Amazon Project Kuiper Broadband Constellation

[The man in the can]

Never heard about antitrust law, it would be in SpaceX interests to launch it if Amazon would ask for it.

[The man in the can]

Let me explain my point a bit more. My previous post was a bit short and may appear rude.

It's better for SpaceX to have launch contracts than a lawsuit for abusing its dominant position in the launch market if they refuse to provide launch service to a competitor of Starlink. After all we have seen SpaceX launch some OneWeb satellites recently so I think they understand that. But we are in the reverse situtation here anyway. It's Amazon who don't want to launch with them.

[Zed_Noir]

<snip>
At the extreme end of the spectrum, facing a lift shortfall, and for whatever reason Starship is not quite ready, what desperation options are available for Kuiper to meet their deadlines? F9H with booster and core ASDS landings using the extended fairing to max out reusable lift in an attempt to up F9H cadence? There is the non-zero possibility Kuiper has shifted to flatpack sats, if their patent filing is any indication, which improves their chances.

In theory a triple Falcon launcher could be an option.Three full Falcon 9 stacks with flat sided asymmetric payload fairings carrying up flatpack Kuiper comsats. Launch as one unit like the Falcon Heavy with side cores detaching shortly after liftoff to three separate stacks.

The launch pad and the transporter-erector will need some modifications for loading propellants to the side core upper stages and stabilizing the side core upper stages with payload fairings during the travel to the pad from the HIF.

Someone will have to come up with another landing platform for down range booster recovery. As well as funding the development and manufacturing of the asymmetric payload fairings.

This option triples the number of comsats launched as compared to a regular Falcon 9 launch. Only requires some bald guy coughing the cash needed in a timely manner. 

[spacenuance]

https://spacenews.com/project-kuiper-partners-with-vodafone-in-europe-and-africa/ [Sept 5th]

TAMPA, Fla. — Vodafone plans to test beta services from Amazon’s planned Project Kuiper broadband constellation next year to extend the reach of its cellular networks in Europe and Africa.

The companies said Sept. 5 they agreed on a partnership that would use Amazon’s envisioned network of 3,200 satellites in low Earth orbit to bring 4G and 5G connectivity to areas where it would be too challenging or expensive to deploy terrestrial networks.

An Amazon spokesperson said initial Project Kuiper service pilots would be available for Vodafone, Vodacom, and other enterprise customers by the end of 2024 after launching an unspecified number of satellites.

[Asteroza]

<snip>
At the extreme end of the spectrum, facing a lift shortfall, and for whatever reason Starship is not quite ready, what desperation options are available for Kuiper to meet their deadlines? F9H with booster and core ASDS landings using the extended fairing to max out reusable lift in an attempt to up F9H cadence? There is the non-zero possibility Kuiper has shifted to flatpack sats, if their patent filing is any indication, which improves their chances.

In theory a triple Falcon launcher could be an option.Three full Falcon 9 stacks with flat sided asymmetric payload fairings carrying up flatpack Kuiper comsats. Launch as one unit like the Falcon Heavy with side cores detaching shortly after liftoff to three separate stacks.

The launch pad and the transporter-erector will need some modifications for loading propellants to the side core upper stages and stabilizing the side core upper stages with payload fairings during the travel to the pad from the HIF.

Someone will have to come up with another landing platform for down range booster recovery. As well as funding the development and manufacturing of the asymmetric payload fairings.

This option triples the number of comsats launched as compared to a regular Falcon 9 launch. Only requires some bald guy coughing the cash needed in a timely manner. 

That's asking for a lot of development though, compared to F9HR which ostensibly exists now, the extended fairing which SpaceX is contractually obligated under NSL launch contracts to have at least designed with a path to manufacturing (though that is currently a non-reusable version, but if this sort of situation happened a reusable version may be on the cards), and possibly at least one additional ASDS (depending on if boosters RTLS or not and transit cycle for a long distance core booster recovery)(which shouldn't be difficult to build quickly as it's just a barge with serial produced thrusters welded on with containerized gensets parked on top).

The immediate added risk is core booster reuse, due to a lack of data. The stress of the F9H config and the hotter reentry may shorten core booster life compared to the regular F9 boosters. This wouldn't substantially change the production line beyond the initial core booster batch build, and the upper stage production line simply has to ramp up a bit more. Elon himself wants to go up to 12 launches a month (144 launches a year weather permitting), which compared to the current 100 goal, suggests there are potentially 40 launch opportunities available (which Starlink will consume if no other payloads show up), though you have to adjust the math as only LC-39A can handle F9H currently and it has NASA missions requiring pad reconfiguration back to single stick. Though if LC-40 does get both the crew access arm and F9H mods, SpaceX could offload F9H to LC-40. Adding to the mix, SLC-6 coming online as F9H capable is another path, though that may take longer than getting LC-40 ready.

This implies perhaps 15-30 launches (of F9R at least) are potentially available per year for Kuiper from SpaceX starting next year. If Amazon effectively underwrites the expansion work to support a large F9HR campaign, then SpaceX gets their extended fairing developed for free and could potentially use it for their own Starlink launches as well. This would conservatively allow launching 300 Starlink equivalent sats a year from SpaceX alone, so that pushes Kuiper into 10% deployment range by the end of 2024. Is 10-15% deployment going to satisfy those who judge a deployment deadline extension, assuming the decision to extend needs to be made early 2025?

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1701923751439532325

Amazon $AMZN Project Kuiper director Naveen Kachroo announces at #WSBW that the inaugural pair of prototype satellites are scheduled to launch in the first week of October, and the company is targeting launches of production satellites in the second half of 2024.

[scaesare]

There’s no shortage of demand right now. There’s OneWeb and Kuiper plus an explosion of growth in every other kind of satellite, too. Multiple other constellations as well.

Falcon 9 eats them up because the other rockets just aren’t available.

Except Jeffrey won't let Kuiper fly on a SpaceX rocket...

[steveleach]

There’s no shortage of demand right now. There’s OneWeb and Kuiper plus an explosion of growth in every other kind of satellite, too. Multiple other constellations as well.

Falcon 9 eats them up because the other rockets just aren’t available.

Except Jeffrey won't let Kuiper fly on a SpaceX rocket...

Yeah. There's no reason why Kuiper & Blue Origin should be any different to Starlink & SpaceX, other than ability to execute. But ability to execute isn't a fundamental barrier to competition. Straying off topic though.

[Zed_Noir]

There’s no shortage of demand right now. There’s OneWeb and Kuiper plus an explosion of growth in every other kind of satellite, too. Multiple other constellations as well.

Falcon 9 eats them up because the other rockets just aren’t available.

Except Jeffrey won't let Kuiper fly on a SpaceX rocket...

Yeah. There's no reason why Kuiper & Blue Origin should be any different to Starlink & SpaceX, other than ability to execute. But ability to execute isn't a fundamental barrier to competition. Straying off topic though.

Jeff will have to call on the folks from Hawthorne if his launch providers of record fails to generated adequate new build launch capacity to meet the regulatory deadline. It looks like all three launch providers will have launch capacity shortfalls if they keep missing development milestone dates.

While the Hawthorne folks just recovered and reuse their small non-FH booster fleet.

[king1999]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

[Zed_Noir]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

Yeah, a waste. Unfortunately B.O. or it's gnomish founder has an anyone but SX launch provider policy. Well it is the choice of B.O. to determined how their flight manifest is make up.

[ZachS09]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

Yeah, a waste. Unfortunately B.O. or it's gnomish founder has an anyone but SX launch provider policy. Well it is the choice of B.O. to determined how their flight manifest is make up.

How about when Falcon 9 solely launched the 475-kilogram FORMOSAT 5? There was a claim that "the satellite contract dating back to the Falcon 1 days ended up creating the most colossal waste of rocket performance in recent history."

https://spaceflight101.com/falcon-9-formosat-5/spacex-falcon-9-lifts-taiwanese-formosat-5/

[DanClemmensen]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

It's not a waste for Amazon. They needed to get those two satellites up to begin testing, and in fact they should have done this several months ago. Sometimes you just need to get there now and you have to pay a premium. They chose to repurpose an Atlas that they had already committed to pay for. They did (probably) save money by using it in the 501 configuration instead of the 551 configuration, i.e., not using the five SRBs. The SRBs are GEM 63s with a guesstimated cost of at least $3.3 million each.

But yes, if they had made the decision earlier they should have launched at least six satellites to provide more test opportunities. You can only test an LEO satellite when it is in line-of-sight of your test site, and orbital mechanics work against you. You can mitigate tjhis by using lots of test sites, but that is expensive.

[deadman1204]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

It's not a waste for Amazon. They needed to get those two satellites up to begin testing, and in fact they should have done this several months ago. Sometimes you just need to get there now and you have to pay a premium. They chose to repurpose an Atlas that they had already committed to pay for. They did (probably) save money by using it in the 501 configuration instead of the 551 configuration, i.e., not using the five SRBs. The SRBs are GEM 63s with a guesstimated cost of at least $3.3 million each.

But yes, if they had made the decision earlier they should have launched at least six satellites to provide more test opportunities. You can only test an LEO satellite when it is in line-of-sight of your test site, and orbital mechanics work against you. You can mitigate tjhis by using lots of test sites, but that is expensive.

Indeed. Transporter missions aren't always useful, because you gotta go where the bus is going.
Since transporter won't be going to the altitude that amazon will be operating at, it wasn't a good option.

[Jim]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

Yeah, a waste. Unfortunately B.O. or it's gnomish founder has an anyone but SX launch provider policy. Well it is the choice of B.O. to determined how their flight manifest is make up.

How about when Falcon 9 solely launched the 475-kilogram FORMOSAT 5? There was a claim that "the satellite contract dating back to the Falcon 1 days ended up creating the most colossal waste of rocket performance in recent history."

https://spaceflight101.com/falcon-9-formosat-5/spacex-falcon-9-lifts-taiwanese-formosat-5/

Not the only one, IXPE, TESS, DSCVR, CASSIOPE, ORBCOMM, JASON-3, SENTINEL-6

[zubenelgenubi]

Launch thread:
Atlas V 501 - Project Kuiper Protoflight Mission - 6 October 2023

[ZachS09]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

Yeah, a waste. Unfortunately B.O. or it's gnomish founder has an anyone but SX launch provider policy. Well it is the choice of B.O. to determined how their flight manifest is make up.

How about when Falcon 9 solely launched the 475-kilogram FORMOSAT 5? There was a claim that "the satellite contract dating back to the Falcon 1 days ended up creating the most colossal waste of rocket performance in recent history."

https://spaceflight101.com/falcon-9-formosat-5/spacex-falcon-9-lifts-taiwanese-formosat-5/

Not the only one, IXPE, TESS, DSCVR, CASSIOPE, ORBCOMM, JASON-3, SENTINEL-6

Of course, those as well.

I only wanted to provide just one example so that this thread wouldn’t go completely off topic.

[meekGee]

What a waste of Atlas V's capacity. SpaceX ride-shared its two prototype sats Tintin A/B, and sent up 60 of its V0.9 preproduction sats for testing. Amazon could have sent a few more of these up for more testing iterations.

Yeah, a waste. Unfortunately B.O. or it's gnomish founder has an anyone but SX launch provider policy. Well it is the choice of B.O. to determined how their flight manifest is make up.

How about when Falcon 9 solely launched the 475-kilogram FORMOSAT 5? There was a claim that "the satellite contract dating back to the Falcon 1 days ended up creating the most colossal waste of rocket performance in recent history."

https://spaceflight101.com/falcon-9-formosat-5/spacex-falcon-9-lifts-taiwanese-formosat-5/

Not the only one, IXPE, TESS, DSCVR, CASSIOPE, ORBCOMM, JASON-3, SENTINEL-6

Of course, those as well.

I only wanted to provide just one example so that this thread wouldn’t go completely off topic.

The question was what cheaper alternatives existed.  Amazon has an alternative that is cheaper and available.

They're choosing not to use it, because they're a completely separate entity from BO and can make their own decisions.

Sorry, that was auto-spell taking over.

What I initially wrote was...

[DanClemmensen]

  The question was what cheaper alternatives existed.  Amazon has an alternative that is cheaper and available.

That's not clear. Here is a possible scenario: They planned to get a ride on Vulcan Cert-1, probably at a very good price.  but Vulcan kept slipping. At each point in time, it seemed like waiting for Vulcan was the most cost-effective. By the time of the last slip, it may have been too late to book an alternative and make arrangement for the dispenser they were using immediately, and the rate of the cost of the delay was increasing rapidly. So flying Atlas in September was the lowest overall cost to the Kuiper project.

[JEF_300]

I don't understand the point of this current discussion.

If we're talking about the relatively recent decision to launch the demo on Atlas V instead of a Falcon 9; a launch you've already bought is always cheaper than a new launch, even if that new launch was on a Falcon 9. Birds in hands vs birds in bushes, etcetera etcetera.

If we're instead talking about the decision to exclude Falcon 9 from the big block launch orders for Kuiper like a year+ ago... well, that discussion has already been beaten to death, hasn't it? We could argue all day, and no one's opinion would change at this point.