Is that not a problem in this case?
For example, operation at 27.5 to 28.35 GHz overlaps a 5G millimeter band in the US. 5G is primary and satellite uplink is secondary in that band, so if Kuiper interferes with a 5G installation, they can be ordered to mitigate the interference (possibly by stopping transmissions).
SpaceX isn't resting on its laurel either, with their R&D effort on Starship.
He says this during a keynote with the US Air Force about 4 months ago. He also says a ton of other interesting things as well.
Since they already had achieved this, Bezos tweeted "Welcome to the club" when Elon Musk's SpaceX had their first successful rocket landing. If that's appropriate is subject for debate, as the conditions experienced are not comparable.
Blue Origin also tried to patent landing a rocket booster on a boat while SpaceX was planning to exactly do that which lead to some bad blood.
Any real payload would be launched with "New Glenn": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Glenn
The GTO market, long the stable of many big rockets, is slowing and not gone pick up.
At the same time every government tries to prop up its domestic industry. One the few commercial launches, beating SpaceX on price is just not gone happen unless you simply fly with a massive lost, you need a couple of years ramp at least.
The other big thing it government launches, SpaceX and ULA are very established and its pretty unlikely that Blue will get deep into these anytime soon. SpaceX is gone continue to have most commercial Space Station buissness. ULA and SpaceX will likely again be selected for the military over the next couple years.
One of the reason SpaceX does Starlink is that it is an amazing driver for scale and re-usability for their rocket buissness. This year alone SpaceX without Starlink does only a few launches, not enough, and this is a year where most others did very few launches.
Blue and Bezos will have made the same calculation, you simply can't New Glenn sized rockets without that.
One of the biggest roadblocks to starting a new ISP or expanding an existing ISPs service area is the big capital expenditure of wiring up areas. I would imagine that having the ability to rent capacity on these networks of satellites would drastically decrease the barrier to entry for new ISPs to form.
I can also see it being useful for mobile data coverage in remote areas. You could install a cell tower along a highway somewhere remote, and you’d just need a solar panel to power the tower, satellite signal to get internet coverage, and then the cell radio to broadcast that to phones.
Link to FCC filing.
Plus the uplink/downlink kit will be beyond mass consumer gear so the economies of scale won't be great.
Anyone seen the uplink kit for the SpaceX or British efforts?
I would be happy if they were on time, but it seems BO missed their milestones quite often.
It's like saying SpaceX isn't Tesla.
I mean is the LEO is open for all countries to launch as many satellites as they want? What if China launches 10k satellites in the next year hypothetically?
It's an amazing business model really. You have a different price and a direct kind of customer in different places. A satellite starts an orbit over Antarctica and uploads scientific data. Then heads out over the sea and connects a few ships. Over Africa it connects rural 4g masts, schools and thousands of small businesses. Then over the Mediterranean it serves Netflix to cruiseline passengers. Over Europe it connects data for a NATO exercise and rural communities. Then later over London it sends data for high frequency traders. Then heads out over the North Sea to send YouTube to oil rig workers and telemetry for wind turbines. Heading up into the Arctic circle it connects a stream of airline flights to the web. And all you have to do is be slightly cheaper than the competition to win customers.
And the outcome of the debate will be a function of your values versus someone else’s, which could then spiral into whether or not one persons desire for a nice view of the night time sky is more important than someone else’s access to affordable high quality internet (which is increasingly being viewed as a “right” these days).
Who knows how this all plays out but my gut says that we are observing oligopolies in the making. The first 2-5 will get licenses and then no one else, ever again.
We already globalized highly accurate time and location, why not data streams?
Part of me also sees a potential National Security security angle to an oligopoly of US-based companies providing satellite internet everywhere. Countries are increasingly putting kill switches on their internet. In a period of conflict, where information flow is likely to be highly managed, its convenient to bypass all that infrastructure with satellite internet. I’m sure these satellites can pick and choose their frequency. No doubt we could point these things at North Korea.
The International Telecommunications Union comes closest.
Orbital debris mitigation is an essential part of an application sent to the FCC
Things they care about:
* Will your satellites survive an uncontrolled re-entry? What parts of the satellite won't burn up in the atmosphere? Will any surviving debris have more than 15 joules of kinetic energy when it reaches the ground? If so, what are the odds of injuring a human?
* How will your satellites deorbit? If the satellite fails before you can deorbit it, how long will it take to deorbit naturally?
* How will you avoid collisions with other satellites?
etc. It's true that the process doesn't take into account light pollution, but that's just one of the many forms of pollution to worry about
We should be trying to control our light pollution and space litter instead of increasing it, however. Seeing the galaxy with naked eyes shouldn't be alien to everyday people.
The reality is even quite poor countries are able to secure high quality internet for reasonable cost with appropriate policy. This isn't an otherwise unsolvable problem.
But I agree that this is an interesting dilemma. Perhaps the low earth orbit satellites should be limited to certain bands around the globe (certain coverage regions in the case of Starlink), so that there remain pristine skies in more remote areas: internationally agreed upon "Natural Sky Preserves" or something of that nature.
These pristine skies do not exist. There are already many satellites in polar orbits that intentionally pass over all points on Earth (e.g. for observation, or for the Iridium satellite phones). If you spend an hour stargazing in a recliner during reasonable viewing conditions, you will likely see a few passing overhead in the north-south direction.
The impact of Starlink on astronomical observation is in dispute and by no means is a settled matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Criticism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgMZa6G-q34 - a basic example using it to remove ISO noise
Edit: Actually, you can even see some satellites in the shot when he sets the layers to 'lighten' that are totally gone when he finishes the stacking.