SpaceX F9 : Starlink group 5-1 : CCSFS SLC-40 : 28 December 2022 (09:34 UTC)

[crandles57]

A: Jonathan McDowell is making informed guesses. Having the same sequence of serial numbers doesn't guarantee that they are the same. Especially when they are just making small changes to start testing Gen 2 hardware

B: SpaceX very clearly presents them as 3 versions of Gen2 satellites and the F9-1 name has nothing to do with previous V1.5 satellites, it's just what they chose to call these 3 versions in this document for convenience. Yes we know they launched 54 satellites and yes obviously if they are Gen2 they would be what they present as F9-1 in the referenced document.

SpaceX was quite clear, why do we have to insist that they didn't mean what they said? Without any evidence that I've seen so far.

It doesn't seem like a stretch to me at all that the first Gen2 satellites will have the same mass as the previous versions, depending on what is actually changed.

If you have circumstantial evidence vs what SpaceX explicitly stated I'll take what they said until proven otherwise.

Yes "SpaceX very clearly presents them as 3 versions of Gen2 satellites"

Gen 2 satellites not v2 satellites.

The natural assumption about 'Gen 2 sats' seems to me that it is satellites launched or to be launched to gen 2 orbits.

If they were different SpaceX would likely be calling them v2 or v1.6 or something. If they haven't given a different version number and are just saying Gen 2 which refers to the orbit then the natural assumption until shown otherwise is that there is no new version launched.

It is possible that there is something different about the satellites compared to v1.5, but how many hoops do you want to jump through to maintain this belief/hypothesis.

Hoop 1 If they were different versions, SpaceX would probably call them a different version rather than the rather awkward gen 2 satellites.
Hoop 2. If they were different versions they may well have a different serial number sequence to clearly distinguish them.
Hoop 3 If they are some upgraded versions on some of the sats, they may be different enough that SpaceX would have needed to show them as a different versions in one of the documents we have.
Hoop 4 If there are some upgraded parts, it is possible that the mass would have appeared to be slightly different to the mass we suspect for v1.5

The simpler alternative is that they are identical to v1.5.

>If you have circumstantial evidence vs what SpaceX explicitly stated I'll take what they said until proven otherwise.

My version is that SpaceX explicitly stated they are gen 2 sats (not v2 sats). The simplest interpretation is that gen 2 sats are simply sats going to gen 2 orbits. That SpaceX has not talked about v2 sats speaks volumes that these are not yet ready for launch.

So I am the one taking what SpaceX has explicitly stated, and I'll take my simple interpretation of what they have explicitly stated over your complex multi hoop speculative interpretation until shown otherwise.


I currently think SpaceX has not used v2 only gen 2 in the documents we have seen. For the moment I accept that I was initially wrongly pushing a v2(F9-1) description while accepting they are likely identical to v1.5. If someone shows me they have deliberately used a v2 description rather than generation 2 then I will accept I am wrong again.

[OceanCat]

As far as the FCC is concerned it's ok to launch v1.5 satellites that don't utilize all Gen2 frequencies today as long as 3,750 (50% of the licensed 7,500) Gen2 satellites utilizing all frequencies are operational by December 1, 2028 and 7,500 are operational by December 1, 2031. The dates are from the FCC order.

Wouldn't it be equally true to say that the FCC doesn't care about the design of the satellite launched to first generation orbital shells as long as they don't broadcast on frequencies other than what is allowed? Put another way, v1.5 satellites could be capable of broadcasting in these other frequencies with only a software update required. Given that they're using software defined radios, in effect, that would not be an incorrect thing to say. (Unless there's some aspect of the v1.5 design that obviates the ability to broadcast in certain frequencies.) A simple software update pre or post-launch could enable the additional frequencies.

Software defined radio is a broad term. It does not necessarily mean the radio is digital front to back. An arbitrary number of elements can still be analog. Starlink terminals are also software defined and yet the latest filing for the high performance model seeking to authorize communications with Gen2 satellites still lists only Ku frequencies. Yes, it's possible v1.5 in group 5-1 are capable of using Ka for user links but it's unlikely in my opinion.

SpaceX stated to the FCC that they will launch up to 10 Gen 2 satellites in this launch.

…

Do you have an exact quote for this from SpaceX? The precise wording matters to answer your question.
…because this quote says “at least 10,” not “at most 10.”… and the sentences include other wording.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=57553.msg2444770#msg2444770

…In each of these launches, SpaceX expects to launch at least 10 Gen2 satellites equipped with VHF tracking beacons for use only during LEOP or in an emergency…

Yes you are correct that they said at least and not up to. I stand corrected.

Now please tell me how that changes anything?

All G5-1 satellites are Gen2 but not all of them could have been equipped with VHF tracking beacons.

[Robotbeat]

SpaceX stated to the FCC that they will launch up to 10 Gen 2 satellites in this launch.

…

Do you have an exact quote for this from SpaceX? The precise wording matters to answer your question.
…because this quote says “at least 10,” not “at most 10.”… and the sentences include other wording.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=57553.msg2444770#msg2444770

…In each of these launches, SpaceX expects to launch at least 10 Gen2 satellites equipped with VHF tracking beacons for use only during LEOP or in an emergency…

Yes you are correct that they said at least and not up to. I stand corrected.

Now please tell me how that changes anything?

With respect to WHAT? I’m not even sure what your point is, here.

From what I can tell, all these satellites that were just launched are Gen2 F9-1, and at least 10 of them probably have that VHF tracking beacon on them. Your comment about them being “at most 10 Gen 2 satellites” made no sense to me, and so I corrected it. That’s it. That’s my point. I still don’t know what yours is.

[crandles57]

SpaceX stated to the FCC that they will launch up to 10 Gen 2 satellites in this launch.

If Gen2 means orbit, how can 10 sats go to one orbit while the rest of the sats from the same launch go to the Gen 1 orbit?

I think everyone believes that all 54 sats on launch 5-1 went to 43 degree inclination orbit which is a gen 2 orbit. None went to a gen 1 orbit, so we don't need to argue over 'how'.

Obviously, at least 10 could mean all of them whereas up to 10 is definitely not all of them.
With 'At least 10' they could all still be identical by all having them.
With 'Up to 10' they could all still be identical by none having them.
So I certainly see potential for it to change the argument needed.


Do we know if v1.5 includes (or could include) these VHF tracking beacons?

[OceanCat]

Do we know if v1.5 includes (or could include) these VHF tracking beacons?

SpaceX was still working on them as of July 1st. They were developed in response to the loss of 38 satellites:

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.
 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.

From their report.

An ITU filing was made on August 23rd. The application covers 29988 satellites so I assume it does not cover gen1 orbits. I found VHF frequencies only in that application. I was not able to find another VHF application filed by Germany.

[crandles57]

SpaceX was still working on them as of July 1st. They were developed in response to the loss of 38 satellites:

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.
 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.

From their report.

An ITU filing was made on August 23rd. The application covers 29988 satellites so I assume it does not cover gen1 orbits. I found VHF frequencies only in that application. I was not able to find another VHF application filed by Germany.

Thank you for that reply.

So are we now agreed that I was wrong to push 'identical' to v1.5?
Sorry about that.

Does this seem a separate upgrade than the road to v2 under development?

Is there any evidence for there being any upgraded parts on the 5-1 launch to help with testing v2?

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1609167250933563392

Doug arrived at Port Canaveral just after 2am this morning with both fairing halves from Starlink 5-1.

Via nsf.live/spacecoast

[SPKirsch]

twitter.com/SpaceOffshore/status/1609011738652938241

Finishing 2022 with one last booster arrival!

ASOG still tracking towards tomorrow morning from early. Updates to follow 🌊

https://twitter.com/SpaceOffshore/status/1609144021598846977

Tracking towards 9 - 10am ET this morning.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1609201096639107073

ASOG droneship on the approach to Port Canaveral this morning with B1062. Should hopefully arrive in the next two hours - it's a foggy day!

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/jennyhphoto/status/1609218079552151552

B1062 making its way back to Port Canaveral after launching Starlink 5-1.

📷: Me for @SuperclusterHQ
@SpaceOffshore

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1609240088126291970

Falcon 9 B1062 arriving back into Port Canaveral.

nsf.live/spacecoast

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1609242597498707968

Welcome back B1062. 40 booster returns to Port Canaveral in 2022 completed successfully! 🤯

Happy New Year!!

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1609255733656276998

Booster 1062 returned to Port Canaveral this afternoon bringing an end to the Starlink 5-1 mission. Today's recovery views include a dolphin as well as people and ships for scale.

@NASASpaceflight recap:
nasaspaceflight.com/2022/12/spacex…

[mn]

SpaceX stated to the FCC that they will launch up to 10 Gen 2 satellites in this launch.

…

Do you have an exact quote for this from SpaceX? The precise wording matters to answer your question.
…because this quote says “at least 10,” not “at most 10.”… and the sentences include other wording.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=57553.msg2444770#msg2444770

…In each of these launches, SpaceX expects to launch at least 10 Gen2 satellites equipped with VHF tracking beacons for use only during LEOP or in an emergency…

Yes you are correct that they said at least and not up to. I stand corrected.

Now please tell me how that changes anything?

With respect to WHAT? I’m not even sure what your point is, here.

From what I can tell, all these satellites that were just launched are Gen2 F9-1, and at least 10 of them probably have that VHF tracking beacon on them. Your comment about them being “at most 10 Gen 2 satellites” made no sense to me, and so I corrected it. That’s it. That’s my point. I still don’t know what yours is.

Whether it said up to 10 or at least 10, either way to me it means 'some but not all'. And that precludes Gen2 being a reference to the orbit. That's all I was trying to say.

And yes I know that 'at least' could end up being all of them. So @candles57: Are you suggesting that SpaceX filed to send some satellites to the Gen2 orbit and then after the filing some genius rocket scientist discovered that you can't do that so they ended up sending all sats to the Gen2 orbit. Or did they intend to send all satellites to the Gen2 orbit, but wrote 'at least 10' for some mystical reason?

On 2nd thought, I guess you are reading this as all are Gen2 but at least 10 will have the additional VHF antenna, I'll admit you may be right and I read it all wrong.

[Steven Pietrobon]

Here's my attempt at a press kit from the archived web page. If someone can do a better job, please do!

https://web.archive.org/web/20221229035034/https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=sl5-1

[mlindner]

Where does the term "version 2" come from?
SpaceX uses the term Gen2 satellites in the December 21 letter that I linked. As I used it too.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=57553.msg2444770#msg2444770
The application: "...VHF tracking beacons for use only during LEOP or in an emergency..." includes some FCC filings. (from 15th and 16th Dec.) An overview is in the letter.

Perhaps only SpaceX knows exactly what Gen2 satellites mean.

There is a small gap before the 5000 in the satellite serial numbers. Maybe there was a little change.
The 5xxx satellites have been launched since mission 4-35.
Individual 4xxx were still launched. At mission 5-1 there were only 3 satellites with 4xxx serial numbers.

About 2000 Gen2 satellites with 43° and 53° inclination are to be equipped with  direct-to-cellular payload. (1.9GHz range)
Probably later the heavier series.

Version 2 has been used by Elon on a couple of occasions, notably in everday astronaut interviews. It's also in multiple FCC filings.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/tskelso/status/1610705159457509377

CelesTrak has GP data for 58 objects from the launch (2022-177) of 54 #Starlink Group 5-1 satellites from Cape Canaveral on Dec 28 at 0934 UTC: celestrak.org/NORAD/elements…. GP matching against the SupGP data shows good orbits for all but 1 satellite: https://celestrak.org/NORAD/elements/supplemental/starlink.match.txt

[Chinakpradhan]

https://twitter.com/tskelso/status/1610705159457509377

CelesTrak has GP data for 58 objects from the launch (2022-177) of 54 #Starlink Group 5-1 satellites from Cape Canaveral on Dec 28 at 0934 UTC: celestrak.org/NORAD/elements…. GP matching against the SupGP data shows good orbits for all but 1 satellite: https://celestrak.org/NORAD/elements/supplemental/starlink.match.txt

why 58?? 1-2 is Starlink tension rods but 4 more than 58 how?? Any debris from mission??

[Comga]

CelesTrak has GP data for 58 objects from the launch (2022-177) of 54 #Starlink Group 5-1 satellites from Cape Canaveral on Dec 28 at 0934 UTC: celestrak.org/NORAD/elements…. GP matching against the SupGP data shows good orbits for all but 1 satellite:

why 58?? 1-2 is Starlink tension rods but 4 more than 58 how?? Any debris from mission??

Starlink launches each use four tensioning rods.
Look at the orbital decay charts from jcm, etc. for any previous Starlink launch.