Please provide additional detail regarding SpaceX’s launch plans for the Gen2 system.  Specifically, for each of the alternative orbital configurations described in SpaceX’s application, what is the anticipated order for launching into the various altitudes and orbital planes? Does SpaceX have any updates regarding the expected timing of launches for the Gen2 system, and does SpaceX have an estimated timeline in which it would plan to notify the Commission concerning which of the two configurations it plans to deploy?

5. In the amended legal narrative and technical attachment, SpaceX states it will conduct testing of its Gen2 satellites at low insertion altitudes before orbit-raising them to operational altitudes, consistent with the authorization for its first generation satellites. However, elsewhere in the technical attachment, SpaceX states the new configuration of satellites will allow for direct-to-station launches, and we note at least one public statement concerning direct injection of satellites into the operational altitude. Please clarify how SpaceX intends to deploy its Gen2 satellites.

6. What is the expected reliability of SpaceX’s Gen2 post-mission disposal systems? Does SpaceX expect the satellites will have reliability of systems necessary for post-mission disposal that is onpar with its first generation system to date?

7. Given the updated orbital parameters, please confirm whether the expected in-orbit lifetime of a fully-functional SpaceX Gen2 satellite will continue to be five to seven years?

8. Will SpaceX’s Gen2 satellites employ an identical automated collision avoidance system as that used for its first generation system, or has SpaceX made improvements or otherwise altered the system? Please confirm whether SpaceX will observe a risk threshold of 0.001% as the trigger for a collision avoidance maneuver, as indicated in its original application.

9. SpaceX indicates that it has “maintained an overall probability of collision with small debris (down to one millimeter in diameter) sufficient to prevent compliance with post-mission disposal maneuvers of less than 0.01 for an individual Gen2 space station during its mission lifetime.”  Please clarify this statement. What is the probability of collision with small debris per satellite, as calculated using the NASA Debris Assessment Software (DAS)? Of the two alternative orbital configurations described in SpaceX’s amended application, which has a lower probability overall of collision with small debris?

10. Please provide a description of how SpaceX’s “internal software leveraging NASA’s Debris Assessment Software” works. How does SpaceX’s software differ from DAS? What are the input parameters? What is the casualty risk result obtained from simply using the NASA DAS, and how does this compare with the results of SpaceX’s calculation? Please provide for reference a “standard” DAS analysis, including supporting material concerning input data, to the extent this would help to illustrate the differences.

11. Does SpaceX plan to utilize spacers and/or stiffening rods as part of the deployment of the satellites requested in this application?

12. Please indicate whether the application, as modified, includes all satellites for which SpaceX is pursuing regulatory approval for operations in the frequency bands included in the referenced IBFS files, whether from the FCC, other ITU Administrations, or other national licensing authorities. To the extent there are any such satellites not described in the application, please provide information concerning the deployment plans for those satellites, including the number of such satellites and whether they are intended as substitutes or replacements for the satellites request in this application, or additional deployments.

Please submit the requested information by January 7, 2022.

Sincerely,
Karl A. Kensinger
Chief, Satellite Division
International Bureau

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5587
  • Liked: 8071
  • Likes Given: 766
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #376 on: 12/28/2021 02:18 am »
It appears that on December 23, the FCC accepted the filing of SpaceX's Gen2 amendment.  In addition, the FCC asked several questions.

I saw the questions, but I'm not sure it means FCC "accepted" the filing, I think there were some fights about whether FCC should make this amendment available for public comment, has that fight been won?

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8992
  • US
  • Liked: 11163
  • Likes Given: 4985
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #377 on: 12/28/2021 02:53 am »
It appears that on December 23, the FCC accepted the filing of SpaceX's Gen2 amendment.  In addition, the FCC asked several questions.

I saw the questions, but I'm not sure it means FCC "accepted" the filing, I think there were some fights about whether FCC should make this amendment available for public comment, has that fight been won?

It was accepted for filing, which is nowhere near granting a license.

Online pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 813
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3292
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #378 on: 12/28/2021 12:52 pm »
From the Public Notice

"The applications listed below have been found, upon initial review, to be acceptable for filing. The Commission reserves
the right to return any of the applications if, upon further examination, it is determined that the application is not in
conformance with the Commission's rules or its policies. Consideration of each satellite application in this Public Notice
may depend on the Commission's action on another satellite application earlier in the queue. Petitions, oppositions, and
other pleadings filed in response to this notice should conform to Section 25.154 of the Commission's rules, unless
otherwise noted. 47 C.F.R. § 25.154."

"This public notice is without prejudice to issues raised on the record of this proceeding by Kuiper Systems, LLC.; Viasat, Inc.; EchoStar Satellite Services LLC. and Hughes Network Systems LLC.; SES Americom and O3B Limited; and Eutelsat S.A., regarding the acceptability of the mutually exclusive proposals in SpaceX's application."

Source https://licensing.fcc.gov/ibfsweb/ib.page.FetchPN?report_key=14146066

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Liked: 1927
  • Likes Given: 8375
Re: Starlink : New FCC and ITU Filings
« Reply #379 on: 12/28/2021 01:51 pm »
It appears that on December 23, the FCC accepted the filing of SpaceX's Gen2 amendment.  In addition, the FCC asked several questions.

I saw the questions, but I'm not sure it means FCC "accepted" the filing, I think there were some fights about whether FCC should make this amendment available for public comment, has that fight been won?

To me, it looks like that fight, small though it is, has been won.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1