SpaceX Urges Starlink Users to Petition FCC in Spectrum Battle With DishQuote from: pcmag.comSpaceX is escalating a regulatory battle against Dish Network for rights over the 12GHz band by calling on Starlink subscribers to petition the FCC in the company’s favor. On Tuesday, SpaceX sent out a message to US-based Starlink customers, asking them to sign a petition(Opens in a new window), which is designed to be sent to both the FCC and US lawmakers. “Today we ask for your support in ending a lobbying campaign that threatens to make Starlink unusable for you and the vast majority of our American customers,” SpaceX wrote in the message, according(Opens in a new window) to Starlink users on Reddit and Facebook.
SpaceX is escalating a regulatory battle against Dish Network for rights over the 12GHz band by calling on Starlink subscribers to petition the FCC in the company’s favor. On Tuesday, SpaceX sent out a message to US-based Starlink customers, asking them to sign a petition(Opens in a new window), which is designed to be sent to both the FCC and US lawmakers. “Today we ask for your support in ending a lobbying campaign that threatens to make Starlink unusable for you and the vast majority of our American customers,” SpaceX wrote in the message, according(Opens in a new window) to Starlink users on Reddit and Facebook.
Thirty-Eight SpaceX Satellites Reentered from the Launch on February 3, 2022—On February 3, 2022, SpaceX launched 49 satellites into an orbit with a perigee of approximately 210 km. Every satellite achieved controlled flight, but due to a geomagnetic storm, the satellites experienced an increased atmospheric drag approximately 50% higher than all previous launches. As a result, while SpaceX was able to command 11 of the satellites to a drag-stable attitude sufficient to ride out the storm, the other 38 satellites reentered the Earth’s atmosphere and demised.1 Since this event, SpaceX has updated the flight software of our satellites to accommodate similar space weather events in the future and is working toward a solution whereby satellites will include an independent position “beacon” to improve ground antenna pointing.
I. THE COMMISSION’S AUTHORITY OVER SPACE SAFETY IS UNTESTEDAs an initial matter, succumbing to Viasat’s repeated efforts to have the Commission arbitrarily and capriciously treat a single U.S.-licensed operator differently than all others jeopardizes the Commission’s authority over space sustainability, which has an uncertain legislative nexus and has never been tested in court. When first asserting its authority over orbital debris, the Commission argued that orbital debris mitigation is within its scope of authority because “satellite communications are an important component of the national and world-wide radio communications infrastructure” and orbital debris can negatively affect new satellite systems, service delivery, or the safety of manned space flight and people and property on the ground.3 In 2020, the Commission then interpreted this authority to cover space traffic management and space situational awareness on the basis that they “are directly tied to the mitigation of orbital debris,” which in turn, it claimed, was related to its authority to license spectrum in the public interest.4As the Supreme Court has recognized, though afforded wide latitude in its supervision over communication by wire and radio, “the Commission was not delegated unrestrained authority,”5 and the public-interest standard “is not to be interpreted as setting up a standard so indefinite as to confer an unlimited power.”6 Rather, the Commission is required to evaluate license applications taking cognizance of matters within the Commission’s expertise as envisioned by Congress. Indeed, contrary to Viasat’s shotgun approach and meandering claims, Commission action “would be arbitrary and capricious if the agency has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider.”7In no other area does the Commission follow Viasat’s view that the Commission’s authority over the airwaves gives it limitless jurisdiction to the operations of the vehicle on which an antenna resides. The Commission has not claimed jurisdiction to tell broadcasters how to drive TV news vans, or firefighters how to drive their trucks, or tower climbers—once the most dangerous job in America—the safest way to climb the tower. And Congress has never indicated that it intends for the Commission to extend its jurisdiction in this way over satellites, having never appropriated funds for the Commission to hire aerospace engineers or other similar technical experts. In fact, the Commission has always deferred to agencies such as NASA, NOAA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Commerce on such issues, while limiting its role to disclosure requirements.8Nevertheless, in its letter, Viasat encourages the Commission to test its authority over orbital debris mitigation by imposing on a single operator new, unfounded substantive requirements that directly contradict expert recommendations and the most recent Commission order on the matter. For example, Viasat would have the Commission flout its existing rules and NASA best practices to impose a recently rejected aggregate collision risk metric while eviscerating the long-standing “zero risk” assumption for maneuverable satellites to reach Viasat’s preferred anti-competitive result. The Commission should ignore Viasat’s misguided invitation to stretch the public interest standard past the breaking point, which would put the Commission’s authority over space sustainability at risk.
SAT-MOD-20220725-00074This filing asks to add two small frequency blocks at 2000-2020MHz and 2180-2200MHz for MSS service. The payload would be added to the Starlink Gen1 sats. The ITU filings haven't been submitted yet. Also Musk's current ownership stake is shown as 42.3% (but he controls well over half of the shares for voting purposes).
Quote from: gongora on 07/26/2022 01:46 amSAT-MOD-20220725-00074This filing asks to add two small frequency blocks at 2000-2020MHz and 2180-2200MHz for MSS service. The payload would be added to the Starlink Gen1 sats. The ITU filings haven't been submitted yet. Also Musk's current ownership stake is shown as 42.3% (but he controls well over half of the shares for voting purposes).Very interesting. I expected them to add L-band service to the Gen2 sats, but this is a different direction.
Quote from: RedLineTrain on 07/26/2022 03:07 pmQuote from: gongora on 07/26/2022 01:46 amSAT-MOD-20220725-00074This filing asks to add two small frequency blocks at 2000-2020MHz and 2180-2200MHz for MSS service. The payload would be added to the Starlink Gen1 sats. The ITU filings haven't been submitted yet. Also Musk's current ownership stake is shown as 42.3% (but he controls well over half of the shares for voting purposes).Very interesting. I expected them to add L-band service to the Gen2 sats, but this is a different direction.The satellites hardware is fully capable. The satellites are software defined so it's just a software update to patch in the new code onboard.
Quote from: russianhalo117 on 07/26/2022 03:21 pmQuote from: RedLineTrain on 07/26/2022 03:07 pmQuote from: gongora on 07/26/2022 01:46 amSAT-MOD-20220725-00074This filing asks to add two small frequency blocks at 2000-2020MHz and 2180-2200MHz for MSS service. The payload would be added to the Starlink Gen1 sats. The ITU filings haven't been submitted yet. Also Musk's current ownership stake is shown as 42.3% (but he controls well over half of the shares for voting purposes).Very interesting. I expected them to add L-band service to the Gen2 sats, but this is a different direction.The satellites hardware is fully capable. The satellites are software defined so it's just a software update to patch in the new code onboard.Are you saying that the Gen 1.5 radios and antennas already have L-band capability?SDR doesn't mean that the other RF subsystem components (e.g. filters, amplifiers, antennas or beam formers, etc. ) support a whole new frequency set. It wouldn't be terribly surprising to me if they had cut in production and deployment of hardware that has support for a new band at some point along the way, but it would have to be something like that. Usually the filters in particular would not pass bands that are not approved for use.
Lastly, this frequency isn't suitable for phone service because it's not omnidirectional. SpaceX says that they will use phased array antennas on the user end in order not to interfere with Dish's GEO-sats.
Is that even possible to have phase array phone? As far i understant fundamentals of good signal for Ku band needs high area.
The next regulatory battle facing SpaceX’s Starlink may involve the 17GHz radio band, which the FCC is considering opening up to low-Earth orbiting satellite internet providers. The FCC today updated(Opens in a new window) its rules to permit higher-orbiting geostationary satellites to use the 17GHz band for downlinking purposes. This means they can share the spectrum with existing TV broadcasting satellite services to beam data to the Earth, including for internet access. The change promises to supply “additional downlink capacity for high-throughput satellite communications,” according to the FCC. Now the US regulator is considering expanding the 17GHz access to non-geostationary (NGSO) satellite services, including SpaceX’s Starlink and Amazon’s upcoming Project Kuiper.
As another example, SpaceX is proud to inform the Commission that it has decided to further accelerate its already record-breaking deployment schedule for its Gen2 system by using both its new Starship vehicle as well as its tested and dependable Falcon 9. While SpaceX will use technically identical satellites on both rockets, the physical structures will be tailored to meet the physical dimensions of the rockets on which they will be launched. In no event will any satellite exceed the overly conservative DAS analysis SpaceX provided to the Commission. To be clear, while SpaceX plans to accelerate deployment by using both of the rockets in its fleet, it remains committed to deploying all of its satellites—whether from Starship or from Falcon 9—into orbits described in Configuration 1 as described in its Amendment from August 2021 and confirmed in its letter to the Commission in January of this year. Specifically, SpaceX plans to launch satellites for its Gen2 constellation beginning with its three 500-kilometer shells, followed by satellites in its lower-altitude shells. The result will be that more Americans will receive high-quality broadband faster.
But the biggest bombshell is SpaceX will use both F9 and Starship to launch Gen2, and it sounds like the Gen2 launched on F9 will be smaller:
