Hopefully they don't use the most gawd awful connectors some other company uses..... One of the few times I have wanted to beat Elon over the head as his whole moto is basically simple/off the shelf and then he allows the worse connectors for it's use case to be used.Kuiper, waterproof RJ45 cables/connectors is a solved issue. Don't try to reinvent what isn't broke.Now...What I am more interested in is price of service/terms.
Quote from: ulm_atms on 03/14/2023 10:30 pmHopefully they don't use the most gawd awful connectors some other company uses..... One of the few times I have wanted to beat Elon over the head as his whole moto is basically simple/off the shelf and then he allows the worse connectors for it's use case to be used.Kuiper, waterproof RJ45 cables/connectors is a solved issue. Don't try to reinvent what isn't broke.Now...What I am more interested in is price of service/terms.Rock and a hard place. Use a standard 8P8C plug, and people will connect it to 8P8C equipment expecting it to conform to standards (it doesn't, Starlink pulls above 150W in deicing mode, well above any PoE standard available) and complain when their hardware releases the magic blue smoke, or just does not function properly. Use a non-standard connector, people will complain about carrying a standard protocol (802.3ab) over a non-standard connector. It also does not help that there is no standard for an IP-rated 8P8C connector, just a bunch of proprietary options from multiple vendors that have no guarantee of - or even attempt at - any cross-compatibility.
Regarding the FCC deadline, that's probably much less of an issue than believed. Practically speaking, the FCC is not going to deny a request for time extension from Amazon. They just aren't.
Quote from: RedLineTrain on 03/16/2023 04:06 pmRegarding the FCC deadline, that's probably much less of an issue than believed. Practically speaking, the FCC is not going to deny a request for time extension from Amazon. They just aren't.Is this only an FCC deadline or is it also an ITU deadline?
Here's some interesting speculation about the business case for Project Kuiper. On thing I can add is that the $10 billion investment Amazon says it is making in Kuiper is likely far below the real amount. I heard they're spending close to that for Vulcan launches/support alone.
Proud to announce @Amazon’s Project Kuiper has expanded to Florida, investing $120 million into the construction of a satellite processing facility at Space Florida’s Launch and Landing Facility! 🛰️ 💫 @LtGovNunez @NASAKennedy
Amazon will invest $120 million to build a Project Kuiper internet satellite processing facility at Space Florida's LLF at NASA's Kennedy Space Center, as the tech giant prepares for launches to begin:
Amazon still plans to fly Kuiper's prototypes on the inaugural launch of ULA's Vulcan, recently delayed to Q4. Although it "can work with" the new timeline, Amazon is "looking at all options available to us to get the prototypes up in a timely manner."
Here’s a look at the satellite processing facility under construction at Kennedy Space Center for Amazon’s Kuiper broadband constellation. This facility will support satellite and dispenser integration, followed by encapsulation inside ULA and Blue Origin payload fairings.
SpaceX's comments on Kuiper's application SAT-MOD-20230228-00043Quoterather than “accelerate the timeline” fordeployment of its commercial constellation, Amazon’s modification appears designed expresslyto enable further delay. As explained below, it seems that Amazon will use this modification—and the ITU modification it proposes to file along with it—to falsely claim that it has brought itscommercial system into use whenever it finally gets around to launching its two experimentalsatellites, while the timeline for its actual commercial deployment remains highly uncertain.The ITU Radio Regulations require an operator to bring its satelliteconstellation into use by launching a satellite into its filed-for constellation and operating withinseven years of initial filing (here, March 2026). By sneaking its two experimental satellites intoits filing to bring its entire three-thousand satellite commercial constellation into use, Amazonseeks to conduct an end-run around its obligation to bring its commercial constellation into use bythat date. Further, Amazon appears poised to use its two experimental satellites to circumvent theCommission’s deployment rules as well, including the still-effective unbuilt system rule and fast approaching build-out deadlines for its gateway earth stations, for which it has not soughtextensions.Amazon also asks to modify its authorized satellite configuration ostensibly to providebetter service to consumers. While such a request could serve the public interest, Amazon avoidsexplaining how it can avoid collisions with thousands of Chinese satellites planned to share thesesame orbits. This evasion is particularly troubling after Amazon’s insistence in response to aSpaceX modification that Amazon’s system is incapable of sharing any overlapping altitudes withother systems. Specifically, Amazon will need to share the 590-600 km altitude range that itplans to use with a forthcoming Chinese system (ITU identifier GW-A59) with nearly 5,000satellites. The Chinese have been launching satellites at an increasing clip, putting them wellahead of Amazon, whose first test satellites have already been delayed by over a year. At thisrate, the Chinese system will likely be operational before Amazon launches its first commercialsatellite.In opposing a SpaceX modification, Amazonrepeatedly and vehemently argued that its system was too fragile to operate anywhere near anothersystem. But Amazon’s reconfigured system will need to coexist with thousands of Chinesesatellites in similar orbits. Amazon avoided addressing this contradiction in the past by claimingits plan was to hope that the Chinese system does not actually deploy. But as China begins toactually launch its communications satellites in earnest, just crossing fingers is no longer asufficient strategy—if it ever was.
rather than “accelerate the timeline” fordeployment of its commercial constellation, Amazon’s modification appears designed expresslyto enable further delay. As explained below, it seems that Amazon will use this modification—and the ITU modification it proposes to file along with it—to falsely claim that it has brought itscommercial system into use whenever it finally gets around to launching its two experimentalsatellites, while the timeline for its actual commercial deployment remains highly uncertain.The ITU Radio Regulations require an operator to bring its satelliteconstellation into use by launching a satellite into its filed-for constellation and operating withinseven years of initial filing (here, March 2026). By sneaking its two experimental satellites intoits filing to bring its entire three-thousand satellite commercial constellation into use, Amazonseeks to conduct an end-run around its obligation to bring its commercial constellation into use bythat date. Further, Amazon appears poised to use its two experimental satellites to circumvent theCommission’s deployment rules as well, including the still-effective unbuilt system rule and fast approaching build-out deadlines for its gateway earth stations, for which it has not soughtextensions.Amazon also asks to modify its authorized satellite configuration ostensibly to providebetter service to consumers. While such a request could serve the public interest, Amazon avoidsexplaining how it can avoid collisions with thousands of Chinese satellites planned to share thesesame orbits. This evasion is particularly troubling after Amazon’s insistence in response to aSpaceX modification that Amazon’s system is incapable of sharing any overlapping altitudes withother systems. Specifically, Amazon will need to share the 590-600 km altitude range that itplans to use with a forthcoming Chinese system (ITU identifier GW-A59) with nearly 5,000satellites. The Chinese have been launching satellites at an increasing clip, putting them wellahead of Amazon, whose first test satellites have already been delayed by over a year. At thisrate, the Chinese system will likely be operational before Amazon launches its first commercialsatellite.In opposing a SpaceX modification, Amazonrepeatedly and vehemently argued that its system was too fragile to operate anywhere near anothersystem. But Amazon’s reconfigured system will need to coexist with thousands of Chinesesatellites in similar orbits. Amazon avoided addressing this contradiction in the past by claimingits plan was to hope that the Chinese system does not actually deploy. But as China begins toactually launch its communications satellites in earnest, just crossing fingers is no longer asufficient strategy—if it ever was.
[...]So my 2 cent analysis gives this Kuiper launch profileLauncher Atlas VC6 A64(I) A64(II) NG F9R2024 9 4 2 0 1 0 2025 0 8 0 3 2 02026.5 0 6 0 3 1 0 sats per 31 45 35 40 61 25total 279 810 70 240 244 0 is 1643 (required 1616 for FCC 2026 July 30th)[...]
Back in March, @Andrewi provided an excellent, well-reasoned, and lengthy analysis of the required launches for Kuiper to meet the FCC deadline of 1616 satellites by 30 July 2026. He summarized in this table:Quote from: andrewi on 03/16/2023 12:24 pm[...]So my 2 cent analysis gives this Kuiper launch profileLauncher Atlas VC6 A64(I) A64(II) NG F9R2024 9 4 2 0 1 0 2025 0 8 0 3 2 02026.5 0 6 0 3 1 0 sats per 31 45 35 40 61 25total 279 810 70 240 244 0 is 1643 (required 1616 for FCC 2026 July 30th)[...]As of last March, the schedule appeared to be tight but still possible given the announced intentions of the launch providers.As of now, Vulcan, Arianne 6, and NG appear to have slipped a lot from Andrew's March baseline. The Atlas launches should be solid, but Kuiper might need to use one early for the experimental satellite pair.I doubt that any of the three new LVs can ramp up as fast as projected: each of them would need to ramp up faster than any orbital LV has ramped up in the past. 50 years.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 08/01/2023 02:42 pm.....It’s more than just the slipping first launch dates and the wonderfully ambitious ramp rates. From Next Spaceflight; fifteen Ariane 6 flights and eighteen Vulcan Centaur flights are manifested before July 26, the vast majority being government payloads. Only two are listed for Kuiper operational deployment.I struggle to see either vehicle flying out this manifest in a thirty month period, and I really doubt that the governments that payed for these vehicles will delay payloads or switch LSP to help Amazon.Now imagine BE-4 has a SNAFU like BE-3.Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.
.....
Amazon may have to use RL Neutron and Firefly MLV to hit 2026 deadline, assuming these LVs are ready.
