United Launch Alliance, Amazon set first launch for SpaceX Starlink competitor Project Kuiper
A launch date is set for the first batch of what will be thousands of satellites for Amazon's Project Kuiper as the company looks to play catch-up to SpaceX and its Starlink internet constellation.
United Launch Alliance is targeting a three-hour window that opens at noon Eastern time on April 9. It will send up 27 satellites on an Atlas V rocket from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station's Space Launch Complex 41.
The KA-01 mission, which stands for Kuiper Atlas 1, will be ULA's first launch of the year and the first of dozens Amazon has bought to get 3,232 satellites into low-Earth orbit by 2029.
SpaceX already has nearly 6,500 of its Starlink satellites in an operational orbit serving more than 5 million customers worldwide.
Amazon is primed, though, to start knocking out as many launches as it can. It has contracted to use eight of the remaining Atlas V rockets as well as an additional 38 on ULA's new Vulcan rocket. In addition, the company has launches lined up with Jeff Bezos' rocket company Blue Origin, European company Arianespace and even a couple of launches with SpaceX.
Amazon's license from the Federal Communications Commission requires half of the satellites be placed in orbit by July 31, 2026.
So far, Amazon has flown two test satellites — in late 2023. That paved the way, though, for operational hardware production at company facilities in Washington. Also in the works is a new satellite processing facility at an 80-acre site at the Kennedy Space Center's former Shuttle Landing Facility in Florida.
Amazon expects to begin satellite internet service to customers before years' end.
'We've designed some of the most advanced communications satellites ever built, and every launch is an opportunity to add more capacity and coverage to our network,' Rajeev Badyal, vice president of Project Kuiper, said in a press release. 'We've done extensive testing on the ground to prepare for this first mission, but there are some things you can only learn in flight.'
The design changed from the test satellites to this first operational batch, and it will be the first time it will be deploying them in such a large number.
'No matter how the mission unfolds, this is just the start of our journey, and we have all the pieces in place to learn and adapt as we prepare to launch again and again over the coming years,' he said.
The satellites are designed to orbit at an altitude of 392 miles circling the Earth about once every 90 minutes at more than 17,000 mph.
The 27 satellites will be the heaviest payload ever flown on an Atlas V and require ULA to launch it in its most powerful configuration using five strap-on solid rocket boosters.
Amazon has already begun to ship and process satellites for the next flight, also on an Atlas V, although ULA might prioritize the first national security launches of its new Vulcan that was finally certified last month by Space Force.
ULA is constructing a second vehicle integration facility at Cape Canaveral's SLC-41, though, so it can process two rockets at the same time as it has a backlog of more than 70 launches to knock out.
_____
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
30 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Global streamers fight CRTC's rule requiring them to fund Canadian content
OTTAWA - Some of the world's biggest streaming companies will argue in court on Monday that they shouldn't have to make CRTC-ordered financial contributions to Canadian content and news. The companies are fighting an order from the federal broadcast regulator that says they must pay five per cent of their annual Canadian revenues to funds devoted to producing Canadian content, including local TV news. The case, which consolidates several appeals by streamers, will be heard by the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Apple, Amazon and Spotify are fighting the CRTC's 2024 order. Motion Picture Association-Canada, which represents such companies as Netflix and Paramount, is challenging a section of the CRTC's order requiring them to contribute to local news. In December, the court put a pause on the payments — estimated to be at least $1.25 million annually per company. Amazon, Apple and Spotify had argued that if they made the payments and then won the appeal and overturned the CRTC order, they wouldn't be able to recover the money. In court documents, the streamers put forward a long list of arguments on why they shouldn't have to pay, including technical points regarding the CRTC's powers under the Broadcasting Act. Spotify argued that the contribution requirement amounts to a tax, which the CRTC doesn't have the authority to impose. The music streamer also took issue with the CRTC requiring the payments without first deciding how it will define Canadian content. Amazon argued the federal cabinet specified the CRTC's requirements have to be 'equitable.' It said the contribution requirement is 'inequitable because it applies only to foreign online undertakings and only to such undertakings with more than $25 million in annual Canadian broadcasting revenues.' Apple also said the regulator 'acted prematurely' and argued the CRTC didn't consider whether the order was 'equitable.' It pointed out Apple is required to contribute five per cent, while radio stations must only pay 0.5 per cent — and streamers don't have the same access to the funds into which they pay. The CRTC imposes different rules on Canadian content contributions from traditional media players. It requires large English-language broadcasters to contribute 30 per cent of revenues to Canadian programming. Motion Picture Association—Canada is only challenging one aspect of the CRTC's order — the part requiring companies to contribute 1.5 per cent of revenues to a fund for local news on independent TV stations. It said in court documents that none of the streamers 'has any connection to news production' and argued the CRTC doesn't have the authority to require them to fund news. 'What the CRTC did, erroneously, is purport to justify the … contribution simply on the basis that local news is important and local news operations provided by independent television stations are short of money,' it said. 'That is a reason why news should be funded by someone, but is devoid of any analysis, legal or factual, as to why it is equitable for foreign online undertakings to fund Canadian news production.' In its response, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters said the CRTC has wide authority under the Broadcasting Act. It argued streamers have contributed to the funding crisis facing local news. 'While the industry was once dominated by traditional television and radio services, those services are now in decline, as Canadians increasingly turn to online streaming services,' the broadcasters said. 'For decades, traditional broadcasting undertakings have supported the production of Canadian content through a complex array of CRTC-directed measures … By contrast, online undertakings have not been required to provide any financial support to the Canadian broadcasting system, despite operating here for well over a decade.' A submission from the federal government in defence of the CRTC argued the regulator was within its rights to order the payments. 'The orders challenged in these proceedings … are a valid exercise of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's regulatory powers. These orders seek to remedy the inequity that has resulted from the ascendance of online streaming giants like the Appellants,' the office of the attorney general said. 'Online undertakings have greatly profited from their access to Canadian audiences, without any corresponding obligation to make meaningful contributions supporting Canadian programming and creators — an obligation that has long been imposed on traditional domestic broadcasters.' The government said that if the streamers get their way, that would preserve 'an inequitable circumstance in which domestic broadcasters — operating in an industry under economic strain — shoulder a disproportionate regulatory burden.' 'This result would be plainly out of step with the policy aims of Parliament' and cabinet, it added. The court hearing comes as trade tensions between the U.S. and Canada have cast a shadow over the CRTC's attempts to regulate online streamers. The regulator launched a suite of proceedings and hearings as part of its implementation of the Online Streaming Act, legislation that in 2023 updated the Broadcasting Act to set up the CRTC to regulate streaming companies. In January, as U.S. President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term, groups representing U.S. businesses and big tech companies warned the CRTC that its efforts to modernize Canadian content rules could worsen trade relations and lead to retaliation. Then, as the CRTC launched its hearing on modernizing the definition of Canadian content in May, Netflix, Paramount and Apple cancelled their individual appearances. While the companies didn't provide a reason, the move came shortly after Trump threatened to impose a tariff of up to 100 per cent on movies made outside the United States. Foreign streamers have long pointed to their existing spending in Canada in response to calls to bring them into the regulated system. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 8, 2025.
Business Insider
39 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Elon Musk's feud with Trump likely won't blow up Tesla's robotaxi push, analysts say
Elon Musk 's public sparring with President Donald Trump last week may have briefly put a dent in Tesla's value, but analysts say they can't see any reason the feud would have a long-term impact on the company's business, including its robotaxi ambitions. The feud between Musk and Trump began with the Tesla CEO's criticism of the GOP's spending bill, which slashes EV tax credits and is estimated to add more than $2.4 trillion to the national deficit. The clash then escalated with threats coming from both sides: Trump threatened to cancel government contracts with Musk's companies, and the CEO fired back by saying he'd shut down SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft before reneging. During Musk's fight with Trump on Thursday, Tesla's stock dipped 14%, wiping out $138 billion from the company's market cap. The company recovered some of the losses the following day. Yet the CEO saw one of his biggest single-day hits to his net worth with an estimated $34 billion loss. Still, some analysts say this storm will pass. "Musk's and Trump's relationship has an impact on the stock and maybe investor sentiment, but as far as the actual business impact for Tesla, I never thought Trump getting elected was positive or that negative for Tesla," Seth Goldstein, Morningstar analyst, told Business Insider. "So with the feud that started between Trump and Musk, I never really viewed that as that positive or negative for Tesla either." While it may not be helpful to no longer be in Trump's good graces, Goldstein said the president has already made clear that he would cut EV subsidies, which the analyst viewed as having the most negative impact not just on Tesla but on all EV makers. Gene Munster, Tesla investor and managing partner at Deepwater Asset Management, estimated in a Friday report that the elimination of the tax credits could reduce 2025 deliveries by 15%. Trump wishes Tesla well As far as Tesla's June robotaxi launch in Austin goes, which Musk says will unlock trillions of dollars of market value for his company, analysts say there's little reason to believe the administration would want to hinder progress there. "In my view, the White House has little to gain in standing in front of autonomy, given autonomy is central to physical AI, and for the US to be a leader globally in AI, it also needs to be a leader in physical AI," Munster said in his Friday report. "The bottom line, I expect cooler heads to prevail and the Federal Government will continue to support the growth of these services." Goldstein told BI that he doesn't see many avenues the administration could take to hinder Tesla's robotaxi progress. He said the Department of Transportation is reviewing federal standards for autonomous vehicle safety. "In theory, if Trump wanted to see Musk face retaliation and target Tesla, they could, say, require autonomous vehicles to have lidar in order to be approved by the federal government for operation, but I don't think they're going to get that detailed," Goldstein said. "I think that Trump could more easily just target SpaceX by just cutting their contracts if he really wanted to hurt Elon, versus making some really weird, nuanced policy." Spokespeople for the DOT and the White House did not respond to a request for comment. In a note on Friday, Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote that Musk's feud with Trump doesn't impact the "longer-term vectors that drive the stock's value." "AI leadership, autonomy/robotics, manufacturing, supply chain re-architecture, renewable power, critical infrastructure... Tesla still holds so many valuable cards that are largely apolitical, in our opinion," Jonas wrote. By late Friday afternoon, the online jabs had slowed down, but the Trump-Musk alliance remained on ice. The president told NBC News on Saturday that he doesn't expect to mend his relationship with Musk and warned the CEO against supporting Democratic candidates. Still, during a press gaggle on Air Force One on Friday, Trump said he hadn't thought about Musk but wished him and his company well. "I mean, I hope he does well with Tesla," Trump said.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Global streamers fight CRTC's rule requiring them to fund Canadian content
OTTAWA — Some of the world's biggest streaming companies will argue in court on Monday that they shouldn't have to make CRTC-ordered financial contributions to Canadian content and news. The companies are fighting an order from the federal broadcast regulator that says they must pay five per cent of their annual Canadian revenues to funds devoted to producing Canadian content, including local TV news. The case, which consolidates several appeals by streamers, will be heard by the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Apple, Amazon and Spotify are fighting the CRTC's 2024 order. Motion Picture Association-Canada, which represents such companies as Netflix and Paramount, is challenging a section of the CRTC's order requiring them to contribute to local news. In December, the court put a pause on the payments — estimated to be at least $1.25 million annually per company. Amazon, Apple and Spotify had argued that if they made the payments and then won the appeal and overturned the CRTC order, they wouldn't be able to recover the money. In court documents, the streamers put forward a long list of arguments on why they shouldn't have to pay, including technical points regarding the CRTC's powers under the Broadcasting Act. Spotify argued that the contribution requirement amounts to a tax, which the CRTC doesn't have the authority to impose. The music streamer also took issue with the CRTC requiring the payments without first deciding how it will define Canadian content. Amazon argued the federal cabinet specified the CRTC's requirements have to be "equitable." It said the contribution requirement is "inequitable because it applies only to foreign online undertakings and only to such undertakings with more than $25 million in annual Canadian broadcasting revenues." Apple also said the regulator "acted prematurely" and argued the CRTC didn't consider whether the order was "equitable." It pointed out Apple is required to contribute five per cent, while radio stations must only pay 0.5 per cent — and streamers don't have the same access to the funds into which they pay. The CRTC imposes different rules on Canadian content contributions from traditional media players. It requires large English-language broadcasters to contribute 30 per cent of revenues to Canadian programming. Motion Picture Association—Canada is only challenging one aspect of the CRTC's order — the part requiring companies to contribute 1.5 per cent of revenues to a fund for local news on independent TV stations. It said in court documents that none of the streamers "has any connection to news production" and argued the CRTC doesn't have the authority to require them to fund news. "What the CRTC did, erroneously, is purport to justify the … contribution simply on the basis that local news is important and local news operations provided by independent television stations are short of money," it said. "That is a reason why news should be funded by someone, but is devoid of any analysis, legal or factual, as to why it is equitable for foreign online undertakings to fund Canadian news production." In its response, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters said the CRTC has wide authority under the Broadcasting Act. It argued streamers have contributed to the funding crisis facing local news. "While the industry was once dominated by traditional television and radio services, those services are now in decline, as Canadians increasingly turn to online streaming services," the broadcasters said. "For decades, traditional broadcasting undertakings have supported the production of Canadian content through a complex array of CRTC-directed measures … By contrast, online undertakings have not been required to provide any financial support to the Canadian broadcasting system, despite operating here for well over a decade." A submission from the federal government in defence of the CRTC argued the regulator was within its rights to order the payments. "The orders challenged in these proceedings … are a valid exercise of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's regulatory powers. These orders seek to remedy the inequity that has resulted from the ascendance of online streaming giants like the Appellants," the office of the attorney general said. "Online undertakings have greatly profited from their access to Canadian audiences, without any corresponding obligation to make meaningful contributions supporting Canadian programming and creators — an obligation that has long been imposed on traditional domestic broadcasters." The government said that if the streamers get their way, that would preserve "an inequitable circumstance in which domestic broadcasters — operating in an industry under economic strain — shoulder a disproportionate regulatory burden." "This result would be plainly out of step with the policy aims of Parliament" and cabinet, it added. The court hearing comes as trade tensions between the U.S. and Canada have cast a shadow over the CRTC's attempts to regulate online streamers. The regulator launched a suite of proceedings and hearings as part of its implementation of the Online Streaming Act, legislation that in 2023 updated the Broadcasting Act to set up the CRTC to regulate streaming companies. In January, as U.S. President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term, groups representing U.S. businesses and big tech companies warned the CRTC that its efforts to modernize Canadian content rules could worsen trade relations and lead to retaliation. Then, as the CRTC launched its hearing on modernizing the definition of Canadian content in May, Netflix, Paramount and Apple cancelled their individual appearances. While the companies didn't provide a reason, the move came shortly after Trump threatened to impose a tariff of up to 100 per cent on movies made outside the United States. Foreign streamers have long pointed to their existing spending in Canada in response to calls to bring them into the regulated system. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 8, 2025. Anja Karadeglija, The Canadian Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
