“They own all these things the other guys don’t,” says Manchester. “In a lot of ways, Amazon has a grander vision. They’re not trying to be a telco.”
Damn SpaceX and their mediocre ambitions like colonising Mars (◔_◔)
Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
61–70 of 133 posts
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...BO needs to actually launch something to orbit... And they need start launching soon. FCC rules give Amazon until 2026 to launch and start operating at least 50% of the licensed number of satellites - 1618 satellites - or risk their satellite constellation license annulled. To put this timeframe in context, Blue Origin was founded in 2000 and has yet to achieve a single orbital flight.
> And they need start launching soon. FCC rules give Amazon until 2026 to launch and start operating at least 50% of the licensed number of satellites - 1618 satellites - or risk their satellite constellation license annulled. I am curious what would happen here. Lets say they get 45% of their satellites up and miss the mark. Do we just end up with a hundres of useless satellites drifting in space doing nothing or ar…
I’d assume they’d appeal the FCC and get an extension to their license
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we assume: * BO rocket 2x the cargo size * Satellites same size/weight as starlink 120 sats per launch(vs F9's 60). If they have to launch 1618 by 2026, that means they need 14 launches in 6 years. If they only need 1/2 the 1618, they need 7 launches in 6 years. So I think 7 launches(840 sats) it's still in the realm of possibility, but they have to execute everything pretty much flawlessly to make it happen. They…
My wording was ambiguous, so to clarify: their full constellation is 3236 satellites, 1618 is the half amount they need to launch until 2026.
thanks! I was to lazy to look up the FCC app to know for sure, so I hedged :)
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't fully understand the negativity around BO. They haven't gone to orbit yet, and they don't run everything they do as a PR campaign the way that SpaceX does, but getting a rocket to orbit isn't that big of a deal these days. We first achieved orbital flight over 50 years ago, and many different groups have achieved the same since then. Given Bezos' deep pockets, why would BO fail where so many other have succee…
> getting a rocket to orbit isn't that big of a deal these days. Arguably true, but to the extent that is is true, it makes BOs failures to do so given how much time and money has been spent on it rather inexplicable, no? Either they're doing something hard (and might fail), or they're doing something easy so why haven't they succeeded? Either way you cut it, it's a bad look. > They appear to be making steady progres…
> It's certainly slow.
Slow compared to what? Compared to SpaceX they're slow, but compared to everybody else?
NASA/Boeing's SLS program started in 2005 as Constellation. It's still over a year away from it's first test launch and several years away from fully operational status.
China's Long March 5 started in 2007 and it can be argued that it wasn't fully operational until this year.
ULA's Vulcan, started in 2014 is at least a year out. And it reuses the same Centaur upper stage as Atlas.
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we assume: * BO rocket 2x the cargo size * Satellites same size/weight as starlink 120 sats per launch(vs F9's 60). If they have to launch 1618 by 2026, that means they need 14 launches in 6 years. If they only need 1/2 the 1618, they need 7 launches in 6 years. So I think 7 launches(840 sats) it's still in the realm of possibility, but they have to execute everything pretty much flawlessly to make it happen. They…
Amazon's obligation to "launch at least half of the total by 2026 to retain the operating license the FCC has granted the company" is designed to stop squatting on the license without delivering service, and it's with the US government NOT the International Telecommunication Union. If Amazon has shown at least some launches done in good faith, expect the FCC to be VERY lenient if Amazon don't meet their goal of launc…
I agree with what you say here. If they are pretty close, I don't think anyone will care much, though perhaps a lawsuit or two by competitors to give their lawyers something to do wouldn't be unfounded :)
But if they are way off, if they only launch 120 sats, instead of the 1,618 they need to launch, I expect even the FCC would rake them over the coals some. If SpaceX is the only provider that met their timeline with the FCC(which seems more and more likely as time goes by that they will be the only one), they will still probably be lenient, but I imagine they will get a stern talking to, about hurrying up!
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#66The synergy of using AWS ground stations for customers as well as their own use is an interesting advantage. SpaceX has to spend on ground stations and won't make it up until their service goes online, while Amazon can begin recovering their costs right away. And it just plugs in to all their other AWS services as well. Plus Amazon of course has all the best on the ground network infrastructure already in place, Spac…
SpaceX has a tremendous first mover advantage and a ton more experience in Space. Networking talent and building things on earth is not hard to buy. Starlink is ready to go now and already is in Beta. They have more customers signing up for the beta than they can handle and they can charge practically any price they want for this service since nothing else like it exists.
Not sure what you have written has to do with what I said. I did not address the overall merits of Starlink vs Kuiper just the ground station aspect of the developing services.
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#67SpaceX is a private military contractor that gets tax money from citizens. Amazon is a public company that needs to disclose their revenue sources and comes from private/voluntary sources. They aren't even comparable.
SpaceX makes most of their launches from communication satellites (including the investor funded Starlink). The money from NASA International Space Station re-supply (crew and cargo), GPS and NRO satellites is a fraction of what they earn selling launches to the civilian space industry.
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#68Bizarre claim. In what way would Starlink have any less access to AWS? Its... the internet > “If Kuiper succeeds, Amazon can not only offer global satellite broadband access—it can include that access as part of its Amazon Web Services (AWS), which already offers resources for cloud computing, machine learning, data analytics, and more”
Likely related to their satellite ground station as-a-service: https://aws.amazon.com/ground-station/
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#69I don’t get this article. How should an ISP benefit from being a cloud provider? He says that they’re going to be able to « move data to and from AWS » or something... 1) that’s a terrible idea it will be slow 2) Starlink should work just as well for that.
Re: Amazon’s Project Kuiper is more than the company’s response to SpaceX
#70I feel like this massively overstates the advantages of an AWS to satellite link. They aren’t going to put tiny regions in space, so it’s just about data transit. Nobody would suggest AWS should start a cell phone company or fiber ISP just for bundling that with AWS. IP, possibly with a VPN, is a very solved issue for AWS access. It’s how 100% of their customers use AWS now, after all.
Maybe they won't put a tiny region in space, but I could get one of these and do it myself... https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/introducing-aws-snowcone-sm...