SpaceX CEO Elon Musk reveals next-generation Starlink satellite details
Speaking in an onsite interview and Starbase tour with YouTuber Tim Dodd (The Everyday Astronaut), Musk – largely unprovoked – revealed that SpaceX has already built at least one functional Starlink Gen2/V2.0 satellite prototype and shipped it to the South Texas Starship factory, where it is currently being stored. More importantly, Musk also provided the first direct specifications for the next-generation spacecraft, stating that each Starlink V2.0 satellite will weigh about 1.25 tons (~2750 lb), measure about seven meters (~23 ft) long, and be almost an order of magnitude more capable than the "Starlink 1" satellites they'll ultimately supersede.
[...] Starlink V1.0 and V1.5 satellites weigh around 260 and 310 kilograms, respectively, meaning that Starlink V2.0 satellites will be about a bit more than four times heavier than V1.5 and a bit less than five times heavier than V1.0.
Musk also revealed that V2.0 satellites will be "almost an order of magnitude more capable than Starlink 1." He refused to call that capability bandwidth or throughput, the traditional method of describing a communication satellite's total performance, but Starlink V1.0 satellites are believed to have a total bandwidth of 18 gigabits per second (18 Gbps). As of today, it's unknown if Starlink V1.5 – a significant upgrade – also added more bandwidth, nor if Musk was referring to that latest Starlink V1.x iteration. But even if he was comparing V2.0 with the earliest V1.0 satellites, it's possible that each Starlink V2.0 satellite could add around 140-160 Gbps to the 30,000-satellite constellation.
Both the standard and extended payload fairings (pp. 40-41) for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy have a diameter of 5.2 meters.
Also at ZDNet.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @02:19AM (5 children)
Headline says Falcon can't launch the new satellite, going on about the difference between earlier models without anything about why Falcon can't launch the new model, except the last bit:
Still ambiguous, since the quoted text tells the "length" of the new model, not the diameter.
???
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @02:27AM
It's a press release, not a news story
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday June 02 2022, @02:36AM (3 children)
Both the dimensions and the mass are a problem, and this is huge news since SpaceX has been launching Starlink on Falcon 9 flights relentlessly (4 in the past month) but is betting all future progress on Starship.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @03:27AM (2 children)
Any news on musk vs putin mano-a-mano death match?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Thursday June 02 2022, @03:39AM (1 child)
Putin is busy avoiding a coup.
https://www.newsweek.com/putin-fires-five-generals-russia-military-failures-ukraine-continue-1712053 [newsweek.com]
https://www.thedailybeast.com/top-russian-military-brass-caught-venting-youre-fucked-putinmotherfucker [thedailybeast.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @09:38AM
The more he tightens his grip the worse the blowback will be when he inevitably loses it. It's just a matter of time.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @02:58AM
There's nothing in the article that says Starlink 2 won't be able to launch on Falcon 9. Falcon 9 is easily capable of launching this satellite, and it could probably launch two or maybe three (if they fit), even with a return to launch site landing.
The worst part of Falcon is the small payload fairing, so running out of space is hardly a new problem for Falcon.
Of course Starship would be better, but Starship is supposed to be better at just about everything.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @03:10AM
A leaked phone call transcript revealed that Starship was once again judged to be likely to reach orbit before SLS and needed to be obstructed to prevent embarrassment of certain VIPs.
And this is why the Environmental Policy Act and every other law that exists for no purpose other than to obstruct progress and allowing useless bureaucrats to pointlessly prevent actual useful people from doing work needs to be repealed.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Barenflimski on Thursday June 02 2022, @04:53AM (4 children)
Elon made it very clear that what he was saying was that for Starlink 2.0 to be profitable, they needed to launch it in bulk on the new Starship. If they didn't, it wasn't profitable to launch on the Falcon 9. Think quantity. Bulk.
I love what he does here. He creates excitement by not being so reserved that he won't talk about anything. His stuff might fail. Most companies policy is to not talk about anything until its accomplished.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @05:08AM
One thing I like about Musk is his fucking with crypto morons. He knows they are morons and he entertains himself and the general public by fucking with them.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @09:23AM (2 children)
They can't meet the FCC's completion deadline* without Starship and that puts their broadcasting licence at risk. That's why Starlink 2.0 exists. Since they must use Starship anyway they might as well use the increased upmass and build a bigger network.
*IIRC OneWeb sued to get SpaceX's deadline shortened, leaving them scrambling.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday June 02 2022, @09:40AM (1 child)
Worst case scenario, Texas remains a testing and R&D site and they start launching out of Florida. But they will probably have lost 2 years.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @05:34PM
They are required to launch half* of the constellation by March 29, 2024 or they risk losing their licence. That's less than two years away.
*If they meet that deadline then they get another three years to launch the rest.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by drussell on Thursday June 02 2022, @01:45PM
Assuming that metric ton is correct, 1250 kg is about 2756 lb, 260 kg is about 573 lb, and 310 kg is about 683 lb.
I'm not sure what comparing the supposed length of the new prototype satellite has to do with the diameter (5.2m ≈ 17 feet) of the payload fairing, other than suggesting you can't stack a bunch of them sideways (?!) if the full length is "fixed", but whatever... It seems mostly like a whole bunch of blabbing blurb about basically nothing.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2022, @10:27PM
the frontrunner global drone network. for national securiti and profit.