Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/03/2023 06:37 pmThe alternative theory seems to be that the test could occur now, but Kuiper is waiting on Vulcan Centaur for reasons that do not appear to make economic sense. They are losing possible customers to Starlink at an increasing rate every month.Kuiper primary mission is to supply a secure datalink between AWS servers and their big customers. This isn't a market Starlink can access without Amazon's approval. Any other business is a bonus. Starlink customers will change providers if they get a better deal or are frakked off with existing service.
The alternative theory seems to be that the test could occur now, but Kuiper is waiting on Vulcan Centaur for reasons that do not appear to make economic sense. They are losing possible customers to Starlink at an increasing rate every month.
Quote from: tssp_art on 07/03/2023 05:18 pmQuote from: meekGee on 07/03/2023 04:31 pmRight now Starlink 2.0 might start launching before Kuiper demo sats do. Let that sink in. Kuiper might go up against Starlink 3.0.What will Kuiper do if Starlink service is half the price and twice the bandwidth? This is not the "Microsoft vs Apple" dynamic. It is also not something Bezos can (or wants?) to bankroll.That last part is actually quite complicated. Bezos is not the owner of Amazon - he's actually not even the largest shareholder (he holds about 10%). What that means is that the Amazon board and executive team have a fiduciary obligation to all the shareholders to maximize the value of their shares - and not to support the dreams or grudges held by their founder. So yes, they could appeal to SpaceX for help and that might save the day - there is already some background noise about shareholder discontent that the multiple launch contracts did not include SpaceX. If they had used SpaceX their prototype satellites would have been launched this past spring and they might be on their way to offering a credible service. But even if SpaceX is willing, it will likely be with Falcon, because all available Starship flights will be used "experimentally" to develop and test tankers and depots, send Lunar Starship prototypes to the moon, and, of course, to launch Starlink (they have their own FCC deadlines to meet). Or, Amazon could realize Kuiper is simply not doable with the disadvantages they have and (a) cancel it or (b) sell it to Bezos. Not sure which would be more entertaining.In theory yes, but then, how come the Kuiper test sats are on a future first flight of a BO powered rocket instead of an F9 transporter flight and already in orbit?
Quote from: meekGee on 07/03/2023 04:31 pmRight now Starlink 2.0 might start launching before Kuiper demo sats do. Let that sink in. Kuiper might go up against Starlink 3.0.What will Kuiper do if Starlink service is half the price and twice the bandwidth? This is not the "Microsoft vs Apple" dynamic. It is also not something Bezos can (or wants?) to bankroll.That last part is actually quite complicated. Bezos is not the owner of Amazon - he's actually not even the largest shareholder (he holds about 10%). What that means is that the Amazon board and executive team have a fiduciary obligation to all the shareholders to maximize the value of their shares - and not to support the dreams or grudges held by their founder. So yes, they could appeal to SpaceX for help and that might save the day - there is already some background noise about shareholder discontent that the multiple launch contracts did not include SpaceX. If they had used SpaceX their prototype satellites would have been launched this past spring and they might be on their way to offering a credible service. But even if SpaceX is willing, it will likely be with Falcon, because all available Starship flights will be used "experimentally" to develop and test tankers and depots, send Lunar Starship prototypes to the moon, and, of course, to launch Starlink (they have their own FCC deadlines to meet). Or, Amazon could realize Kuiper is simply not doable with the disadvantages they have and (a) cancel it or (b) sell it to Bezos. Not sure which would be more entertaining.
Right now Starlink 2.0 might start launching before Kuiper demo sats do. Let that sink in. Kuiper might go up against Starlink 3.0.What will Kuiper do if Starlink service is half the price and twice the bandwidth? This is not the "Microsoft vs Apple" dynamic. It is also not something Bezos can (or wants?) to bankroll.
Quote from: Rebel44 on 07/03/2023 10:22 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 07/03/2023 09:21 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/03/2023 06:37 pmThe alternative theory seems to be that the test could occur now, but Kuiper is waiting on Vulcan Centaur for reasons that do not appear to make economic sense. They are losing possible customers to Starlink at an increasing rate every month.Kuiper primary mission is to supply a secure datalink between AWS servers and their big customers. This isn't a market Starlink can access without Amazon's approval. Any other business is a bonus. Starlink customers will change providers if they get a better deal or are frakked off with existing service./disclaimer: I work in telco - transmission (backbone) networks/I seriously doubt that - the bandwidth Kuipers terminals are likely to provide (especially uplink) is likely to be only good enough to serve as a backup. Connections between data centers and big corporate customers are usually over optical fibers for good reasons - not for fun. IMO, good encryption should also allow data to be reasonably secure (unless someone like the NSA is after you - in which case you are screwed anyway...) for commercial use purposes even on lines you don't physically control.If all "customers" are AWS server farms, then all the links are in effect teleport links. Each satellite serves only a few links and each ground station/server farm has antennas for multiple satellites. Lots of bandwidth, all full duplex non-shared links. Probably still not as much as a terrestrial fiber, but many times as much as a Starlink customer. The huge advantage is lower latency. The RF and laser links operate at the speed of light in vacuum, which is about 300,000 km/s, and the links are straight lines. Fiber operates at the speed of light in fiber, which is about 200,000 km/s, and fiber cables are not straight at all, because they follow terrestrial rights-of-way and undersea routes that dodge around undersea topology and continents. AWD will move massive bulk data by fiber and certain premium data by satellite.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 07/03/2023 09:21 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/03/2023 06:37 pmThe alternative theory seems to be that the test could occur now, but Kuiper is waiting on Vulcan Centaur for reasons that do not appear to make economic sense. They are losing possible customers to Starlink at an increasing rate every month.Kuiper primary mission is to supply a secure datalink between AWS servers and their big customers. This isn't a market Starlink can access without Amazon's approval. Any other business is a bonus. Starlink customers will change providers if they get a better deal or are frakked off with existing service./disclaimer: I work in telco - transmission (backbone) networks/I seriously doubt that - the bandwidth Kuipers terminals are likely to provide (especially uplink) is likely to be only good enough to serve as a backup. Connections between data centers and big corporate customers are usually over optical fibers for good reasons - not for fun. IMO, good encryption should also allow data to be reasonably secure (unless someone like the NSA is after you - in which case you are screwed anyway...) for commercial use purposes even on lines you don't physically control.
Deployment deadlines get extended all the time, both by FCC and ITU. If Amazon is actively launching satellites, has launch contracts for the rest, and has production lined up for the rest, then they will almost certainly get an extension. FAR has no relevance to this.
Quote from: gongora on 06/30/2023 10:24 pmDeployment deadlines get extended all the time, both by FCC and ITU. If Amazon is actively launching satellites, has launch contracts for the rest, and has production lined up for the rest, then they will almost certainly get an extension. FAR has no relevance to this.Sure. But usually this is that every interested party is OK with such extension or at least not willing to protest because they may need the same favor soon. And it depends on FCC willing to do so.But a situation with unfriendly administration may happen (again) and the good will may give way to politics. Especially that unfriendly administration could have an extremely good excuse of "treating everyone the same" and "rules are for everyone". Add to that that the left side of the political scene is not too fond of Amazon, so if unfriendly right wing administration decides to knock Amazon down a peg, they would do nothing and in fact smile in private. It's always strategically better not to give unfriendly officials great wide avenues to screw you up with impunity.
Having your test sats sitting in boxes for the best part of a year because your 10 billion dollar plus program insisted on using low cost, high schedule risk launch vehicles isn’t a good look. I hope that Amazon can demonstrate that they entered serious negotiations with SpaceX and were either rejected or offered unreasonable terms (Edit: that applies to both the test sats and the main constellation).
But the reason MIGHT be that “SpaceX competes with Kuiper.”
Quote from: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 07/04/2023 01:20 pmHaving your test sats sitting in boxes for the best part of a year because your 10 billion dollar plus program insisted on using low cost, high schedule risk launch vehicles isn’t a good look. I hope that Amazon can demonstrate that they entered serious negotiations with SpaceX and were either rejected or offered unreasonable terms (Edit: that applies to both the test sats and the main constellation).I was a senior manager at Amazon a few years ago (a level high enough that I had to present to Bezos in person annually), so I have some idea how things work there.A very good way to understand the company is to look at their leadership principles. Lots of companies have things like this, but nowhere I ever worked treated them the way Amazon does. Not only are they integrated into the performance review system, they're such a part of the corporate culture, that one or another of them comes up in just about every meeting--even in casual conversations with people.So when you look at the case of launching satellites, I'd say that two principles are in play: "Bias for Action" and "Deliver Results." Anyone pursuing a strategy of "let's just sit and wait and everything will be fine" would be in hot water at once. Another thing I learned at Amazon, though, was that whenever you think a problem has a simple solution, that just means you don't fully understand it. If it had a simple solution, someone would have already done it. There is an excellent reason why that solution won't work; you just don't know what it is yet.So if it looks like a no-brainer that Amazon should be launching with SpaceX, there is some reason consistent with the leadership principles that they are not doing so. That reason will not be, "SpaceX competes with Blue Origin."
Quote from: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 07/04/2023 01:20 pmHaving your test sats sitting in boxes for the best part of a year because your 10 billion dollar plus program insisted on using low cost, high schedule risk launch vehicles isn’t a good look. I hope that Amazon can demonstrate that they entered serious negotiations with SpaceX and were either rejected or offered unreasonable terms (Edit: that applies to both the test sats and the main constellation).I was a senior manager at Amazon a few years ago (a level high enough that I had to present to Bezos in person annually), so I have some idea how things work there.A very good way to understand the company is to look at their <a href="https://jdmeier.com/amazon-leadership-principles/">leadership principles.</a> Lots of companies have things like this, but nowhere I ever worked treated them the way Amazon does. Not only are they integrated into the performance review system, they're such a part of the corporate culture, that one or another of them comes up in just about every meeting--even in casual conversations with people.So when you look at the case of launching satellites, I'd say that two principles are in play: "Bias for Action" and "Deliver Results." Anyone pursuing a strategy of "let's just sit and wait and everything will be fine" would be in hot water at once. Another thing I learned at Amazon, though, was that whenever you think a problem has a simple solution, that just means you don't fully understand it. If it had a simple solution, someone would have already done it. There is an excellent <i>reason</i> why that solution won't work; you just don't know what it is yet.So if it looks like a no-brainer that Amazon should be launching with SpaceX, there is some reason <i>consistent with the leadership principles</i> that they are not doing so. That reason will <i>not</i> be, "SpaceX competes with Blue Origin."
Latency from delays is very important in gaming where 10s ms can make difference at other end of spectrum a 1seconds latency doesn't matter to much when downloading large files or watching a video. With large files and videos datarate is more important.
From a Kuiper spokesperson... "Amazon is still launching with all three launch providers. The proxy statement only includes information related to two of the three."
Ochinero, on the Telesat Lightspeed launch contract announced today: our use of reusability allows us to absorb vast amounts of launches. Happy to take on more constellations if they need help.
Kuiper launch companies say they can meet Amazon’s scheduleJeff FoustSeptember 12, 2023Amazon’s 83-launch deal includes 18 Ariane 6 launches, 12 to 27 New Glenn launches and 38 United Launch Alliance Vulcan Centaur. PARIS — The three companies with multibillion-dollar contracts to launch Amazons’s Project Kuiper constellation say they are committed to deploying those satellites on schedule despite delays in the development of their vehicles.
It’s going to be really interesting to see how this plays out and how well the launch providers predictions hold up:https://spacenews.com/kuiper-launch-companies-say-they-can-meet-amazons-schedule/QuoteKuiper launch companies say they can meet Amazon’s scheduleJeff FoustSeptember 12, 2023Amazon’s 83-launch deal includes 18 Ariane 6 launches, 12 to 27 New Glenn launches and 38 United Launch Alliance Vulcan Centaur. PARIS — The three companies with multibillion-dollar contracts to launch Amazons’s Project Kuiper constellation say they are committed to deploying those satellites on schedule despite delays in the development of their vehicles.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/13/2023 06:00 amIt’s going to be really interesting to see how this plays out and how well the launch providers predictions hold up:https://spacenews.com/kuiper-launch-companies-say-they-can-meet-amazons-schedule/QuoteKuiper launch companies say they can meet Amazon’s scheduleJeff FoustSeptember 12, 2023Amazon’s 83-launch deal includes 18 Ariane 6 launches, 12 to 27 New Glenn launches and 38 United Launch Alliance Vulcan Centaur. PARIS — The three companies with multibillion-dollar contracts to launch Amazons’s Project Kuiper constellation say they are committed to deploying those satellites on schedule despite delays in the development of their vehicles.Kuiper needs to launch 1800 satellites by July 2026 to meet the FCC requirement and keep their license. If they start in January 2025, they only need to average 100/month for 18 months. What could possibly go wrong?
