Amazon is getting ready to launch a lot of broadband satellites(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
Amazon is getting ready to launch a lot of broadband satellites
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/07/amazon-is-getting-ready-to-launch-a-lot-of-broadband-satellites/
66 comments
In the US the regulators have been captured or are neutered. Attempts to install effective regulators are stalled until they withdraw from the appointment process.
This is how it works in Holland with Open Access fiber lines https://hollandcityfiber.com/about-holland-city-fiber/
The fiber itself is owned and maintained by the public and any number of private ISP's can offer service over it. Changing ISP provider is a software decision and as such the average cost is 42 euro/mo
The fiber itself is owned and maintained by the public and any number of private ISP's can offer service over it. Changing ISP provider is a software decision and as such the average cost is 42 euro/mo
Similar story in France, ISPs have to give each other access at regulated costs, after an initial grace period (if an ISP builds a new line they have exclusivity on it for 1-2 years, to still incentivise investment). Internet is broadly affordable, and there are tons of villages and towns in the middle of nowhere with proud "commune fibrée" sign on their entrance. (Ironically sometimes such villages and towns are better connected than midsized cities due to the costs involved).
First time I see someone plainly refer to 'Holland' and it's not in The Netherlands but actually a city in Michigan.
Checked on a map and it's actually near a place called Zeeland, which is also in The Netherlands. Wow "Noordeloos" also sounds Dutch. I guess they just have many Dutch-named towns over there.
Checked on a map and it's actually near a place called Zeeland, which is also in The Netherlands. Wow "Noordeloos" also sounds Dutch. I guess they just have many Dutch-named towns over there.
In the village where my brother lives there are no wires. There is a 4G tower but it runs on solar panels and the connection isn't very stable on cloudy days. I spoke to a person who works at a company in that area that uses Starlink. One satellite dish would probably be enough to provide Internet for the entire village.
That's true, but they aren't doing this to provide internet to villages. As you pointed out, there's not much demand there and that's why no one bothers to provide internet access (I guess the good thing with Starlink and Amazon's version of it is that once it works, it should work in those places too).
Anyway the real reason they are doing it is that is extremely hard to enter the ISP space. It's not even the cost of fiber to run to every home, it is the cost of laying it and all the hoops the existing monopoly will use it.
Google has tried and failed. What often happened is that when they enter market with its 1Gbps offering, suddenly the 30Mbps ISP had 1Gbps and even at a cheaper price. They could sell it at a loss, because they were making a killing in other regions. They also created all kind of obstacles when Google tried to run a wire.
It is ridiculous and we really need a law to force competition.
Anyway the real reason they are doing it is that is extremely hard to enter the ISP space. It's not even the cost of fiber to run to every home, it is the cost of laying it and all the hoops the existing monopoly will use it.
Google has tried and failed. What often happened is that when they enter market with its 1Gbps offering, suddenly the 30Mbps ISP had 1Gbps and even at a cheaper price. They could sell it at a loss, because they were making a killing in other regions. They also created all kind of obstacles when Google tried to run a wire.
It is ridiculous and we really need a law to force competition.
I'm sure there is demand, it's just too remote to be practical. They did get a fiber connection to the closest city a few years ago which made 4G faster. One million people live in the region and there are more places like that in the world. 32% of the Latin American population don't have access to high speed Internet. Schools, hospitals and businesses could be connected which would be good for education, healthcare and economy.
I spent a few days in Leticia and the Internet connection was really shaky, sometimes they can't even work at the migration office because the connection is so bad. 50 000 people live there and 67 000 in the neighboring city Tabatinga. And there's a lot of islands in the world too.
I spent a few days in Leticia and the Internet connection was really shaky, sometimes they can't even work at the migration office because the connection is so bad. 50 000 people live there and 67 000 in the neighboring city Tabatinga. And there's a lot of islands in the world too.
They're presumably doing it to sell internet to anybody who willing to buy it, why shouldn't that include villages?
If your point is that it's not an act of charity.. so what?
If your point is that it's not an act of charity.. so what?
It’s not clear that it does make economic sense. Amazon may be burning margin for growth, or placing bets on the future relative costs of satellite vs 5G and cable/fiber which may not pan out.
Any space program which involves a new Rocket is essentially a Rocket program.
- Someone at NASA.
- Someone at NASA.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #39:
> 39. Any exploration program which "just happens" to include a new launch vehicle is, de facto, a launch vehicle program.
See: https://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu/akins_laws.html
> 39. Any exploration program which "just happens" to include a new launch vehicle is, de facto, a launch vehicle program.
See: https://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu/akins_laws.html
I think I'm going to steal and adapt that quote for any new product underpinned by a new-to-us bit of tech.
News like this always reminds me of how the Western world polluted the earth and then got snippy when the rest of the world started doing the same on scale. China, India, North Korea - everyone have equal rights to do this too but I don't think it will happen without a lot of western news articles, hand wringing by experts, talking heads talking, etc. and likely some politics too.
I wish we had laws that made sure a fix of future problems (ie. with debris, astronomy, etc.) had to be guaranteed before a launch was allowed. A bit of insight of how new technology often end up causing unintended problems later (or in the case of astronomy, sometimes right away).
I wish we had laws that made sure a fix of future problems (ie. with debris, astronomy, etc.) had to be guaranteed before a launch was allowed. A bit of insight of how new technology often end up causing unintended problems later (or in the case of astronomy, sometimes right away).
> News like this always reminds me of how the Western world polluted the earth and then got snippy when the rest of the world started doing the same on scale
That's a simplification to the point of no sense.
The "West" (as someone who grew in "the East" with "the West" being the others, it's weird to me to talk about "the West" with regards to the EU, since my home country is an EU member) doesn't get "snippy" because someone else is doing what they used to do. It's because we have collectively, mostly, realised that those things that were done were terrible, and our morals of today condemn attempts at replicating it. If a Western company was dumping pollution in a river like they used to up until 1960s, you'd get outcry, of course. Germany gets rightfully criticised all the time about their stupid coal policy.
Of course there are the people who still have a colonial outlook (those savages polluting my vacation spots!), but that's not the prevailing attitude. It's our planet, of all of us, and it's understandable that developing countries want to develop further; they should be assisted so that development is as sustainable as possible, for their own sake, but also for humanity and the planet as a whole.
That's a simplification to the point of no sense.
The "West" (as someone who grew in "the East" with "the West" being the others, it's weird to me to talk about "the West" with regards to the EU, since my home country is an EU member) doesn't get "snippy" because someone else is doing what they used to do. It's because we have collectively, mostly, realised that those things that were done were terrible, and our morals of today condemn attempts at replicating it. If a Western company was dumping pollution in a river like they used to up until 1960s, you'd get outcry, of course. Germany gets rightfully criticised all the time about their stupid coal policy.
Of course there are the people who still have a colonial outlook (those savages polluting my vacation spots!), but that's not the prevailing attitude. It's our planet, of all of us, and it's understandable that developing countries want to develop further; they should be assisted so that development is as sustainable as possible, for their own sake, but also for humanity and the planet as a whole.
>it's understandable that developing countries want to develop further; they should be assisted so that development is as sustainable as possible, for their own sake, but also for humanity and the planet as a whole.
I wholeheartedly agree, but more often than not these countries do not have the technology available or it costs more than older tech. Either they should be allowed to pollute with the old tech and "we" must pollute less to make it up or "we" must pay for/give the technology for free to countries that doesn't have access to it. We could even build it (with no strings attached of course).
Pointing fingers at -for example- China or India because of coal power plants while they are struggling to lift millions out of poverty is not helping anyone. In my opinion it is shut up or pay the bill. That includes North Korea, Iran, etc. and as long as we don't do this we have zero rights to criticise.
I wholeheartedly agree, but more often than not these countries do not have the technology available or it costs more than older tech. Either they should be allowed to pollute with the old tech and "we" must pollute less to make it up or "we" must pay for/give the technology for free to countries that doesn't have access to it. We could even build it (with no strings attached of course).
Pointing fingers at -for example- China or India because of coal power plants while they are struggling to lift millions out of poverty is not helping anyone. In my opinion it is shut up or pay the bill. That includes North Korea, Iran, etc. and as long as we don't do this we have zero rights to criticise.
> News like this always reminds me of how the Western world polluted the earth and then got snippy when the rest of the world started doing the same on scale
This claim makes zero sense. Western environmental movements have predominantly focused on reform in western countries and stay relatively mum about others.
This claim makes zero sense. Western environmental movements have predominantly focused on reform in western countries and stay relatively mum about others.
Those are not the only entities that comment on pollution. US, EU, news papers - there are lots of other commentators that point fingers.
Does anyone know how many satellites before things get too crowded? 100,000? 1 million?
Depends on execution, we could have billions of satellites without huge problems. But Kessler syndrome could happen even just with the amount of satellites already in orbit if people had been actively malicious. So, the “limits” are mostly just a question of what assumptions you’re making.
> Kessler syndrome could happen even just with the amount of satellite
Kessler as in a catastrophic loss of satellites. In LEO, it wouldn’t be a denial of space programme, nor even a systemic issue—there aren’t high enough orbital energies.
Kessler as in a catastrophic loss of satellites. In LEO, it wouldn’t be a denial of space programme, nor even a systemic issue—there aren’t high enough orbital energies.
Kessler syndrome is both loss of satellites but also rendering orbits unavailable. My comment was presupposing malicious actors so the hypothetical orbits aren’t going to be identical to what we currently have. It doesn’t take that much material orbiting in the opposite direction to render geosynchronous orbit untenable for example.
There are 1.5 billion cars in the world, and they all drive on a single plane on a very small percentage of the surface. Now increase the circumference by a lot and add a whole new dimension. I think we'll be fine.
One critical thing you're missing is that when cars smash into each other, the debris stops moving soon, and a spec doesn't completely destroy other cars a week later.
And most debris from a VLEO collision deorbit in under an hour.
Kuiper isn't in VLEO, but any larger constellations likely will be.
Kuiper isn't in VLEO, but any larger constellations likely will be.
Also car interactions are seldom between competing space programs or warring nationalities with their own interests and limits on maneuvering capability and energy expense quotas.
Collision avoidance at spaceX is largely automated but for most operators there is a wide variety of response capability
Collision avoidance at spaceX is largely automated but for most operators there is a wide variety of response capability
Not disagreeing with the conclusion, but cars are almost always stationary (parked) and when they do move they are many orders of magnitude slower than satellites. Which means it's not an obvious 1:1 comparison.
Cars also collide constantly despite best efforts to proactively avoid that. Not the sort of thing that’s desirable for satellites.
And cars are very maneuverable -- can stop, start, and turn in seconds; and can safely pass within inches of each other. (Most) cars also have one human each paying full attention to where it is going and controlling its path.
Satellites don't have so many degrees of freedom.
A bad way to extend the cars analogy is to compare with people. There are 8 billion of us and we walk around all the time but almost never get damaged by running into each other.
Satellites don't have so many degrees of freedom.
A bad way to extend the cars analogy is to compare with people. There are 8 billion of us and we walk around all the time but almost never get damaged by running into each other.
Satellites follow a extremely well known path and are tracked by the operators to a ridiculous level of precision. I can't imagine us needing more than 10 providers of 100K sats each at an upper limit. You could fit them all in a few (10 say) large football stadiums if you piled them up (a sat is probably 5m³ at most, a stadium is 100x100x50m so 500000m³)
There have already been six "Unintentional high-speed collisions between active satellites and orbital debris" [0], the most recent of which was in 2021.
There is more to worry about than just tracking satellites following "extremely well known paths". You could have a situation like Intelsat 29e [1] where a satellite is torn to pieces, creating a debris field with parts too small to track. You can't avoid what you can't see.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_collision
[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/new-video-of-intelsa...
There is more to worry about than just tracking satellites following "extremely well known paths". You could have a situation like Intelsat 29e [1] where a satellite is torn to pieces, creating a debris field with parts too small to track. You can't avoid what you can't see.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_collision
[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/new-video-of-intelsa...
But cars constantly have traffic jams, so this doesn’t work as an argument a fortriori (basically, showing that a generous bound has been loosened).
It’s a great analogy but to nitpick a little I wouldn’t say the circumference is expanded ‘a lot’ - they’re generally in LEO at 5-600km so an additional 1000 km which is essentially 3,141.5 ish kilometres on top of 40,000ish - under 8%?
Of course, each additional orbital plane is basically another set of roads but for all the internet sat constellations being planned extra distance = lag, hence we’re going to see the most growth in that LEO category
Of course, each additional orbital plane is basically another set of roads but for all the internet sat constellations being planned extra distance = lag, hence we’re going to see the most growth in that LEO category
I looked it up, and
LEO = <2000km altitude, and
rEarth = ~6300m, so
surface area of a sphere with r=6300km => ~500,000,000 km^2
surface area of a sphere with r=8300km => ~860,000,000 km^2
so roughly 1.5x the surface area at max LEO compared to earth's surface
(feel free to correct me if my arithmetic is off :)
LEO = <2000km altitude, and
rEarth = ~6300m, so
surface area of a sphere with r=6300km => ~500,000,000 km^2
surface area of a sphere with r=8300km => ~860,000,000 km^2
so roughly 1.5x the surface area at max LEO compared to earth's surface
(feel free to correct me if my arithmetic is off :)
Unfortunately it's the wrong comparison to make.
Two cars sitting still in a car park won't collide with each other, but there's no way to sit still in orbit.
Any two circular orbits at the same altitude will intersect at two points. You have to be very careful to make sure objects in such orbits will not collide with each other. It's far easier to make the orbits slightly different sizes or shapes, so that they don't intersect at all.
In any case, the need to be in an orbit to stay in orbit severely restricts your free choices for where to put your objects, so there is not as much free space as you might expect.
Two cars sitting still in a car park won't collide with each other, but there's no way to sit still in orbit.
Any two circular orbits at the same altitude will intersect at two points. You have to be very careful to make sure objects in such orbits will not collide with each other. It's far easier to make the orbits slightly different sizes or shapes, so that they don't intersect at all.
In any case, the need to be in an orbit to stay in orbit severely restricts your free choices for where to put your objects, so there is not as much free space as you might expect.
no problems with that, but the internet sats all seem to be aiming for 500-600 (Starlink) up to 1000km. it's lots of 'space' :)
I’m excited for the part where interstellar travel stops being a viable human endeavor because we littered LEO with more of fucking Jeff Bezos’ boxes.
Aren't all these communications satellites in a low orbit that will decay in 5-10 years?
are they? That’s a promising thought actually
But, think of the astronomers!
These LEO satellite internet companies need to pay a tax to fund more space telescopes!
These LEO satellite internet companies need to pay a tax to fund more space telescopes!
If there are 500 billion satellites evenly distributed under an altitude of 1200km, each satellite would have 1km3 of space.
Given that low earth orbit satellites supposedly travel around 17,000 miles per hour, that is a frighteningly small amount of space. If we're voting, I say let's not get that crowded.
That means the satellites should be aware of each other positions, just like aircrafts. It’d take care of collision. The majority of satellites will be commercial, not military. There will be space control for them.
Also may be not 500 billions, but how about 100 millions? So 5000 times fewer.
Also may be not 500 billions, but how about 100 millions? So 5000 times fewer.
I was thinking more if we needed to get through them in a rocket than if they crashed into each other
Aren't they traveling much slower versus their orbital plane - basically how much drag they experience?
For example, we travel 1600kmph due to the Earth's rotation.
For example, we travel 1600kmph due to the Earth's rotation.
That's much better than cars doing 80mph a few feet apart on the freeway.
Rocket ships don't have to cross the plane cars travel perpendicular to the direction of their travel. That's a very big distinction.
When two satellites cross each others plane it is highly predictable and easy to maneouver an avoidance. OTOH on a freeway lane changes happen constantly are sometimes very unexpected.
It amuses me to think we could inadvertently solve for global warming by having so many satellites that we start blocking out the sun.
We could not do that inadvertently. To block even 1% of light using Starlink sized satellites (~30 m^2 with solar panels deployed) would require tens of billions of satellites. We could do it on purpose with huge rotating solar reflectors, and it should honestly be considered as a real option, but we couldn't and wouldn't do so just by launching communication satellites.
Starlink satellites are designed to manuever and burn up in the atmosphere once they have reached the end of their lifespan.
What becomes of the satellite powder, do they seed clouds, reflect sunlight, etc. Especially to consider the question of maximum capacity.
Starlink satellites mass 300 kg each. There's about 5000 of them in orbit, so that's 1,500,000 kg.
The Earth has about 5.15x10^18 kg of atmosphere. 5,130,000,000,000,000,000 kg of gas. If each satellite aerosolized completely (which it wouldn't, metals would rapidly precipitate out of the air) then they would make up a couple parts per trillion of the atmosphere. Way lower concentrations than cloud seeding.
In contrast, routine operations of Air Force One emit around 41,000,000 kg of CO2 per year. (They fly not just the president, but his security detail, and the presidential limo to every foreign visit)
The Earth has about 5.15x10^18 kg of atmosphere. 5,130,000,000,000,000,000 kg of gas. If each satellite aerosolized completely (which it wouldn't, metals would rapidly precipitate out of the air) then they would make up a couple parts per trillion of the atmosphere. Way lower concentrations than cloud seeding.
In contrast, routine operations of Air Force One emit around 41,000,000 kg of CO2 per year. (They fly not just the president, but his security detail, and the presidential limo to every foreign visit)
I don't know but maybe we'll start to see the earth cool a little :)
Space is really, really big. And, orbits can happen at different distances from the Earth.
As long as we don’t overcommit LEO satellites we can keep putting things in GEO orbit for probably a very long time.
As long as we don’t overcommit LEO satellites we can keep putting things in GEO orbit for probably a very long time.
Enough to eventually block out the sun :-) https://satellitetracker3d.com
...assuming the launch vehicles are good to go.
> All told, Amazon has purchased 77 launches: 38 Vulcan launches, plus nine flights on ULA's soon-to-retire Atlas V, 18 Ariane 6 rockets, and 12 New Glenn missions, with a contract option for 15 more.
All three of the new launch vehicles have seen repeated delays. Also note that Vulcan and New Glenn both use Blue Origin's BE-4 engine.
> All told, Amazon has purchased 77 launches: 38 Vulcan launches, plus nine flights on ULA's soon-to-retire Atlas V, 18 Ariane 6 rockets, and 12 New Glenn missions, with a contract option for 15 more.
All three of the new launch vehicles have seen repeated delays. Also note that Vulcan and New Glenn both use Blue Origin's BE-4 engine.
I will bet a nice, cold beer that some of those satellites end up riding to orbit on top of Falcon 9 rockets. Too much has to go absolutely right for them otherwise.
No doubt this will irritate Jeff to no end. I hear he’s not a big SpaceX fan.
No doubt this will irritate Jeff to no end. I hear he’s not a big SpaceX fan.
I would be shocked if this happened unless Amazon’s hand was somehow forced by shareholders. Even if none of the rockets fly when Amazon expects them to, it’s more likely for Amazon to quietly drop the whole project than go to SpaceX. It’s going to take years of delays for Amazon to realize that their launch partners aren’t gonna work out, and by then the market opportunity will be over.
Frankly, the whole satellite deal always smelled like self-dealing to me in the first place.
Frankly, the whole satellite deal always smelled like self-dealing to me in the first place.
> Also note that Vulcan and New Glenn both use Blue Origin's BE-4 engine.
One of those engines destined for Vulcan's maiden flight exploded during qualification testing recently.
I think a lot will have to go right going forward for Amazon to reach the July 2026 deadline for half deployment.
One of those engines destined for Vulcan's maiden flight exploded during qualification testing recently.
I think a lot will have to go right going forward for Amazon to reach the July 2026 deadline for half deployment.
Launch the Hypno Drones.
Has anyone heard much about the Telesat Lightspeed program?
As far as I can tell, there is no regular consumer access planned for it. It seems like a missed opportunity on their part.
As far as I can tell, there is no regular consumer access planned for it. It seems like a missed opportunity on their part.
LightSpeed is indeed all backhaul. Whether it is a missed opportunity depends on how you look at it. Go direct consumer and you are competing directly against Amazon and StarLink. I guess TeleSat believes the bigger opportunity is going where these companies are not.
And I gotta say that "Lightspeed" is a hell of a misnomer given the rate that this program is plodding along. The longer it slides, the more that StarLink etc eat their lunch.
And I gotta say that "Lightspeed" is a hell of a misnomer given the rate that this program is plodding along. The longer it slides, the more that StarLink etc eat their lunch.
Can we have a law passed that would mandate to lease the last mile to others (kind of like phone companies were required phone lines for DSL) so once again we can have competition?
It is just dumb to require every ISP to run a dedicated line to your house.