Comments on: Amazon asks FCC for time extension for launching its Leo constellation

By: Dick Eagleson

Dick Eagleson — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 22:33:34 +0000

I suspect the “burial” of the news of that new 10-launch contract was entirely deliberate – slip it into a bunch of other verbiage and put it out there in the dark of night. One can certainly understand that this is not news Blue wants to show up above the fold anywhere.

By: Richard M

Richard M — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 20:14:32 +0000

Bob, I missed it, too!

Thankful to Micah for his close attentiveness. So far as I can tell, he was the only one who noticed it (though his post has been picked up on Reddit now)….

By: Robert Zimmerman

Robert Zimmerman — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 17:26:10 +0000

In reply to Richard M. Richard M: Darn it, I missed these newly contracted launches in Amazon's submission to the FCC. I was too focused on its request for an extension to look closely at the numbers of launches it had contracted from its various launch providers. This deserves a full post.

By: Richard M

Richard M — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 15:21:45 +0000

Micah Maidenberg noted an interesting detail in Amazon’s Leo filings on Saturday: They’ve also hired SpaceX to conduct *10 more* flights for Leo, per the new FCC filing. Business also now listing 24 flights with Blue Origin (original contract started with a dozen launches + options).

https://fccprod.servicenowservices.com/ibfs?id=ibfs_application_summary&number=SAT-MOD-20260129-00065

https://x.com/i/status/2017364803728114043

By: Richard M

Richard M — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 07:13:46 +0000

Mkent:

Oh, I agree. But then Amazon would have to be prepared for the obvious begging questions triggered by a) how SpaceX somehow dodged the Covid bomb at both ends of the equation, and b) the curious fact of that Amazon shareholder lawsuit, and the sudden scramble to contract a few SpaceX launches by way of response.

Still, I expect Bob is right that the FCC will want to go the extra mile to give Amazon more runway. They want competition in this market, and Leo is the most obvious way to get it.

By: mkent

mkent — Sun, 01 Feb 2026 04:35:11 +0000

I agree with your overall take, but I think Amazon missed an obvious excuse for the delay: the pandemic shut down most of the aerospace industry for over two years. I would think the government would be very accommodating to such an argument.

By: Richard M

Richard M — Sat, 31 Jan 2026 21:13:17 +0000

Nonetheless, it is likely the FCC will agree to Amazon’s extension request. The company has now shown it is committed to the process and intends to get its constellation in orbit. It is not sitting on its license doing nothing. I would not be surprised however if the FCC imposes some new requirements in an effort to force Amazon to launch more satellites more quickly.

This is a balanced take, and I think it is very likely what is going to happen.

By: Dick Eagleson

Dick Eagleson — Sat, 31 Jan 2026 19:25:12 +0000

The purpose of these FCC interim deployment requirements is to prevent would-be operators from “spectrum squatting.” However much Amazon is jointly responsible, along with its tardy notional launch providers, for what now looks to be quite a yawning gulf between FCC license requirements and actual deployments by the notional mid-2026 date, there is no credible case to be made that Amazon is spectrum squatting.

If the Dems were still in power, there might still be a reasonable probability of Amazon having to take a hit to the size of its eventually-deployed constellation – even though Bezos would almost certainly still be a lefty-in-good-standing in such a case. But, given the Trump administration’s quite opposite inclinations, and the fact that Bezos has publicly kissed the Orange One’s ring, I seriously doubt Amazon has anything to worry about – other than actually competing with Starlink of course.