Author Topic: Amazon Project Kuiper Broadband Constellation (Read 194986 times)

gongora · « **Reply #300 on:** 03/01/2023 01:33 pm »

Kuiper filing for a modification of the satellite layout within the constellation. SpaceX has proposed similar things among the many Starlink layouts they've gone through.

SAT-MOD-20230228-00043

Robotbeat · « **Reply #301 on:** 03/01/2023 01:47 pm »

Kuiper satellites are slightly less massive than STARLINK v2minis, right?

Tomness · « **Reply #302 on:** 03/01/2023 02:12 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 01:47 pm

Kuiper satellites are slightly less massive than STARLINK v2minis, right?

Since it's headed by the team that started on the original Starlink Prototypes TinTin A&B. They could be decently sized but not as powerful nor compacted as the Starlink
V1 or V2 Minis.

seb21051 · « **Reply #303 on:** 03/01/2023 08:57 pm »

Quote from: Tomness on 03/01/2023 02:12 pm

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 01:47 pm
Kuiper satellites are slightly less massive than STARLINK v2minis, right?

Since it's headed by the team that started on the original Starlink Prototypes TinTin A&B. They could be decently sized but not as powerful nor compacted as the Starlink
V1 or V2 Minis.

From what I've read the V.2 Minis are around 750kg, while the Kuipers are double that. The full size V.2s are closer to the Kuipers.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #304 on:** 03/01/2023 09:16 pm »

Quote from: seb21051 on 03/01/2023 08:57 pm

Quote from: Tomness on 03/01/2023 02:12 pm
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 01:47 pm
Kuiper satellites are slightly less massive than STARLINK v2minis, right?

Since it's headed by the team that started on the original Starlink Prototypes TinTin A&B. They could be decently sized but not as powerful nor compacted as the Starlink
V1 or V2 Minis.

From what I've read the V.2 Minis are around 750kg, while the Kuipers are double that. The full size V.2s are closer to the Kuipers.

I saw Kuipers as about 600-700kg. Your information is wrong or launch executives actually launching them are all wrong. https://www.geekwire.com/2022/amazon-reserves-up-to-83-rocket-launches-for-project-kuiper-broadband-satellite-constellation/#:~:text=Based%20on%20those%20figures%2C%20Quilty,and%20OneWeb%20(150%20kilograms).

Quote

During a Space Symposium panel, the top executives for the three launch companies revealed how many Kuiper satellites they could launch on each rocket: 35 to 40 for Arianespace’s Ariane 6, 61 for Blue Origin’s New Glenn, and 45 for United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan Centaur.

Based on those figures, Quilty estimates that each Project Kuiper satellite weighs 600-700 kilograms (1,300-1,540 pounds), which would make them significantly more massive than the satellites fielded by SpaceX (260-300 kilograms) and OneWeb (150 kilograms).

Robotbeat · « **Reply #305 on:** 03/01/2023 09:33 pm »

Here’s confirmation that it’s around 700kg:

The FCC document here: (attached as well) https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=285359
Says “KuiperSats will each reserve 6.7 kg of fuel for disposal maneuvers, which represents 185 meters/second of Delta-V budget.”

It earlier mentions this is an inert noble gas, so probably Krypton (maybe Argon, unlikely to be Xenon but not impossible). And probably a Hall Effect thruster, so an Isp of around 2000s (15-25km/s V_ex).

6.7kg*20km/s/(185m/s) = 724kg (this linear approximation of the rocket equation is fine at low delta-v). Or between about 543kg and 905kg depending on 15 to 25 km/s Isp.

EDIT: Based on this Tweet, which mentions it’s a Hall Thruster, you can tell they’re using Krypton because of the purple color (Xenon is turquoise-ish, Argon is blue). That confirms the rough performance range I gave earlier.

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1453061006293360651

ulm_atms · « **Reply #306 on:** 03/01/2023 09:51 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 09:33 pm

Here’s confirmation that it’s around 700kg:

The FCC document here: (attached as well) https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=285359
Says “KuiperSats will each reserve 6.7 kg of fuel for disposal maneuvers, which represents 185 meters/second of Delta-V budget.”
It earlier mentions this is an inert noble gas, so probably Krypton (maybe Argon, unlikely to be Xenon but not impossible). And probably a Hall Effect thruster, so an Isp of around 2000s (15-25km/s V_ex).

6.7kg*20km/s/(185m/s) = 724kg (this linear approximation of the rocket equation is fine at low delta-v). Or between about 543kg and 905kg depending on 15 to 25 km/s Isp.

Maybe this is why SpaceX developed the new Argon Hall thrusters in house in the first place. They saw all these mega constellations and realized there is going to be a squeeze on Krypton if all these constellations have hall thrusters. There isn't enough Xenon and SpaceX is using a good chunk of the Krypton by themselves for gen 1.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #307 on:** 03/01/2023 09:54 pm »

Quote from: ulm_atms on 03/01/2023 09:51 pm

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 09:33 pm
Here’s confirmation that it’s around 700kg:

The FCC document here: (attached as well) https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=285359
Says “KuiperSats will each reserve 6.7 kg of fuel for disposal maneuvers, which represents 185 meters/second of Delta-V budget.”
It earlier mentions this is an inert noble gas, so probably Krypton (maybe Argon, unlikely to be Xenon but not impossible). And probably a Hall Effect thruster, so an Isp of around 2000s (15-25km/s V_ex).

6.7kg*20km/s/(185m/s) = 724kg (this linear approximation of the rocket equation is fine at low delta-v). Or between about 543kg and 905kg depending on 15 to 25 km/s Isp.
Maybe this is why SpaceX developed the new Argon Hall thrusters in house in the first place. They saw all these mega constellations and realized there is going to be a squeeze on Krypton if all these constellations have hall thrusters. There isn't enough Xenon and SpaceX is using a good chunk of the Krypton by themselves for gen 1.

Yeah, there isn’t even enough Krypton for Starlink Gen2 alone, even ignoring Kuiper.

BTW, when one of our members here (who is in Europe and does hall thrusters there) had a thread about the SpaceX Argon thrusters, Jeff Bezos followed him on Twitter. Jeff only follows 181 people.

seb21051 · « **Reply #308 on:** 03/02/2023 07:01 am »

From what I've read the V.2 Minis are around 750kg, while the Kuipers are double that. The full size V.2s are closer to the Kuipers.
[/quote]I saw Kuipers as about 600-700kg. Your information is wrong or launch executives actually launching them are all wrong. https://www.geekwire.com/2022/amazon-reserves-up-to-83-rocket-launches-for-project-kuiper-broadband-satellite-constellation/#:~:text=Based%20on%20those%20figures%2C%20Quilty,and%20OneWeb%20(150%20kilograms).

Quote

During a Space Symposium panel, the top executives for the three launch companies revealed how many Kuiper satellites they could launch on each rocket: 35 to 40 for Arianespace’s Ariane 6, 61 for Blue Origin’s New Glenn, and 45 for United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan Centaur.

Based on those figures, Quilty estimates that each Project Kuiper satellite weighs 600-700 kilograms (1,300-1,540 pounds), which would make them significantly more massive than the satellites fielded by SpaceX (260-300 kilograms) and OneWeb (150 kilograms).

[/quote]

You're right, my bad.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #309 on:** 03/02/2023 12:47 pm »

I’m glad you challenged me, though, because it was a lot of fun to independently confirm it based on sparse details in their FCC documents using some basic physics or dimensional analysis.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #310 on:** 03/14/2023 12:14 pm »

twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1635627156498702336

Quote

Amazon reveals a trio of satellite antennas for its Project Kuiper internet network, with initial service slated to begin in 2024.

Standard, up to 400 Mbps
Ultra-compact, up to 100 Mbps
Pro, up to 1 Gbps

Read more:

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1635628510860517377

Quote

Amazon recently shipped the first two Project Kuiper prototype satellites, launching on the debut of ULA's Vulcan rocket:

The company expects to begin producing commercial satellites by the end of this year, with launches beginning in first half 2024.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/14/amazon-first-look-project-kuiper-satellite-internet-antennas.html

jstrotha0975 · « **Reply #311 on:** 03/14/2023 12:44 pm »

The Oneweb antenna's look smaller than the Starlink antenna's.

daedalus1 · « **Reply #312 on:** 03/14/2023 12:52 pm »

Quote from: jstrotha0975 on 03/14/2023 12:44 pm

The Oneweb antenna's look smaller than the Starlink antenna's.

Kuiper.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #313 on:** 03/14/2023 12:54 pm »

Or it’s a huge laptop and cup of Joe!

gongora · « **Reply #314 on:** 03/14/2023 12:59 pm »

https://twitter.com/Free_Space/status/1635624943634325504

Quote

A third , 7 in. sq terminal -- about the size of a Kindle-- will also be available, says Dave Limp

Robotbeat · « **Reply #315 on:** 03/14/2023 01:03 pm »

7in will mean much lower bandwidth efficiency. It’ll take more of the capacity of the satellite to serve such small terminals. Same problem with Starlink’s mobile antenna or the idea of doing direct to Earth high bandwidth 5G to smartphones.

(But looks like there’s a range of terminals for different use-cases.)

Robotbeat · « **Reply #316 on:** 03/14/2023 01:10 pm »

Wonder what the size of Kuiper’s Enterprise terminal is?

There’s lots of value in having a range of sizes like this. A big terminal means the cost per bit can be lower, both upload and download.

And I actually think establishing a minimum antenna size would be good as antenna size dictates not just per user upload and download bandwidth but also the size of the beams and the ability to do spatial multiplexing. A 7 inch terminal is going to have a beam 4 times the solid angle of a 14 inch terminal.

The FCC should be considering spatial multiplexing when allocating spectrum.

DanClemmensen · « **Reply #317 on:** 03/14/2023 01:10 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/14/2023 01:03 pm

7in will mean much lower bandwidth efficiency. It’ll take more of the capacity of the satellite to serve such small terminals. Same problem with Starlink’s mobile antenna or the idea of doing direct to Earth high bandwidth 5G to smartphones.

In addition to worse downlink bandwidth efficiency, you get worse uplink bandwidth efficiency, which means you need more electrical power per bit. Not a big deal for a fixed site, but these little guys are intended for portable use, and of course the situation is worst for smartphones.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #318 on:** 03/14/2023 01:25 pm »

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1635647839656132609

Quote

I took a closer look at Amazon’s ultra-compact satellite antenna, and this thing is tiny: cnbc.com/2023/03/14/ama… #satshow

Asteroza · « **Reply #319 on:** 03/14/2023 09:35 pm »

Quote from: gongora on 03/14/2023 12:59 pm

https://twitter.com/Free_Space/status/1635624943634325504
Quote
A third , 7 in. sq terminal -- about the size of a Kindle-- will also be available, says Dave Limp

Hrm, too bad no one's figured out how to embed a kindle sized tablet screen into a phase array antenna yet...