SpaceX’s ambition to dramatically expand its Starlink cellular satellite network is drawing fresh resistance from rival satellite operators, environmental groups, and even fellow space companies, as U.S. regulators begin formally weighing the implications of one of the largest orbital buildouts ever proposed.
The Federal Communications Commission has opened a public comment period on SpaceX’s request to launch an additional 15,000 satellites for its next-generation cellular Starlink system. The proposal is designed to ease capacity constraints and significantly enhance Starlink’s ability to deliver direct-to-phone connectivity, including 5G-level services such as high-quality video calls and faster data downloads across the globe.
At present, SpaceX has FCC approval to deploy about 12,000 satellites, with roughly 650 currently supporting its cellular Starlink service. The additional constellation would mark a major scaling-up of that system. Taken together with SpaceX’s other Starlink filings, rival satellite provider Viasat estimates the company is seeking approval for close to 49,000 satellites in low-Earth orbit, a figure that has become a central concern for critics.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 19 (Feb 9 – May 2, 2026).
Register for Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Register for Tekedia AI Lab (class begins Jan 24 2026).
Viasat, one of SpaceX’s most persistent opponents, warned that the expansion could further entrench Starlink’s dominance in orbital space and radio spectrum. In a filing to the FCC, the company argued that granting the request would give SpaceX “an even greater ability and incentive to foreclose other operators from accessing and using limited orbital and spectrum resources on a competitive basis.”
The concern, echoed by other firms, is that the sheer scale of Starlink could crowd out competitors before they are able to deploy or expand their own systems.
Globalstar, which provides satellite connectivity for Apple’s iPhone emergency and messaging services, also lodged objections, focusing on spectrum use. While SpaceX struck a $17 billion deal last year to use EchoStar’s licensed spectrum within the United States, Globalstar says the same satellites would tap into the 1.6GHz band outside U.S. borders, a frequency range Globalstar relies on globally. The company argues that this overlap could result in harmful radio interference, even if it does not technically violate existing spectrum rights.
“SpaceX’s failure in the September Application to provide a legitimate interference analysis is not surprising,” Globalstar wrote, adding that the Big LEO band is already so congested that “new operator entry … is technically infeasible.”
The dispute highlights how Starlink’s expansion is not just a question of satellite numbers, but also of how finite spectrum resources are shared in an increasingly crowded orbital environment.
Beyond commercial rivals, environmental concerns are emerging as a significant line of opposition. DarkSky International, an advocacy group focused on light pollution and environmental impacts of space activity, urged the FCC to closely examine the long-term consequences of deploying and deorbiting 15,000 additional satellites. The group warned that as satellites burn up on reentry, they could release large quantities of metals and other compounds into the upper atmosphere, with unknown but potentially harmful effects on the ozone layer.
“SpaceX’s proposed satellites will dump millions of pounds of pollution into the atmosphere,” DarkSky alleged, arguing that the scale of the constellation warrants far more rigorous environmental scrutiny than it has so far received.
Scientific research into the atmospheric impacts of satellite reentry is still developing, leaving regulators with limited data as they weigh these concerns.
Even Blue Origin, the space company founded by Jeff Bezos and often viewed as a direct competitor to SpaceX, submitted comments. While stopping short of outright opposition, Blue Origin flagged operational risks associated with SpaceX’s plan to place many of the satellites in very low-Earth orbit, around 330 kilometers above the planet. At those altitudes, satellites could intersect with rocket flight paths, potentially constraining launch windows for other operators.
Blue Origin warned that a “very dense vLEO environment” could impose “unnecessary launch-availability constraints” unless accompanied by strict coordination and review procedures. The company urged the FCC to consider authorizing the satellites in phases, with future deployments dependent on evidence that other launch providers will not be materially hindered.
Additional objections have come from companies and industry groups, including Iridium, Ligado, and the Mobile Satellite Services Association, reflecting broad unease across the satellite sector. Still, such resistance is not new. SpaceX has faced similar pushback during earlier Starlink expansions, often overcoming it as regulators approved successive phases of deployment.
The decisive factor may be the FCC’s current leadership. Chairman Brendan Carr, a Republican appointee, has been openly supportive of SpaceX and has framed large satellite constellations as strategically important for U.S. leadership in space, particularly as China accelerates its own satellite ambitions. Under Carr, the FCC is already moving toward exempting large constellations from certain environmental review requirements, a shift that could blunt some of the objections now being raised.
SpaceX has not yet publicly responded to the latest round of criticism. The company has consistently argued that Starlink delivers tangible public benefits, from ending cellular dead zones to providing connectivity during disasters and in remote regions. It also says its satellites are designed to deorbit safely and burn up completely, minimizing risks to people on the ground.