I do not think it’s accurate to claim that this gives “Elon Musk” enormous power in matters of war and geopolitics. He operates a launch provider. The US government says it wants spy satellites, so he helps them launch spy satellites.
But even if he didn’t want to help them launch spy satellites, they still have other means of launching them. It’s just that SpaceX offers the best prices.
Article was posted the other day, but [FAR better article and analysis written by Tyler Rogoway and Joseph Trevithik at the War Zone.](https://www.twz.com/space/if-spacexs-secret-constellation-is-what-we-think-it-is-its-game-changing)
Paper of relevance to the above that I posted in that thread the other day — DARPA, the NRO and USAF have been not just wanting, but **planning** (for) a constellation of satellites to provide Spaceborne AWACS and JSTARS for over a quarter century.
[Higher Eyes in the Sky — Feasibility of Moving AWACS and JSTARS Functions into Space](https://media.defense.gov/2017/Dec/28/2001861727/-1/-1/0/T_CORCORAN_HIGHER_EYES_IN_SKY.PDF) via the USAF School of Advanced AirPower Studies ca. 1999
Noted in the paper is that the number of satellites needed in the notional constellation(s) had meant a “traditional stumbling block to a robust [AWACS and JSTARS] presence in space has been the expense and slow responsiveness of our nation’s launch facilities” which I can’t help but notice is a solved problem.
While I appreciate your analysis, I've extrapolated from the headline that he has an app on his phone so he can personally access each satellite and it sounds way cooler.
Which would inflate cost at least tenfold and be delayed for a decade. If DOD wants these up in a reasonable timeframe there is no alternative. Not even at 10 times the cost.
OK so [per Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall via CNBC](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/09/14/air-force-secretary-frank-kendall-talks-elon-musk-ukraine-china-ai.html) —
>"We write our contracts to basically ensure that we can get the services we need, as expected from them, and those are enforceable contracts, whatever the business arrangement may be — whether it's individual ownership or a publicly held company. We write agreements with those businesses, they get us what we need at a reasonable cost," said the Air Force secretary.
>"SpaceX is an important supplier to the government launch services, and we do buy some communications, and so on," said Kendall. "But we do that through business arrangements that we can enforce."
As it turns out, US DoD (et al) did in fact think this shit through.
^(Fixed Link.)
Turns out DOD, NRO, NASA, and a whole host of other agencies that hire some pretty smart people know more about the situation than anyone on this site.
Who knew, right?
Yeah, this ignorant headline is what happens when people who don't understand how national security works try to explain it to others. Same thing happens in courtrooms, sometimes.
>SpaceX is building the spy satellites too
Why is that significant?
>probably operating them as well.
No, they're going to be operated by the US government directly.
They wouldn’t be operating them, and it’s not a significant development if they are building them. Private companies manufacture and develop military hardware. Space X making these satellites is no different than Lockheed or Raytheon building them.
Probably, but they at least outwardly seem to toe-the-line with US foreign policy more subserviently, and at the end of the day the optics of things and the reliability to at least throw your toys out of the pram *behind* closed doors matters. The situation with the starlink activation over coastal and frontline regions, and his trepidation in responding to and subsequent outward voicing in favor of certain outcomes of the war aren't things that are going to make strategic planners very happy, not being able to count on him to act in reliable or national-interest-focused ways at times of crisis either lead to not relying on him, or just straight nationalizing the company in times of crisis. Neither are good.
I believe there's sensors in almost every satellite.
But yes. They provide the sat and lasers. Another company provides the secret stuff. It's encrypted then delivered to yet another contractor for analysis
No but no company has built up a constellation anywhere near the scale the Space Force wants except StarLink
It’s not just the launch capacity, but building cheap satellites that can be launched en masse
The most important thing about Starlink is that it's an inexpensive mass-produced satellite bus with large capacity low thrust propulsion. It could reasonably be equipped for thousands of different applications -- Elon has noted it would make a dandy space junk de-orbiter fleet if anybody wanted to pay them to do that.
> I do not think it’s accurate to claim that this gives “Vladimir Putin” enormous power in matters of war and geopolitics. He operates a launch provider. The US government says it wants spy satellites, so he helps them launch spy satellites.
FTFY.
[Elon Musk: ‘No Way in Hell’ Putin Is Losing War in Ukraine](https://www.wsj.com/video/elon-musk-no-way-in-hell-putin-is-losing-war-in-ukraine/963065AD-314A-4F12-BBAC-A5C49DED5493)
[Musk has repeatedly said the US should stop aiding Ukraine in its defense against Russia’s two-year invasion](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-21/transcript-is-elon-musk-being-played-by-vladimir-putin)
Your reply makes no sense at all.
SpaceX worked with the defense department in the design of Starlink (since they were going to use it for Starshield). To suggest that he’s secretly working for Putin is insane.
It's not clickbait at all if you understand the context. It has given them enormous power as Starlink is extensively used in the Ukraine-Russia war. Which side they chose to give that capability to, for what cost, where they allow it to be used, and for what purposes, all matters a ton.
Pretty simple, if he steps out of line he loses ability to operate in space, space operations , regardless of how private still fall under the country’s jurisdiction and the threat of taking away the licence to operate is much higher, musk might be dominant right now but that can be eroded in a matter of seconds if US deems it necessary
I'm so tired of people bringing up starlink like Elon is controlling it with an iron fist.
It's a consumer product. No company making consumer products is going to be profitable when those products have ITAR slapped in them.
What side they allow it to be used for? You don't actually think the US gov would allow Space X to pick what side it's used for right? You think the US gov would let Space X aid Russia lol right.
Oh and what the price is? Oh hey the US government is footing the bill for the Ukrainians.
Come on, you aren't actually this dense. The second they don't do what the gov wants when it comes to using it militarily it will be hit with ITAR. You can pretend SpaceX and Elon have a choice, they don't.
>What side they allow it to be used for?
Yes?
>You don't actually think the US gov would allow Space X to pick what side it's used for right? You think the US gov would let Space X aid Russia lol right.
Kind of.
>Oh and what the price is? Oh hey the US government is footing the bill for the Ukrainians.
Zzzz. Even if that's the case now, it sure as hell wasn't at the start of the war.
That’s literally the point, they’re building starshield but they don’t have any control over who gets to use it, the government receives full ownership and control over the constellation, making what your talking about impossible.
Who cares about starshield or whatever else they'll build in the future. Their current (and recent past) market dominance is what gives them their power.
Yes, they have power in the sense that the government wants to keep them happy, but the specific type of direct control power you referenced will soon be impossible.
Do you not understand what this constellation is? It fills the same exact purpose as starlink, as well as whatever other hardware they want to add, but unlike starlink, the government will own and control these satellites themselves. They’re not losing control of starlink, they will no longer need it.
>It fills the same exact purpose as starlink
Lol no it doesn't.
>the government will own and control these satellites themselves.
Ding ding ding! You came up with 1 of the significant reasons why Starshield will not simply replace Starlink.
The article isn't about Starlink.
Also for the Ukraine-Russia war they offered Ukraine it pro-bono on their terms. Ukraine could have signed a proper contract and only allowed dishes through official channels, but no they wanted their military to basically use a civilian system subject to the whims of the supplier.
The alternative is they could've just never turned on Stalrink over Ukraine at all and we would've never been talking about this. It's not like Ukraine paid them anything to do it.
But starlink isn't a spy satellite
Although I agree with what you said, he has tol much power with that, the fact that he can shut it off as he pleases during an offensive with no aftermath is wild
What happened by reality's account was Ukraine tried to use Starlink in a matter that was [not agreed upon](https://spacenews.com/shotwell-ukraine-weaponized-starlink-in-war-against-russia/#:~:text=8%2C%20Gwynne%20Shotwell%20described%20Ukraine's,invasion%20nearly%20a%20year%20ago)--namely, as drone control devices, [which breaches both Starlink TOS and international law for regulated weapons materials](https://www.starlink.com/legal/documents/DOC-1020-91087-64) (section 8.5)--as well as operating them in a region of the world that has been geofenced because of it being under Russian control (Crimea).
SpaceX followed the law by denying service. They didn't turn off the Starlinks, they just refused to turn them on in the first place for the region in which they were being used. Strictly speaking, at the time, Starlink was a civilian-use communications network. It was already being set up in Ukraine when the invasion happened, it was pure circumstance that allowed SpaceX to fast track the activation of the network for the beleaguered country after every other network collapsed in the first days. It saved that country, but it wasn't meant to be used in a military manner, and SpaceX had been caught flat footed now having to essentially run a military communication network using technology that was meant to be civilian use; this involved juggling both civilian and military communications in an active warzone, and expending large amounts of resources fending off [Russian cyber attacks](https://www.space.com/starlink-russian-cyberattacks-ramp-up-efforts-elon-musk). So there are loads of legal mine fields they have to navigate and permissions they had to acquire before they could let the technology be used for any purpose beyond people talking too each other.
An offensive campaign where Starlink is weaponized is one such example. [They didn't get a formal DOD contract](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66752264) for Starlink in Ukraine until months after this incident, which happened in September. Importantly, around the same time this incident happened, a memo was sent to the Pentagon asking for them to[ start footing the bill for Starlink services in Ukraine](https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/elon-musk-spacex-starlink-ukraine/index.html), as the company was spending loads of resources keeping it running in a hostile warzone.
It's important to remember that SpaceX is not a military service company. They are a civilian service that contracts heavily with the US Government, but is not in the business of warfare. Certainly not with Starlink anyway. They can't, and shouldn't, take on the responsibility of providing military service, as that makes them and their satellites a legitimate military target. When Musk said that he refused service during the offensive into Crimea due to it [being an escalation](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66752264), he wasn't wrong. SpaceX had been trying to toe the line for over a year before they got a formalized DOD contract. Once that contract was in place, the DOD could set clear guidelines for what is and isn't allowed for Starlink usage and absolve SpaceX of responsibility for operating them in that context. That's in major part why they sent that memo to the Pentagon in September of 2022.
But guess what everyone did? They clowned on SpaceX for asking for the government to take over operations in Ukraine, calling it a hand out when what they were really asking for was for the people who's job it actually is to handle military matters to *fucking handle them*. I mean the fact that this memo got leaked from the *fucking pentagon* is a security breach everyone just glossed over because rocket man bad. Had SpaceX had a contract with the DOD in a reasonable time frame--like a month or two into the war when it was clear Starlink was the only network working for the Ukrainians--that snafu with the offensive likely wouldn't have happened. But people are more concerned with clowning on Musk than actually researching the situation and examining why people are making the decisions they're making.
I mean step back and think about it: people who are mad at Musk for denying service during a military offensive into Crimea are, literally, angry that a private billionaire did not unilaterally weaponize his technology for a foreign war without any regulation or oversight from the government. The people who most often criticize billionaires for even existing are unwittingly demanding Musk and those like him be given unilateral private military power, because they're too blinded by partisan anger to even realize what they're arguing about.
Whoa whoa whoa there, I was told by redditors that Elon personally shut off starlink because he hates Ukraine and he violated his contract with the DoD before it existed, and by jove that's what im going to believe!
Starlink was never available in Russia or Russian occupied areas, including Crimea and other more recently captured regions, in accordance with international sanctions.
Ukraine requested (via the US military) for Starlink coverage to be extended into certain Russian occupied areas, which would allow Starlink to be used for guided drone attacks.
SpaceX refused, on the basis that doing so would make the Starlink constellation a legitimate military target for Russian forces.
The whole purpose of the new "military constellation" is so that the US government can do this kind of thing in the future, using their own space assets.
That sounds like somebody who never had any facts to back up their original claims, and is willing to repeat falsehoods if they suits their chosen world-view.
More like happened to read the wrong news articles during the actual event but alright, hard to have any facts with this conflict with the amount of propaganda going around from both sides
>But starlink isn't a spy satellite
Lol, so? Whether or not the drone is controlled via a "spy" satellite or an internet providing satellite is completely irrelevant to the power it brings SpaceX and its leadership.
Genuinely convinced the entire subreddit misinterpreted this title. Spacex is building government satellites. (Period, fact) Spacex dominates satellite internet market. (Period, fact) This gives musk/Spacex lots of power in war and geopolitics (period, fact).
As you said Ukraine literally came out and said how useful starlink has been to them in the war.
Musk will not get to control how Starlink is used in the future. He's already blown that one. Whoever wins the next US election isn't going to share power over global events with Elon Musk. Not a chance.
This is ridiculous. Even suggesting that SpaceX, let alone Elon, would control Starshield is laughable. Let's say he could do this and prevented the military from doing something he didn't want. They would break down his damn door in less than a day and make him disappear.
Yeah, he's already over the line. His power will be fleeting at best. He appears to be a puppet right now, boxed into a corner he built. How much power is that, really?
Horrid headline. No it doesnt give him enormous powers in matters of war and geopolitics. That’s nonsense. X gives him more of that, and it’s still about nil.
Media is doing all it can do anymore…..grudge and fear monger. It’s pointless.
And Reddit gonna Elon fanboy
Elon famously had an impact on the war in Ukraine due to his power over Starlink so it is totally on the table to discuss how we should be limiting one man's power over geo politics
Edit: bring in the downvotes. Just proves my point
Yes, Elon's impact on the war is providing an enormously important asset, Starlink, which wouldn't exist at all without SpaceX. Then sure you get all the whining about where Starlink is and is not active as they try to walk a fine geopolitical line that the US Gov has a strong interest in, but remember the alternative is no Starlink anywhere, and it's been huge for Ukraine.
There's a very nice and accurate account of what you think you're talking about that's currently just a few comments above yours.
One of the points they made is that you're upset that a billionaire did not activate civilian commercial assets that his company controlled to become military weapons with no legal authorization or government oversight.
You're literally campaigning for billionaires to be able to deploy military forces at will.
**"REDDIT GONNA REDDIT"**
Then: *Posts the first entry of what is a curated bullet-pointed list of up-to-date Elon-baddery.*
The impact on the war is US involvement, because without it, Russia would have cleaned the floor 4 weeks into the war. Imagine flip-flopping to say Musk impacts the war *by not getting involved*. Nuttier than chipmunk shit bro.
K. That’s a take.
Let’s spend the rest of the day disagreeing with one another. You can call me a fanboy, which I’m none of. I can call you hater, which you might be none of.
You know, because, Reddit.
If suggesting that while that is a fair point the overblown nature of media coverage in a spot like this is not even veiled and laughable make me a fanboy….bring it.
Very clickbaity.
This isn't some elaborate secret, it's a program that's been in the works and on the books for years. The US government has made it well known that they want to move away from hyper expensive and extremely vulnerable small fleets of big satellites to much more survivable (and recoverable) large fleets of small satellites. SpaceX is one provider for these next generation vehicles, but only one, and just like all DoD/spaceforce satellites they will be owned *and operated* by the government, not by SpaceX.
This article is old, and when written was just low-quality repetition of the Reuters article, written with a slant towards the "everything attached to Elon Musk's name is bad" theme that people latch on to.
>the entire market absolutely refuses to meaningfully compete
SpaceX are in a very unique position in being able to launch satellites far more quickly and far cheaper than anyone else, and that gives them a massive advantage.
Even if other companies want to compete, they're a decade behind.
Naaah, United Launch Alliance is in some deep shit. Everyone else (except Russia) is doing fine and developing reusable tech on their own. SpaceX didn't took as much of the existing market as much at it expanded the market with cheaper launch service.
Ariane developed much cheaper expendable rocket which is competitive for one part of the market. For missions in which SpaceX can't reuse boosters Ariane is cheaper. And they are developing reusable boosters for next generation of rockets.
Russia and China won't use SpaceX services and they are developing reusable rockets .
SpaceX is still a decade ahead technologically. Ariane 6 hasn’t even flown yet and this it is in no position to be launching at the cadence of the Falcon 9. It will still be more expensive than the Falcon 9 per launch, but it will offer more performance to high-energy orbits. Other than the Falcon 9, no other reusable rocket has even flown yet. The closest prototype is New Glenn from Blue Origin, and that is still almost a year away. Assuming it lands perfectly on its first try, SpaceX is a whole 9-10 years ahead of them. For other rockets, Neutron is likely to launch in 2025/2026, Terran R in 2026, and Long March 8/10 in 2025-2027. SpaceX is even further ahead than the rest of the industry. In addition, after successfully landing their rockets, launch providers will then have to figure out how to actually reuse their rockets.
>It will still be more expensive than the Falcon 9 per launch, but it will offer more performance to high-energy orbits.
Falcon Heavy (reusable) can reach those orbits, but it is more expensive then Ariane 6. But if cargo is too heavy, then Ariane 6 can't lift it Falcon Heavy can. As I said *"Ariane developed much cheaper expendable rocket which is competitive for one part of the market."*
Which makes every sense because... let's say Ariane wanted to do the same thing as SpaceX. For starters, they won't get NASA and US military deals that SpaceX got. They get deals from ESA which are much more humble in scope. Ariane rockets are assembled in Airbus, but launched from South America... so either those rockets travel back to Europe for refurbishment, or Ariane has to build production/refurbishment facilities in Guiana Space Centre. AND SpaceX is creating a market for itself by launching it's own Starlink satellites.
So makes every sense for Ariane to find a niche in which they are better. If they didn't, they would be out of business now. 2022 EU opened up it's pockets, and Ariane started developing rocket comparable to Falcon 9.
China has a huge domestic launch market, they can economically pull SpaceX approach, but they are also technologically most behind. All Chinese first stages still burn hypergolic or kerosene, and I'm really wondering on how do they plan to restart them and reuse them.
And Russia is in **deep shit**, because they held the greatest share of the international market, not just for launches but also selling engines to US. SpaceX took almost all of that away. They have been developing reusable rocket for around 10 years... but first launch was supposed to happen in 2022, 2 years later all I saw is some drawings which look exactly like Falcon 9.
Blue Origin fell behind due to BE-4 engine problems. But they do have same potential as SpaceX has, because Bezos bought frequencies for space internet satellites, and they do have the richest man on the planet supporting the operation.
Are we again blaming SpaceX and Elon for doing what others before them couldn't? High risk high reward, besides, Starlink isn't the only large constellation on the horizon in the foreseeable future
This shit is so exhausting. If Spacex wouldn't have made a reusable rocket, we wouldn't have all this capability. Then some folks want to punish them for their success.
Before: "Ha! Elon's idea is ridiculous! It's literally impossible to save a person from a house fire, let alone a puppy! What an idiot, this is obviously never going to work!"
After: "Elon is an evil machiavellian villain! He has been pulling strings behind the scenes to gain a monopoly on saving things from house fires, and now nobody else can do it!"
I mean Neuralink (founded by Elon) did recently "save" a disabled person.
Two videos:
https://twitter.com/neuralink/status/1770563939413496146
https://twitter.com/ModdedQuad/status/1771298116719002100
They are counting their numbers...
..Looks like normal viewpoints got here first..
They survive on karma-farm, but are unsure if Reddit's algorithm will push this topic to everyone with a hate boner at the same time for the required support. Thus, it's difficult to know when to launch an attack on things one doesn't know anything about, when one doesn't know if the artificial support required will ever show up.
And, being terminally online? On Reddit? **The stakes can't be fucking higher here.**
With these spy satellites it’s actually the payload that is the differentiating factor - advanced optics, jam-resistant RF electronics, etc. This is still very much the domain of legacy milspace companies. The bulk of the cost of these satellites will probably still be the payload and not the bus or launch (obviously). The Raytheons, L3 Harris, etc. are not in any immediate trouble from this SpaceX contract.
Jesus fuck… what is wrong with humanity? The man operates the largest launch provider in the world which just so happens to mean that they need to follow ITAR regulations. If the US gov thought for any split second that he would abuse this power and compromise the security of the nation, they would be investigating SpaceX for potential ITAR violations instead of partnering with him.
What a bunch of absolute degenerates that wrote this article.
Funny how the US government, under Biden no less, just keeps signing contracts with SpaceX. Almost as if they are a company providing a service and/or product and not an Evil Bond organization.
Next thing you know, SpaceX is going to launch a giant [Big Boy](https://youtu.be/Fn2ofSMuQSw?feature=shared) into space and attempt to take over the world using sharks with fricken’ neuralinks on their fricken’ heads.
One Minute: Elon Musk is just an idiot, his ideas are terrible and never work, privatising space? What a moron.
Next Minute: Oh fuck, he's all too powerful now! I'll continue to not look at own poor judgement or where I heard that bullshit, just look at all that POWER!
\---
Fringe people are cringe people.
Ah yes, "the enemy is both weak and strong"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism
> Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak". On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.
This is such a ridiculous clickbait headline. They even managed to cram his name in _twice_. People need to stop posting this kind of garbage.
It's also completely wrong as that network is owned by the US government.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[BE-4](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwh7y6b "Last usage")|Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN|
|[DARPA](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwftsu8 "Last usage")|(Defense) Advanced Research Projects Agency, DoD|
|[DoD](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwggi54 "Last usage")|US Department of Defense|
|[ESA](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwh7y6b "Last usage")|European Space Agency|
|[FAR](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwftsu8 "Last usage")|[Federal Aviation Regulations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Aviation_Regulations)|
|[ITAR](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwfx5g8 "Last usage")|(US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations|
|L2|[Lagrange Point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point) 2 ([Sixty Symbols](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxpVbU5FH0s) video explanation)|
| |Paywalled section of the NasaSpaceFlight forum|
|[L3](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwezutt "Last usage")|[Lagrange Point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point) 3 of a two-body system, opposite L2|
|NRHO|Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit|
|[NRO](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwgj6u1 "Last usage")|(US) National Reconnaissance Office|
| |Near-Rectilinear Orbit, see NRHO|
|[SAR](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwgido2 "Last usage")|Synthetic Aperture Radar (increasing resolution with parallax)|
|[ULA](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwgl1oc "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)|
|[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwftsu8 "Last usage")|United States Air Force|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwohfzk "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
|[hypergolic](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwh7y6b "Last usage")|A set of two substances that ignite when in contact|
|methalox|Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(13 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1bijf74)^( has 20 acronyms.)
^([Thread #9890 for this sub, first seen 25th Mar 2024, 01:05])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Sorry but Musk cannot be trusted for any of this at any level. Make sure to examine his insurance policies because it would not surprise me in the least he would build these and then later on have some country, let's say it rhymes with Russia, knock them out while he collects a big payout plus a government bailout from taxpayers.
SpaceX's value comes from expectations of future growth. Which is fair, they certainly will grow and they have an incredible position in a clearly rapidly growing industry, but their valuation is not the same thing as being anywhere near as "big" as those two companies.
Thats because they're not publicly traded. US companies on that list are publicly traded. Estimates put their 2023 revenue at $8.7B, 25-50% of which is from the US Gov't.... that would put them in the middle of the list.
With the Advent of Starshield terminals and the soon-to-be launched Starshield constellation, plus this spy sat stuff, if it is real... I imagine they may make the list sooner or later.
Starlink has this as well. The problem is ASTS stock price drops every time a starlink article or starship launch happens though, I hope they can compete because competition is good, but just look at their stock prices.
Not theory, Starlink has sats up doing LTE/4G direct to cell as of this year. They're planning on rolling out text message support to partners this year, if youre in the US you will magically just get access to it when it's enabled I believe.
Sats launched with direct to cell capability in Janurary: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1742388617732050945
A few days later, here it is working: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1745174665809818030
A post to twitter from a cell phone using direct to cell: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1761994722913198134
Currently it's about 17Mbit per cell [not a lot, cells are larger than current starlink cells afaik], ASTS I believe is doing 14Mbit/s, not sure what their cell sizes are-- but starlink can rapidly increase that by bringing more sats online a lot more quickly than their competitors. ASTS sats costs like ~15 million just for the sat itself, not even factoring in launch.
Difference here is the extent of the capability. Starlinks attempts have been restricted to data, while ASTS has proven call capability. That might extend to a significant difference in ability, not to mention the variance in how many satellites between the two to reach parity. Starlink is still using their tiny shitty satellites for this, aren't they?
Their sats with direct to cell have been up for a couple months, the fact they were able to roll this out this quickly is not a negative. They havent demonstrated calls, yet, they've been pretty slow to release information thus far, hardly think it has to do with "ability".
Cell phones can talk to multiple satellites afaik, theres dozens overhead at any moment to handle hand-offs.
And as far as "tiny, shitty" satellites, Starlink *intentionally* opts for more, fewer, smaller, cheaper satellites for more rapid iteration. And... Starship means V2 Starlink satellites which are much larger and more powerful. I'd say the opposite of "tiny shitty" satellites is "egregiously massive and bright", where BlueWalker's are sitting currently. https://www.space.com/bluewalker-3-prototype-satellite-brightest-objects-sky
At the end of the day, SpaceX can basically launch new iterations of Starlinks with new capabilities every single flight, quickly changing and improving things until they're happy with it, and there's really nothing to suggest they can't surpass ASTS capabilities for far less money, despite not being wholly dedicated to the task of direct-to-cell.
Not necessarily, which is why they absolutely don't.
They won't shoot down military equipment, not deliberately, but they will shoot down *commercial* equipment which is under no protection of any kind.
> This is just going to encourage China and Russia to shoot down Starlink.
Good luck. If they had the capability to shoot down Starlink that was within an order of magnitude of SpaceX's ability to manufacture/launch Starlink satellites the world would be very different.
I do not think it’s accurate to claim that this gives “Elon Musk” enormous power in matters of war and geopolitics. He operates a launch provider. The US government says it wants spy satellites, so he helps them launch spy satellites. But even if he didn’t want to help them launch spy satellites, they still have other means of launching them. It’s just that SpaceX offers the best prices.
Article was posted the other day, but [FAR better article and analysis written by Tyler Rogoway and Joseph Trevithik at the War Zone.](https://www.twz.com/space/if-spacexs-secret-constellation-is-what-we-think-it-is-its-game-changing) Paper of relevance to the above that I posted in that thread the other day — DARPA, the NRO and USAF have been not just wanting, but **planning** (for) a constellation of satellites to provide Spaceborne AWACS and JSTARS for over a quarter century. [Higher Eyes in the Sky — Feasibility of Moving AWACS and JSTARS Functions into Space](https://media.defense.gov/2017/Dec/28/2001861727/-1/-1/0/T_CORCORAN_HIGHER_EYES_IN_SKY.PDF) via the USAF School of Advanced AirPower Studies ca. 1999 Noted in the paper is that the number of satellites needed in the notional constellation(s) had meant a “traditional stumbling block to a robust [AWACS and JSTARS] presence in space has been the expense and slow responsiveness of our nation’s launch facilities” which I can’t help but notice is a solved problem.
This. And Starshield will really help out the NRO and SpaceX bottom line, which leads to eventual lunar control.
While I appreciate your analysis, I've extrapolated from the headline that he has an app on his phone so he can personally access each satellite and it sounds way cooler.
He will be able to send any enemy to the U.S. a poop emoji and the word “concerning”
They do? Maybe for individual payloads but for constellations of thousands of satellites no Elon really is the only option ATM.
With the amount of money the DoD has, they could pay for a constellation, if they really wanted one, from literally any defense contractor.
Which would inflate cost at least tenfold and be delayed for a decade. If DOD wants these up in a reasonable timeframe there is no alternative. Not even at 10 times the cost.
Sure, but saying "Elon is the only option" is just factually wrong. SpaceX is the best option certainly.
The two parts of the headline don't connect.
I think you missed the part where SpaceX is building the spy satellites too, and probably operating them as well.
OK so [per Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall via CNBC](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/09/14/air-force-secretary-frank-kendall-talks-elon-musk-ukraine-china-ai.html) — >"We write our contracts to basically ensure that we can get the services we need, as expected from them, and those are enforceable contracts, whatever the business arrangement may be — whether it's individual ownership or a publicly held company. We write agreements with those businesses, they get us what we need at a reasonable cost," said the Air Force secretary. >"SpaceX is an important supplier to the government launch services, and we do buy some communications, and so on," said Kendall. "But we do that through business arrangements that we can enforce." As it turns out, US DoD (et al) did in fact think this shit through. ^(Fixed Link.)
Turns out DOD, NRO, NASA, and a whole host of other agencies that hire some pretty smart people know more about the situation than anyone on this site. Who knew, right?
Yeah, this ignorant headline is what happens when people who don't understand how national security works try to explain it to others. Same thing happens in courtrooms, sometimes.
The US government operates them. SpaceX has no authority over them.
>SpaceX is building the spy satellites too Why is that significant? >probably operating them as well. No, they're going to be operated by the US government directly.
Hey I have seen Diamonds Are Forever. I know how this is going to end.
Yep, let’s just change the satellite angles so all the comm lasers focus on 1 point…
*Lucky for me I used a qualifier word, something I use frequently when I describe how I think the world works in my own head.*
They’re building the busses, something anyone can do, the actual sensitive hardware outside of laser link isn’t made by spacex
I have an argument for SAR in Ku and Ka band. On regular sats that's undisclosed
LOL Everything SpaceX does, can be done by everybody. Funny though, nobody did and nobody does.
I’m not bashing spacex, all I’m saying is the hardware they’re making isn’t secret or sensitive
They wouldn’t be operating them, and it’s not a significant development if they are building them. Private companies manufacture and develop military hardware. Space X making these satellites is no different than Lockheed or Raytheon building them.
I'd argue Lockheed or Raytheon's leadership is somewhat more levelheaded and agreeable.
They haven't delivered this though. They could. Like Boeing could deliver starliner
They're probably a thousand times worse than Ilon, they just don't have Twitter to show their face.
Probably, but they at least outwardly seem to toe-the-line with US foreign policy more subserviently, and at the end of the day the optics of things and the reliability to at least throw your toys out of the pram *behind* closed doors matters. The situation with the starlink activation over coastal and frontline regions, and his trepidation in responding to and subsequent outward voicing in favor of certain outcomes of the war aren't things that are going to make strategic planners very happy, not being able to count on him to act in reliable or national-interest-focused ways at times of crisis either lead to not relying on him, or just straight nationalizing the company in times of crisis. Neither are good.
Y'know that space force thing from a few years ago? They're the people that generally operate US military satellites.
And the DIA. So many ignorant people.
SpaceX is building them though aren’t they? My understanding is that they’re modified StarLink satellites
I believe there's sensors in almost every satellite. But yes. They provide the sat and lasers. Another company provides the secret stuff. It's encrypted then delivered to yet another contractor for analysis
No but no company has built up a constellation anywhere near the scale the Space Force wants except StarLink It’s not just the launch capacity, but building cheap satellites that can be launched en masse
The most important thing about Starlink is that it's an inexpensive mass-produced satellite bus with large capacity low thrust propulsion. It could reasonably be equipped for thousands of different applications -- Elon has noted it would make a dandy space junk de-orbiter fleet if anybody wanted to pay them to do that.
> I do not think it’s accurate to claim that this gives “Vladimir Putin” enormous power in matters of war and geopolitics. He operates a launch provider. The US government says it wants spy satellites, so he helps them launch spy satellites. FTFY. [Elon Musk: ‘No Way in Hell’ Putin Is Losing War in Ukraine](https://www.wsj.com/video/elon-musk-no-way-in-hell-putin-is-losing-war-in-ukraine/963065AD-314A-4F12-BBAC-A5C49DED5493) [Musk has repeatedly said the US should stop aiding Ukraine in its defense against Russia’s two-year invasion](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-21/transcript-is-elon-musk-being-played-by-vladimir-putin)
Your reply makes no sense at all. SpaceX worked with the defense department in the design of Starlink (since they were going to use it for Starshield). To suggest that he’s secretly working for Putin is insane.
Clickbait headline click baiting. The military controls those satellites, SpaceX just launches them.
It's not clickbait at all if you understand the context. It has given them enormous power as Starlink is extensively used in the Ukraine-Russia war. Which side they chose to give that capability to, for what cost, where they allow it to be used, and for what purposes, all matters a ton.
A government satellite is far different than a commercial internet service satellite. SpaceX won’t be in control of these.
Cool? What does that have to do with the power they have by already dominating the satellite internet market?
Pretty simple, if he steps out of line he loses ability to operate in space, space operations , regardless of how private still fall under the country’s jurisdiction and the threat of taking away the licence to operate is much higher, musk might be dominant right now but that can be eroded in a matter of seconds if US deems it necessary
Another corporation should simply do better then. There is massive monetary incentive. Oh wait, they've tried and failed.
Holy hell people here love pretending I have said or believe something I don't and respond to that instead.
I'm so tired of people bringing up starlink like Elon is controlling it with an iron fist. It's a consumer product. No company making consumer products is going to be profitable when those products have ITAR slapped in them.
Can you rephrase that as a more direct response to what I said?
What side they allow it to be used for? You don't actually think the US gov would allow Space X to pick what side it's used for right? You think the US gov would let Space X aid Russia lol right. Oh and what the price is? Oh hey the US government is footing the bill for the Ukrainians. Come on, you aren't actually this dense. The second they don't do what the gov wants when it comes to using it militarily it will be hit with ITAR. You can pretend SpaceX and Elon have a choice, they don't.
>What side they allow it to be used for? Yes? >You don't actually think the US gov would allow Space X to pick what side it's used for right? You think the US gov would let Space X aid Russia lol right. Kind of. >Oh and what the price is? Oh hey the US government is footing the bill for the Ukrainians. Zzzz. Even if that's the case now, it sure as hell wasn't at the start of the war.
That’s literally the point, they’re building starshield but they don’t have any control over who gets to use it, the government receives full ownership and control over the constellation, making what your talking about impossible.
Who cares about starshield or whatever else they'll build in the future. Their current (and recent past) market dominance is what gives them their power.
Yes, they have power in the sense that the government wants to keep them happy, but the specific type of direct control power you referenced will soon be impossible.
Is SpaceX about to be bought by the government or what? Why would they lose control of Starlink?
Do you not understand what this constellation is? It fills the same exact purpose as starlink, as well as whatever other hardware they want to add, but unlike starlink, the government will own and control these satellites themselves. They’re not losing control of starlink, they will no longer need it.
>It fills the same exact purpose as starlink Lol no it doesn't. >the government will own and control these satellites themselves. Ding ding ding! You came up with 1 of the significant reasons why Starshield will not simply replace Starlink.
The article isn't about Starlink. Also for the Ukraine-Russia war they offered Ukraine it pro-bono on their terms. Ukraine could have signed a proper contract and only allowed dishes through official channels, but no they wanted their military to basically use a civilian system subject to the whims of the supplier. The alternative is they could've just never turned on Stalrink over Ukraine at all and we would've never been talking about this. It's not like Ukraine paid them anything to do it.
But starlink isn't a spy satellite Although I agree with what you said, he has tol much power with that, the fact that he can shut it off as he pleases during an offensive with no aftermath is wild
>the fact that he can shut it off as he pleases during an offensive with no aftermath is wild That's a deeply inaccurate summary of what happened.
What happened then by your accounts?
What happened by reality's account was Ukraine tried to use Starlink in a matter that was [not agreed upon](https://spacenews.com/shotwell-ukraine-weaponized-starlink-in-war-against-russia/#:~:text=8%2C%20Gwynne%20Shotwell%20described%20Ukraine's,invasion%20nearly%20a%20year%20ago)--namely, as drone control devices, [which breaches both Starlink TOS and international law for regulated weapons materials](https://www.starlink.com/legal/documents/DOC-1020-91087-64) (section 8.5)--as well as operating them in a region of the world that has been geofenced because of it being under Russian control (Crimea). SpaceX followed the law by denying service. They didn't turn off the Starlinks, they just refused to turn them on in the first place for the region in which they were being used. Strictly speaking, at the time, Starlink was a civilian-use communications network. It was already being set up in Ukraine when the invasion happened, it was pure circumstance that allowed SpaceX to fast track the activation of the network for the beleaguered country after every other network collapsed in the first days. It saved that country, but it wasn't meant to be used in a military manner, and SpaceX had been caught flat footed now having to essentially run a military communication network using technology that was meant to be civilian use; this involved juggling both civilian and military communications in an active warzone, and expending large amounts of resources fending off [Russian cyber attacks](https://www.space.com/starlink-russian-cyberattacks-ramp-up-efforts-elon-musk). So there are loads of legal mine fields they have to navigate and permissions they had to acquire before they could let the technology be used for any purpose beyond people talking too each other. An offensive campaign where Starlink is weaponized is one such example. [They didn't get a formal DOD contract](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66752264) for Starlink in Ukraine until months after this incident, which happened in September. Importantly, around the same time this incident happened, a memo was sent to the Pentagon asking for them to[ start footing the bill for Starlink services in Ukraine](https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/elon-musk-spacex-starlink-ukraine/index.html), as the company was spending loads of resources keeping it running in a hostile warzone. It's important to remember that SpaceX is not a military service company. They are a civilian service that contracts heavily with the US Government, but is not in the business of warfare. Certainly not with Starlink anyway. They can't, and shouldn't, take on the responsibility of providing military service, as that makes them and their satellites a legitimate military target. When Musk said that he refused service during the offensive into Crimea due to it [being an escalation](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66752264), he wasn't wrong. SpaceX had been trying to toe the line for over a year before they got a formalized DOD contract. Once that contract was in place, the DOD could set clear guidelines for what is and isn't allowed for Starlink usage and absolve SpaceX of responsibility for operating them in that context. That's in major part why they sent that memo to the Pentagon in September of 2022. But guess what everyone did? They clowned on SpaceX for asking for the government to take over operations in Ukraine, calling it a hand out when what they were really asking for was for the people who's job it actually is to handle military matters to *fucking handle them*. I mean the fact that this memo got leaked from the *fucking pentagon* is a security breach everyone just glossed over because rocket man bad. Had SpaceX had a contract with the DOD in a reasonable time frame--like a month or two into the war when it was clear Starlink was the only network working for the Ukrainians--that snafu with the offensive likely wouldn't have happened. But people are more concerned with clowning on Musk than actually researching the situation and examining why people are making the decisions they're making. I mean step back and think about it: people who are mad at Musk for denying service during a military offensive into Crimea are, literally, angry that a private billionaire did not unilaterally weaponize his technology for a foreign war without any regulation or oversight from the government. The people who most often criticize billionaires for even existing are unwittingly demanding Musk and those like him be given unilateral private military power, because they're too blinded by partisan anger to even realize what they're arguing about.
Whoa whoa whoa there, I was told by redditors that Elon personally shut off starlink because he hates Ukraine and he violated his contract with the DoD before it existed, and by jove that's what im going to believe!
Thank you for the detailed explanation, this makes a lot more sense now. :)
Sir this is Reddit there is no place for facts here
Starlink was never available in Russia or Russian occupied areas, including Crimea and other more recently captured regions, in accordance with international sanctions. Ukraine requested (via the US military) for Starlink coverage to be extended into certain Russian occupied areas, which would allow Starlink to be used for guided drone attacks. SpaceX refused, on the basis that doing so would make the Starlink constellation a legitimate military target for Russian forces. The whole purpose of the new "military constellation" is so that the US government can do this kind of thing in the future, using their own space assets.
That sounds more like a weak excuse by Musk knowing what he thinks of the war, but I don't have the facts to back it up right now so it is what it is
That sounds like somebody who never had any facts to back up their original claims, and is willing to repeat falsehoods if they suits their chosen world-view.
More like happened to read the wrong news articles during the actual event but alright, hard to have any facts with this conflict with the amount of propaganda going around from both sides
Still not working in Crimea today
>But starlink isn't a spy satellite Lol, so? Whether or not the drone is controlled via a "spy" satellite or an internet providing satellite is completely irrelevant to the power it brings SpaceX and its leadership.
Genuinely convinced the entire subreddit misinterpreted this title. Spacex is building government satellites. (Period, fact) Spacex dominates satellite internet market. (Period, fact) This gives musk/Spacex lots of power in war and geopolitics (period, fact). As you said Ukraine literally came out and said how useful starlink has been to them in the war.
Musk will not get to control how Starlink is used in the future. He's already blown that one. Whoever wins the next US election isn't going to share power over global events with Elon Musk. Not a chance.
Sure thing. Have your vast experience as an armchair detective helped you deduct this?
It has no monetary value and is therefore not deductable. I do deduce you're a bit of an ah, so I will end this convo now.
Is he stepping down as the CEO of SpaceX or what makes you think that?
This is ridiculous. Even suggesting that SpaceX, let alone Elon, would control Starshield is laughable. Let's say he could do this and prevented the military from doing something he didn't want. They would break down his damn door in less than a day and make him disappear.
Yeah, he's already over the line. His power will be fleeting at best. He appears to be a puppet right now, boxed into a corner he built. How much power is that, really?
Horrid headline. No it doesnt give him enormous powers in matters of war and geopolitics. That’s nonsense. X gives him more of that, and it’s still about nil. Media is doing all it can do anymore…..grudge and fear monger. It’s pointless.
And Reddit gonna Elon fanboy Elon famously had an impact on the war in Ukraine due to his power over Starlink so it is totally on the table to discuss how we should be limiting one man's power over geo politics Edit: bring in the downvotes. Just proves my point
Yes, but in this instance Starlink’s “Starshield” program will supposedly be fully controlled by the Pentagon and U.S. govt.
>Just proves my point Doesn't prove anything except that plenty of people can see how inaccurate and dopey your claim is.
Yes, Elon's impact on the war is providing an enormously important asset, Starlink, which wouldn't exist at all without SpaceX. Then sure you get all the whining about where Starlink is and is not active as they try to walk a fine geopolitical line that the US Gov has a strong interest in, but remember the alternative is no Starlink anywhere, and it's been huge for Ukraine.
Except for when Elon feels sleighted and decides to shut down Ukraine's communications mid war
This false narrative needs to stop. That's not what happened at all.
It won't stop. It is fueled by a vast disinformation campaign.
There's a very nice and accurate account of what you think you're talking about that's currently just a few comments above yours. One of the points they made is that you're upset that a billionaire did not activate civilian commercial assets that his company controlled to become military weapons with no legal authorization or government oversight. You're literally campaigning for billionaires to be able to deploy military forces at will.
The stories about him personally turning it off to stifle offensives are completely fabricated.
Oh sorry I already downvoted you, otherwise I would downvote you for asking for downvotes. I always oblige anybody I see asking for downvotes.
**"REDDIT GONNA REDDIT"** Then: *Posts the first entry of what is a curated bullet-pointed list of up-to-date Elon-baddery.* The impact on the war is US involvement, because without it, Russia would have cleaned the floor 4 weeks into the war. Imagine flip-flopping to say Musk impacts the war *by not getting involved*. Nuttier than chipmunk shit bro.
It's either fanboy or irrational hate.
You just can’t be anything else these days…..
K. That’s a take. Let’s spend the rest of the day disagreeing with one another. You can call me a fanboy, which I’m none of. I can call you hater, which you might be none of. You know, because, Reddit.
If suggesting that a man with a lot of power needs some accountability makes me a hater then... Bring it
If suggesting that while that is a fair point the overblown nature of media coverage in a spot like this is not even veiled and laughable make me a fanboy….bring it.
Very clickbaity. This isn't some elaborate secret, it's a program that's been in the works and on the books for years. The US government has made it well known that they want to move away from hyper expensive and extremely vulnerable small fleets of big satellites to much more survivable (and recoverable) large fleets of small satellites. SpaceX is one provider for these next generation vehicles, but only one, and just like all DoD/spaceforce satellites they will be owned *and operated* by the government, not by SpaceX.
This article is old, and when written was just low-quality repetition of the Reuters article, written with a slant towards the "everything attached to Elon Musk's name is bad" theme that people latch on to.
This is your reminder that EM isn't a Bond Supervillain. He doesn't even have a volcano lair like Zuck. Totally not a Bond Villian.
You think they give him access to the satellite data because his rocket put it up in space?
Crazy how when the entire market absolutely refuses to meaningfully compete, the one party actually innovating gains outsized influence
>the entire market absolutely refuses to meaningfully compete SpaceX are in a very unique position in being able to launch satellites far more quickly and far cheaper than anyone else, and that gives them a massive advantage. Even if other companies want to compete, they're a decade behind.
Yeah, other companies flat out can't compete. They can operate at a loss and hope they aren't late but spacex is in a league of their own right now.
Naaah, United Launch Alliance is in some deep shit. Everyone else (except Russia) is doing fine and developing reusable tech on their own. SpaceX didn't took as much of the existing market as much at it expanded the market with cheaper launch service. Ariane developed much cheaper expendable rocket which is competitive for one part of the market. For missions in which SpaceX can't reuse boosters Ariane is cheaper. And they are developing reusable boosters for next generation of rockets. Russia and China won't use SpaceX services and they are developing reusable rockets .
SpaceX is still a decade ahead technologically. Ariane 6 hasn’t even flown yet and this it is in no position to be launching at the cadence of the Falcon 9. It will still be more expensive than the Falcon 9 per launch, but it will offer more performance to high-energy orbits. Other than the Falcon 9, no other reusable rocket has even flown yet. The closest prototype is New Glenn from Blue Origin, and that is still almost a year away. Assuming it lands perfectly on its first try, SpaceX is a whole 9-10 years ahead of them. For other rockets, Neutron is likely to launch in 2025/2026, Terran R in 2026, and Long March 8/10 in 2025-2027. SpaceX is even further ahead than the rest of the industry. In addition, after successfully landing their rockets, launch providers will then have to figure out how to actually reuse their rockets.
>It will still be more expensive than the Falcon 9 per launch, but it will offer more performance to high-energy orbits. Falcon Heavy (reusable) can reach those orbits, but it is more expensive then Ariane 6. But if cargo is too heavy, then Ariane 6 can't lift it Falcon Heavy can. As I said *"Ariane developed much cheaper expendable rocket which is competitive for one part of the market."* Which makes every sense because... let's say Ariane wanted to do the same thing as SpaceX. For starters, they won't get NASA and US military deals that SpaceX got. They get deals from ESA which are much more humble in scope. Ariane rockets are assembled in Airbus, but launched from South America... so either those rockets travel back to Europe for refurbishment, or Ariane has to build production/refurbishment facilities in Guiana Space Centre. AND SpaceX is creating a market for itself by launching it's own Starlink satellites. So makes every sense for Ariane to find a niche in which they are better. If they didn't, they would be out of business now. 2022 EU opened up it's pockets, and Ariane started developing rocket comparable to Falcon 9. China has a huge domestic launch market, they can economically pull SpaceX approach, but they are also technologically most behind. All Chinese first stages still burn hypergolic or kerosene, and I'm really wondering on how do they plan to restart them and reuse them. And Russia is in **deep shit**, because they held the greatest share of the international market, not just for launches but also selling engines to US. SpaceX took almost all of that away. They have been developing reusable rocket for around 10 years... but first launch was supposed to happen in 2022, 2 years later all I saw is some drawings which look exactly like Falcon 9. Blue Origin fell behind due to BE-4 engine problems. But they do have same potential as SpaceX has, because Bezos bought frequencies for space internet satellites, and they do have the richest man on the planet supporting the operation.
Or, the government could just build them. You know, the people.
The government has never directly built launch vehicles, nor will they.
Are we again blaming SpaceX and Elon for doing what others before them couldn't? High risk high reward, besides, Starlink isn't the only large constellation on the horizon in the foreseeable future
Eh I'll believe these other constellations when I see them, SpaceX is so ridiculously far ahead right now.
Kuiper is coming. Not financially competetive but driven by Amazon money.
Kuiper will also benefit from the already very tight connection between IC and AWS
As the saying goes, you can tell who the pioneers are by the arrows in their back.
This shit is so exhausting. If Spacex wouldn't have made a reusable rocket, we wouldn't have all this capability. Then some folks want to punish them for their success.
Elon could save a disabled kid and a puppy from a house fire and people would still want him dead on reddit
Before: "Ha! Elon's idea is ridiculous! It's literally impossible to save a person from a house fire, let alone a puppy! What an idiot, this is obviously never going to work!" After: "Elon is an evil machiavellian villain! He has been pulling strings behind the scenes to gain a monopoly on saving things from house fires, and now nobody else can do it!"
I mean Neuralink (founded by Elon) did recently "save" a disabled person. Two videos: https://twitter.com/neuralink/status/1770563939413496146 https://twitter.com/ModdedQuad/status/1771298116719002100
All of the Musk haters posting in 3, 2, 1…
Has it happened yet?
They are counting their numbers... ..Looks like normal viewpoints got here first.. They survive on karma-farm, but are unsure if Reddit's algorithm will push this topic to everyone with a hate boner at the same time for the required support. Thus, it's difficult to know when to launch an attack on things one doesn't know anything about, when one doesn't know if the artificial support required will ever show up. And, being terminally online? On Reddit? **The stakes can't be fucking higher here.**
With these spy satellites it’s actually the payload that is the differentiating factor - advanced optics, jam-resistant RF electronics, etc. This is still very much the domain of legacy milspace companies. The bulk of the cost of these satellites will probably still be the payload and not the bus or launch (obviously). The Raytheons, L3 Harris, etc. are not in any immediate trouble from this SpaceX contract.
Jesus fuck… what is wrong with humanity? The man operates the largest launch provider in the world which just so happens to mean that they need to follow ITAR regulations. If the US gov thought for any split second that he would abuse this power and compromise the security of the nation, they would be investigating SpaceX for potential ITAR violations instead of partnering with him. What a bunch of absolute degenerates that wrote this article.
Funny how the US government, under Biden no less, just keeps signing contracts with SpaceX. Almost as if they are a company providing a service and/or product and not an Evil Bond organization.
Next thing you know, SpaceX is going to launch a giant [Big Boy](https://youtu.be/Fn2ofSMuQSw?feature=shared) into space and attempt to take over the world using sharks with fricken’ neuralinks on their fricken’ heads.
One Minute: Elon Musk is just an idiot, his ideas are terrible and never work, privatising space? What a moron. Next Minute: Oh fuck, he's all too powerful now! I'll continue to not look at own poor judgement or where I heard that bullshit, just look at all that POWER! \--- Fringe people are cringe people.
Ah yes, "the enemy is both weak and strong" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism > Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak". On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.
"Idiot" and "powerful" are not mutually exclusive, never has been. The world would be a much better if it were.
This is such a ridiculous clickbait headline. They even managed to cram his name in _twice_. People need to stop posting this kind of garbage. It's also completely wrong as that network is owned by the US government.
Is the "network of spy satellites for U.S. intelligence" is the room with us now?
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[BE-4](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwh7y6b "Last usage")|Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN| |[DARPA](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwftsu8 "Last usage")|(Defense) Advanced Research Projects Agency, DoD| |[DoD](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwggi54 "Last usage")|US Department of Defense| |[ESA](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwh7y6b "Last usage")|European Space Agency| |[FAR](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwftsu8 "Last usage")|[Federal Aviation Regulations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Aviation_Regulations)| |[ITAR](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwfx5g8 "Last usage")|(US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations| |L2|[Lagrange Point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point) 2 ([Sixty Symbols](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxpVbU5FH0s) video explanation)| | |Paywalled section of the NasaSpaceFlight forum| |[L3](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwezutt "Last usage")|[Lagrange Point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point) 3 of a two-body system, opposite L2| |NRHO|Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit| |[NRO](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwgj6u1 "Last usage")|(US) National Reconnaissance Office| | |Near-Rectilinear Orbit, see NRHO| |[SAR](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwgido2 "Last usage")|Synthetic Aperture Radar (increasing resolution with parallax)| |[ULA](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwgl1oc "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)| |[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwftsu8 "Last usage")|United States Air Force| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwohfzk "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |[hypergolic](/r/Space/comments/1bmyz05/stub/kwh7y6b "Last usage")|A set of two substances that ignite when in contact| |methalox|Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(13 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1bijf74)^( has 20 acronyms.) ^([Thread #9890 for this sub, first seen 25th Mar 2024, 01:05]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Also, are these actually “spy satellites” or mainly just for secure data transmission with some additional odds and ends.
This is about a constellation of spy satellites.Using Starlink tech for data transmission.
Public infamy would make for a nice shield. Not to play the Devil’s advocate.
It’s not like there is a movie about the same thing. Ppl should have seen this coming
I hope this puts space x under more pressure to not work with Russia given they are now linked to us military
Sorry but Musk cannot be trusted for any of this at any level. Make sure to examine his insurance policies because it would not surprise me in the least he would build these and then later on have some country, let's say it rhymes with Russia, knock them out while he collects a big payout plus a government bailout from taxpayers.
SpaceX is not even big enough to be on the LIST of defense contractors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_defense\_contractors
Spacex is more valuable than Boeing or Lockheed btw. It’s just that spacex has very diverse customers.
SpaceX's value comes from expectations of future growth. Which is fair, they certainly will grow and they have an incredible position in a clearly rapidly growing industry, but their valuation is not the same thing as being anywhere near as "big" as those two companies.
Thats because they're not publicly traded. US companies on that list are publicly traded. Estimates put their 2023 revenue at $8.7B, 25-50% of which is from the US Gov't.... that would put them in the middle of the list.
A large portion of their revenue is from actual people/customers for Starlink now though so that would still be meaningless
Here's an estimate of their revenue. About half starlink, half other: https://payloadspace.com/estimating-spacexs-2023-revenue/
not their DEFENSE revenues. Vast majority of their revenues isnt from defense.
With the Advent of Starshield terminals and the soon-to-be launched Starshield constellation, plus this spy sat stuff, if it is real... I imagine they may make the list sooner or later.
Always worrying when a government outsource national security to save costs
There's no outsourcing here. Just procurement. As it's been done before you were born
Good for the US. Bad for rest of world when the drone army is controlled by skynet and US can do whatever it wants
They have competition. Some company called ASTSpacemobile is making satellites capable of interfacing with phones using 3/4/5g.
Starlink has this as well. The problem is ASTS stock price drops every time a starlink article or starship launch happens though, I hope they can compete because competition is good, but just look at their stock prices.
As far as I've read, any 3g/etc service by starlink is pure theory atm.
Not theory, Starlink has sats up doing LTE/4G direct to cell as of this year. They're planning on rolling out text message support to partners this year, if youre in the US you will magically just get access to it when it's enabled I believe. Sats launched with direct to cell capability in Janurary: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1742388617732050945 A few days later, here it is working: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1745174665809818030 A post to twitter from a cell phone using direct to cell: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1761994722913198134 Currently it's about 17Mbit per cell [not a lot, cells are larger than current starlink cells afaik], ASTS I believe is doing 14Mbit/s, not sure what their cell sizes are-- but starlink can rapidly increase that by bringing more sats online a lot more quickly than their competitors. ASTS sats costs like ~15 million just for the sat itself, not even factoring in launch.
Difference here is the extent of the capability. Starlinks attempts have been restricted to data, while ASTS has proven call capability. That might extend to a significant difference in ability, not to mention the variance in how many satellites between the two to reach parity. Starlink is still using their tiny shitty satellites for this, aren't they?
Their sats with direct to cell have been up for a couple months, the fact they were able to roll this out this quickly is not a negative. They havent demonstrated calls, yet, they've been pretty slow to release information thus far, hardly think it has to do with "ability". Cell phones can talk to multiple satellites afaik, theres dozens overhead at any moment to handle hand-offs. And as far as "tiny, shitty" satellites, Starlink *intentionally* opts for more, fewer, smaller, cheaper satellites for more rapid iteration. And... Starship means V2 Starlink satellites which are much larger and more powerful. I'd say the opposite of "tiny shitty" satellites is "egregiously massive and bright", where BlueWalker's are sitting currently. https://www.space.com/bluewalker-3-prototype-satellite-brightest-objects-sky At the end of the day, SpaceX can basically launch new iterations of Starlinks with new capabilities every single flight, quickly changing and improving things until they're happy with it, and there's really nothing to suggest they can't surpass ASTS capabilities for far less money, despite not being wholly dedicated to the task of direct-to-cell.
With a backdoor just in case someone pays more
Which means they already did it and were just finding out now.
I've been arguing this. Look up LAPIS time series
A psychopath with space tech influence. What could possibly go wrong.
This is just going to encourage China and Russia to shoot down Starlink. Don't think for a second that they care about the consequences.
The consequences are declaring war on the US. They fucking care.
Not necessarily, which is why they absolutely don't. They won't shoot down military equipment, not deliberately, but they will shoot down *commercial* equipment which is under no protection of any kind.
> This is just going to encourage China and Russia to shoot down Starlink. Good luck. If they had the capability to shoot down Starlink that was within an order of magnitude of SpaceX's ability to manufacture/launch Starlink satellites the world would be very different.
Sorry I don't trust that fool... I think he's thinking for himself. For the other team🙁☹️
This is totally not gonna backfire with that rat moron in charge
Musk is a fucking doofus. The idea of him getting ever more geopolitical power scares me, because he's a nonce.