Non Terrestrial Network (NTN – IEEE ComSoc Technology Blog

Starlink Mobile: NTN–Terrestrial Convergence, Network Capacity, and the Limits of Disruption

Posted on August 8, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

Executive Summary:

Elon Musk’s strategic objective for Starlink extends beyond satellite broadband connectivity for remote, maritime, aviation, and enterprise users. SpaceX is positioning Starlink for a broader role in mobile communications through an integrated non-terrestrial network (NTN) and terrestrial-network architecture. That strategy could combine direct-to-device (D2D) satellite connectivity, satellite backhaul, selected terrestrial access infrastructure, and potentially a retail mobile service.

Financial markets have treated that prospect seriously. Shares of U.S. wireless network operators have been under pressure since SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell described the opportunity for “Starlink Mobile” as “huge,” in a CNBC interview on June 12th. On SpaceX’s recent earnings call, Shotwell characterized the U.S. wireless market as generating $600 billion in annual revenue and stated, “and I anticipate us to be able to acquire quite a few of their customers because I think our service will be better.”

Editor’s Note: The combined annual revenue of AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile is closer to $360 billion, depending on the reporting period and whether total revenue or service revenue is used.

The timing, service architecture, spectrum strategy, device ecosystem, and go-to-market model for a SpaceX mobile offering remain unresolved. A central distinction is needed: direct-to-device NTN service, satellite backhaul, a terrestrial radio access network (RAN), and a consumer mobile service are related but technically and commercially distinct propositions.

The most plausible medium-term outcome is not wholesale replacement of U.S. mobile network operators (MNOs), but deeper NTN–terrestrial integration. LEO satellite systems can extend coverage, improve resilience, support mobility, and connect underserved areas. Dense terrestrial networks retain structural advantages for high-traffic urban service, indoor coverage, and busy-hour mobile capacity.

“The perceived risk of Starlink Mobile disrupting the U.S. wireless industry is greater than the actual risk in the next one to two years,” says Morgan Stanley analyst Sean Diffley.

Starlink’s satellite-broadband business serves 12 million subscribers and reportedly generates profit margins above 60%. Musk’s ambitions, however, extend beyond connectivity for aircraft, ships, and remote fixed locations. SpaceX plans a large third-generation Starlink constellation, supported by the anticipated launch economics of its fully reusable Starship system. Starlink V3 satellites are expected to materially increase satellite capacity relative to earlier generations.

However, aggregate constellation capacity should not be equated with mobile-network capacity in dense urban markets. The relevant question is how much spectrum, beam capacity, spatial reuse, and backhaul capacity can be delivered to a given area during the busy hour.

Image Source: Facebook

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Starlink Mobile could develop along four, potentially overlapping, paths:

Service or architecture	Primary function	Principal constraint
Direct-to-device NTN	Extends basic connectivity beyond terrestrial coverage using standard or adapted mobile devices	Limited shared spectrum and capacity over large beam footprints
Satellite backhaul	Connects selected remote, temporary, or difficult-to-fiber terrestrial sites	Cost, capacity, availability, and traffic concentration
Hybrid NTN–terrestrial network	Combines satellite coverage extension with targeted terrestrial RAN deployment	Capital intensity and operational integration
Retail mobile service or MVNO	Markets consumer service using wholesale terrestrial access and Starlink capabilities	Dependence on partner economics and network-control limitations

The proposed Starlink Mobile service should therefore be assessed as an integrated network proposition, not as a simple satellite replacement for a nationwide cellular network.

Why Terrestrial Networks Retain an Advantage:

The central technical constraint is spatial/spectrum reuse. Terrestrial mobile networks deliver high area capacity by repeatedly reusing licensed spectrum across dense grids of macro cells, small cells, and indoor systems. Capacity is further increased through sectorization, advanced antenna systems, massive MIMO, carrier aggregation, and high-capacity fiber or microwave backhaul.

A LEO satellite system has different strengths. It can provide wide-area reach, support mobility, offer resilience during terrestrial outages, and extend coverage to regions where conventional network deployment is uneconomic. Yet its radio resources are shared across comparatively large beam footprints. This creates more demanding link-budget, capacity, and spectral-efficiency constraints in high-density areas, particularly for indoor service and busy-hour traffic.

Terrestrial-cell coverage areas vary considerably with spectrum band, terrain, urban morphology, antenna configuration, and load. Nevertheless, the architectural distinction remains: terrestrial networks achieve high capacity by spatially reusing spectrum over relatively small geographic areas, whereas satellite systems must manage shared capacity over much broader footprints.

For this reason, Starlink V3 satellites may substantially improve overall system capability without eliminating the terrestrial RAN advantage in dense urban and suburban markets. The strongest near-term use cases for NTN are likely to include coverage extension, emergency communications, maritime and aviation connectivity, mobility, IoT, selected backhaul, and service in remote or underserved locations.

3GPP’s NTN work is specifically directed toward integration with terrestrial cellular and wireline networks, reinforcing the view that NTN will develop as part of a broader communications architecture rather than wholly separate from it. Analyss opinions:

Daiwa Capital Markets analyst Jonathan Kees similarly argues that Starlink is “only a complement, not a substitute” for existing wireless infrastructure.
BofA Securities analyst Michael Funk reaches a comparable conclusion: “Existing direct-to-device satellite technology [is] underdeveloped and largely complementary to terrestrial mobile networks,” Funk says.

Spectrum, Capital, and AI:

SpaceX has acquired valuable spectrum assets through its EchoStar transactions. The FCC approved the transfer of approximately 65 MHz of spectrum to SpaceX for next-generation direct-to-device use. This is strategically important, but spectrum ownership alone does not establish a nationwide facilities-based mobile network.

A fourth nationwide MNO would require much more than spectrum. It would require:

Radio-access infrastructure, including macro sites, small cells, antennas, radios, and power.
High-capacity backhaul and transport networks.
Mobile core-network functions, service assurance, cybersecurity, and operational-support systems.
Device testing and certification, distribution, retail channels, billing, customer care, and subscriber-acquisition spending.
Sustained capital investment to expand coverage and capacity as traffic grows.

SpaceX must also finance Starlink V3 production, launches, constellation replenishment, gateways, ground infrastructure, and continuing development of D2D and NTN capabilities. At the same time, the company is investing heavily in AI infrastructure and Starship. Reported second-quarter capex exceeded $18 billion, including approximately $15.83 billion associated with AI infrastructure.

This does not establish that SpaceX lacks the financial capability to enter mobile communications. It does establish a major capital-allocation challenge. AI infrastructure requires rapid, front-loaded investment; terrestrial mobile networks require multi-year and geographically distributed deployment; and satellite systems require recurring capital expenditure for replenishment and capacity expansion.

—->Please see detailed discussion of this issue in Addendum below Conclusions subhead.

The key strategic risk is therefore prioritization. If AI, Starship, and satellite-constellation investment continue to absorb the majority of incremental capital, Starlink Mobile may progress more slowly as an independent terrestrial build. It may instead favor targeted terrestrial deployment, satellite-enabled backhaul, wholesale arrangements, or an MVNO model.

Starlink Coverage Issues as per Iain Morris of Light Reading:

Starlink is estimated to have between 3 and 4 million subscribers in the U.S., mostly in rural areas where there is no fixed or mobile alternative. That is, after all, why someone would opt for satellite broadband. But a small cell network built on the rooftops of these 3 to 4 million customers – or several times that amount – is not going to provide the mobile coverage demanded by anyone who even occasionally travels a few miles from home. And inside the building, what advantage would a Starlink cellular service have over Starlink-supported Wi-Fi?

SpaceX cannot possibly hope to address this coverage problem without some kind of physics-defying technological breakthrough. According to figures shared by an authoritative source on the telco side, a small cell might get you coverage about half a kilometer from the basestation, while a rural macro site would take you up to 20 kilometers from it. In urban areas where higher-frequency spectrum comes into play, this radius would probably fall to about 2 kilometers, making small cells look more competitive. The trouble there is Starlink’s lack of subscribers in cities.

Other estimates do not improve the outlook. William Webb, an academic and analyst who previously worked for UK telecom regulator Ofcom, thinks Starlink might be able to achieve a coverage radius of 1 to 2 kilometers with roof-mounted antennas, “assuming a reasonably high gain cellular antenna is integrated into the Starlink terminal and oriented correctly,” as he wrote in a LinkedIn update. But mounting below roof level would reduce the figure to less than 1 kilometer, according to Webb.

“The biggest issue will likely be that overall coverage will be patchy, concentrated in areas where there are the most Starlink broadband subscribers,” he said. “These are likely to be rural areas where fixed broadband provision is poor. As a result, coverage will likely be overlapping in rural communities but sparse outside of these areas.”

Commercial Models and Possible Partnerships:

SpaceX may determine that a fully independent nationwide mobile network is not the most efficient near-term approach. An MVNO arrangement would allow SpaceX to purchase terrestrial capacity at wholesale rates while offering a consumer service incorporating Starlink capabilities. Such a model could provide near-national coverage more rapidly, though it would reduce SpaceX’s control over network economics, service differentiation, and quality-of-service management.

Several Starlink Mobile outcomes are plausible:

Path	Capital requirement	Likely implication
Independent nationwide MNO	Very high	Long deployment cycle, substantial execution risk, and intense capital competition with AI, Starship, and satellite programs
Hybrid NTN–terrestrial network	High, but targeted	Satellite supports coverage extension and selected backhaul; terrestrial infrastructure is concentrated where capacity demand is greatest
MVNO or strategic MNO partnership	Lower upfront capex	Faster national-market entry, but less control over margins, network policy, and customer experience

Why would AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile enter an MVNO or deeper partnership with a prospective competitor? The answer may be competitive strategy. The first MNO to secure a commercially favorable relationship with SpaceX could gain a relative advantage in coverage, satellite integration, customer acquisition, or enterprise services.

SpaceX is “going to have to partner with one of the mobile network operators like a Verizon or T-Mobile,” says RBC Capital Markets analyst Ken Herbert. “They’re going to have to find ways to work with other companies.”

T-Mobile already has a direct-to-cell/device (D2D) relationship with SpaceX. Verizon’s FWA business is more directly exposed to fixed-broadband competition from Starlink, while AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile each possess extensive spectrum, RAN, transport, and customer-service assets that would be difficult and costly for a new nationwide entrant to replicate.

Evaluating Starlink/Spacex Deployment Plans:

Starlink’s satellite-broadband business serves 12 million subscribers and reportedly generates profit margins above 60%. Musk’s ambition, however, is substantially broader than providing internet access to aircraft and oceangoing vessels. SpaceX plans to deploy as many as 100,000 third-generation Starlink satellites, supported by the anticipated economics of its fully reusable Starship launch system. Starship remains in the test phase, but SpaceX has stated that it is designed to place up to 150 metric tons in orbit per launch at approximately one-tenth the per-kilogram cost of Falcon 9. Starlink V3 satellites are expected to provide roughly 10 times the capacity of earlier-generation spacecraft.

SpaceX is advancing these plans at a time when the U.S. communications market is already experiencing cross-sector competitive convergence. Fifth-generation mobile technology enabled MNOs to expand fixed wireless access (FWA) offerings and compete more directly with cable operators for residential broadband customers. The resulting service bundles combine mobile subscriptions, home broadband, and, in some cases, video and value-added services. Cable operators, in turn, have expanded mobile offerings, generally using Wi-Fi offload, their extensive wireline footprints, and mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) arrangements with incumbent wireless carriers for wide-area cellular coverage.

This competitive equilibrium has modestly favored wireless operators, although neither sector has emerged unambiguously dominant. AT&T, for example, is expected to generate sales and earnings growth over the next several years, albeit below broader market growth rates. Comcast faces a more constrained outlook, with relatively flat expected revenue and earnings performance. The valuation gap reflects both differing growth expectations and the capital intensity of maintaining and upgrading nationwide communications infrastructure.

Wall Street has amplified concerns about SpaceX’s competitive impact. Early research coverage has broadly characterized the launch, satellite-connectivity, and artificial-intelligence company as a disruptive force. The average analyst price target for SpaceX stock is approximately $227, implying a valuation near $3 trillion—roughly five times the combined market capitalization of AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.

The major U.S. MNOs also operate with substantial debt burdens. AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile collectively carry approximately $420 billion in net debt, against about $140 billion in expected 2026 EBITDA. “I would not for a second sleep easily if I had the investments that [wireless telecom providers] have, and the debt that they have, and Elon Musk working on a superweapon as it pertains to my business,” says Drew Cupps of Polen Capital.

Nevertheless, Starlink faces significant capital, engineering, and deployment challenges before it can offer a broadly substitutable mobile service. Daiwa Capital Markets analyst Jonathan Kees argues that the investment required to build a V3-based Starlink constellation capable of materially disrupting terrestrial operators is underestimated. He estimates that constellation deployment could require more than $100 billion, excluding investment associated with SpaceX’s AI initiatives. Starlink is “only a complement, not a substitute” for existing wireless infrastructure, says Kees.

The fundamental constraint is spatial reuse and capacity density. A terrestrial cell site can concentrate spectrum resources over a coverage area measured in a few square miles, while a LEO satellite beam may serve a much broader footprint. Satellite systems therefore face more difficult link-budget, capacity, and spectral-efficiency challenges in dense urban environments, particularly for indoor service and high-traffic applications. V3 satellites may substantially improve system capacity, but they do not eliminate the capacity advantage of dense terrestrial RAN deployments.

For that reason, BofA Securities analyst Michael Funk does not view SpaceX as an immediate, large-scale competitive threat to incumbent MNOs. While some projections assign LEO-based mobile services 15% to 35% of the U.S. telecommunications market, Funk regards those estimates as overly optimistic. “Existing direct-to-device satellite technology [is] underdeveloped and largely complementary to terrestrial mobile networks,” Funk says. That assessment is consistent with Starlink’s present international model, which emphasizes partnerships with mobile operators rather than wholesale replacement of their networks.

Conclusions:

Starlink Mobile is an important strategic development in the evolution of NTN–terrestrial convergence. It should not, however, be evaluated as a satellite-only replacement for nationwide cellular networks.

LEO systems can provide broad-area reach, coverage extension, resilience, mobility, selected backhaul, and direct-to-device services. Dense terrestrial RAN infrastructure retains decisive advantages in spatial reuse, indoor coverage, spectrum utilization, and busy-hour capacity. Starlink’s most credible competitive impact in the near and medium term is therefore likely to occur in selected coverage, mobility, resilience, backhaul, and fixed-broadband segments—not through immediate replacement of nationwide terrestrial mobile networks.

The central uncertainty is which architecture and commercial model SpaceX will adopt. Its concurrent commitments to AI infrastructure, Starship, satellite replenishment, and spectrum assets may favor a hybrid or partnership-led approach over a fully independent nationwide MNO build.

In that outcome, incumbent operators’ spectrum, terrestrial RAN, fiber backhaul, tower infrastructure, customer relationships, and regulatory authorizations remain strategically important. Rather than becoming obsolete, those assets may increase in value as NTN and terrestrial networks become more tightly integrated.

If satellite and terrestrial systems become increasingly interdependent, incumbent operators’ assets may become more valuable rather than less. Spectrum, fiber backhaul, tower infrastructure, distributed RAN assets, customer relationships, billing systems, and regulatory authorizations remain essential elements of an integrated non-terrestrial network (NTN) and terrestrial-network ecosystem. EchoStar’s share-price appreciation over the past year illustrates the strategic value that spectrum holdings can command, particularly as SpaceX and AT&T acquire additional spectrum assets.

The three national U.S. wireless operators collectively hold spectrum assets estimated to be worth more than $400 billion based on recent transaction benchmarks. That figure is approximately 80% of their combined market capitalization and is broadly comparable to their aggregate debt burden. Spectrum holdings alone do not establish an investment thesis, but they provide a meaningful asset-value foundation as satellite, terrestrial, and hybrid connectivity models continue to evolve. They aren’t going to sell their spectrum. They have businesses to run, and those businesses are reasonably valued and growing.

Addendum: AI Capex is a Significant Risk for Starlink Mobile:

AI-data-center investment is a significant capital-allocation risk to Starlink Mobile, but it is not, by itself, evidence that SpaceX lacks the financial capacity to enter mobile communications. The more credible concern is that AI, Starship, constellation replenishment, and terrestrial mobile deployment will compete for capital simultaneously—potentially slowing Starlink Mobile’s rollout, limiting network densification, or increasing reliance on an MVNO partnership.

SpaceX’s capital spending has risen sharply: reported second-quarter capex exceeded $18 billion, including approximately $15.83 billion directed to AI infrastructure. Management indicated that similarly elevated capex could continue over subsequent quarters. Meanwhile, Starlink profitability and connectivity operations remain an important source of funding for the broader AI strategy.

A facilities-based mobile network would add another exceptionally capital-intensive program:

SpaceX has already committed approximately $19.6 billion through its EchoStar spectrum transactions for up to 65 MHz of spectrum, including associated debt obligations. Thus, the issue is not whether it can acquire any spectrum; it has already done so. The issue is whether that spectrum portfolio is sufficient for a competitive nationwide terrestrial-mobile network, particularly in high-density markets.reuters
A fourth nationwide MNO requires far more than spectrum: site acquisition, radios, antennas, power, backhaul, core-network functions, device certification, retail/distribution, customer care, and sustained subscriber-acquisition spending.
Starlink must also fund V3 satellite production, launch capacity, gateway infrastructure, constellation replenishment, and the evolution of direct-to-device/non-terrestrial-network capabilities.

These programs have distinctly different investment horizons. AI infrastructure requires rapid, front-loaded spending to secure compute capacity; terrestrial mobile networks require multi-year, geographically distributed capex; and satellite systems require continuous capital expenditure to maintain and upgrade orbital capacity.

The likely consequence is not cancellation of Starlink Mobile, but a more capital-disciplined architecture than a conventional nationwide greenfield MNO build. SpaceX has said it intends to build terrestrial mobile services but has not disclosed projected mobile capex or a site-count plan; analysts have warned that a competitive direct-to-consumer national offering would be very difficult without an MVNO agreement providing broad baseline coverage. This produces three plausible outcomes:

Path	Capital requirement	Likely implication
Independent nationwide MNO	Very high	Slow rollout, large execution risk, and a potentially prolonged cash drain while AI and Starship also consume capital
Hybrid satellite–terrestrial network	High but more targeted	Terrestrial build concentrated in capacity-constrained urban and suburban areas; Starlink provides backhaul, coverage extension, and resilience
MVNO or strategic MNO partnership	Lower upfront capex	Fastest route to nationwide service, but less control over margins, product design, and differentiation

Technical constraint remains decisive: Even if SpaceX could fully finance a terrestrial build, capital alone does not eliminate the fundamental network-engineering constraints. Its acquired spectrum is valuable, but incumbents have substantially deeper spectrum portfolios, dense existing cell-site grids, mature indoor-coverage solutions, established device ecosystems, and decades of operational experience.

Satellite connectivity can reduce backhaul requirements at selected sites and enhance rural, maritime, aviation, emergency, and resilience use cases. It cannot economically substitute for dense terrestrial spectral reuse in the highest-traffic urban areas. Therefore, AI-related capex pressure is particularly relevant because Starlink Mobile needs substantial investment precisely where the satellite component provides the least complete replacement for terrestrial infrastructure.

A key additional risk is strategic prioritization, not immediate insolvency. If SpaceX continues allocating the overwhelming share of incremental capital to AI data centers and Starship, Starlink Mobile may emerge as a hybrid service, wholesale platform, or MVNO-enabled offering rather than a fully independent fourth nationwide carrier. That outcome would reduce the near- to medium-term disruption risk to AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon. It would also reinforce the more technically credible view that Starlink is likely to be complementary to terrestrial mobile networks for years, even if it becomes a powerful competitor in selected coverage, backhaul, and mobility segments.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

References:

https://www.barrons.com/articles/spacex-wont-destroy-telecomit-will-just-reinvent-it-79b88d1a

https://www.lightreading.com/satellite/spacex-small-cell-plan-serves-up-more-musk-madness

FT: SpaceX considering Starlink Direct-to-Consumer mobile service & terrestrial cellular network infrastructure in the U.S. (See Comments below the article)

Ookla: Starlink a viable competitor for hybrid 5G/NTN services due to network performance improvements and larger coverage area

Ookla: D2D satellite connectivity surged 24.5% during last 9 months; Starlink’s footprint expansion leads the way

US Mobile’s new bundle combines its multi-network mobile service with Starlink residential internet

Direct-to-Device (D2D) satellite network comparison: Starlink V2 (Starlink Mobile) vs “Satellite Connect Europe”

Blue Origin announces TeraWave – satellite internet rival for Starlink and Amazon Leo

Eutelsat hails EC’s IRIS-2 project to take on U.S. NTN providers

Posted on August 7, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

Executive Summary:

The European Commission (EC) has announced the next steps for the IRIS²[1.] project after reaching an implementation agreement with the prime contractors, one of which is Eutelsat. The EC agreed terms with the SpaceRISE consortium – comprising Eutelsat, Hispasat and SES – for deploying the satellite system, which includes adding 66 more low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellites dedicated to defense, security and emergency services, and launching services from 2029.

Note 1. IRIS² Backgrounder:

IRIS² is the European Union’s secure-connectivity LEO satellite program: Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite. It is intended to provide sovereign, resilient communications for EU governmental users while also supporting commercial broadband and connectivity in underserved areas. IRIS² is planned as a multi-orbit constellation of 290 satellites, principally in low-Earth orbit (LEO) and medium-Earth orbit (MEO). Combining LEO’s lower latency with MEO’s wider coverage is meant to support secure, high-availability communications across Europe and beyond.

IRIS² was established under Regulation (EU) 2023/588, the Union Secure Connectivity Programme for 2023–2027. The Commission awarded a 12-year concession in December 2024 to the SpaceRISE consortium—SES, Eutelsat, and Hispasat—with major European aerospace, satellite, and telecom companies participating as subcontractors.

The current planning cited by ESA anticipates first satellite launches in 2029, initial services in 2030, and full operations targeted for 2031. In the interim, initial governmental capability is to draw on pooled national satellite resources through GOVSATCOM.

IRIS² is commonly described as the EU’s third flagship space program after Galileo and Copernicus. Its strategic rationale is European digital and communications sovereignty: reducing reliance on non-European satellite systems, improving resilience against cyber and physical disruptions, and sustaining a European space/telecom industrial base. It is not simply a European retail satellite-internet competitor to Starlink; secure governmental connectivity and strategic autonomy are central design objectives.

A good part of the motivation to build the IRIS²satellite system is to reduce reliance on U.S. satellites internet providers (e.g. Starlink, Amazon LEO), especially for sensitive military and government communications.

Principal uses of IRIS²include:

Secure communications for EU institutions, Member States, defence/security users, embassies, and critical infrastructure.
Crisis management, disaster/humanitarian response, border or surveillance-related applications.
Broadband, transport connectivity, satellite trunking, and service in terrestrial coverage gaps.
Integration with 5G/non-terrestrial-network technology; the Commission’s 2026 terminal-industrialization call explicitly includes 5G NR NTN-compliant modem/baseband capabilities.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Eutelsat CEO Jean-François Fallacher said this is “a very important milestone” that moves the project on from design and preparation to an “operational phase” and confirms Eutelsat’s role as the program’s “LEO lead.” Fallacher shared a high-level view of some of the system’s new technology that is hoped to give it an advantage over larger U.S. rivals. He said the multi-orbit MEO-LEO constellation is “very advanced,” and will have “much more” capacity than satellite internet provider OneWeb has today.

He also confirmed it will be based on 5G non-terrestrial network (NTN) standards, which is “important.”

“We use 5G NTN technology. For IRIS², we want to normalize the technology … This is also a way to fight against the American giants because today each of the technology used by ourselves on OneWeb (now owned by Eutelsat), by Amazon or by Starlink are full proprietary technologies,” he said. “Going to normalized technologies such as 5G NTN will also help [in] bringing the cost down [and] having antennas which will be cheaper and of a smaller size.”

Eutelsat, which also operates 31 geostationary orbit (GEO) satellites, gained its LEO constellation with the acquisition of OneWeb in 2023. It is a distant second LEO operator with around 650 satellites, compared to Starlink’s more than 10,000. They both operate LEO constellations, but Eutelsat has a “fundamentally different constellation with different target customers, business models and scale.” LEO connectivity accounted for 25% of Eutelsat’s total revenue of €1.23 billion (US$1.41 billion) for the fiscal year ending June 30, and LEO revenue grew 70% year-over-year.

Photo Credit: HJBC/Alamy Stock Photo

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

For IRIS², Eutelsat will design and operate 264 dual Mil-Ka/Ku band and 66 Mil-Ka band satellites. The company said it will invest €2.23 billion ($2.57 billion) in the shared infrastructure and €1.16 billion ($1.34 billion) in the commercial infrastructure (which includes Ku payload and commercial ground equipment), with spending phased from 2027 to 2034. According to its concession agreement with the EC, the company said it expects revenue from IRIS²activity to be more than €10 billion ($11.6 billion) from 2032 to 2040. The Ka-only satellites are planned to start launching in 2029, while the commercial Ku LEO system is expected to be operational by mid-2032. Eutelsat also said it plans to add 229 satellites to OneWeb through 2034 in addition to 440 new first-generation satellites for an investment of €1 billion ($1.2 billion).

IRIS² links EU spectrum policy to sovereign satellite connectivity:

The EC’s proposed allocation of the 2 GHz mobile-satellite-services band complements IRIS², the EU’s secure-connectivity program. One-third of the spectrum would be assigned to a European operator providing governmental services—security, critical communications, and defense—with a requirement to integrate with present and future IRIS² capabilities. Together, the initiatives seek to strengthen Europe-controlled satellite infrastructure and reduce reliance on non-European systems.

IRIS² is designed primarily for secure governmental connectivity, including defense, crisis response, civil protection, and critical-infrastructure users. The SpaceRISE concession—led by Eutelsat, SES, and Hispasat—also permits commercial use of shared infrastructure. The planned multi-orbit architecture combines LEO and MEO satellites to provide resilience, coverage, and broadband capacity.

3GPP 5G NR-NTN alignment:

IRIS² is intended to use 3GPP 5G NR non-terrestrial-network (NTN) technology in the space, ground, and user-terminal segments. At the March 2025 3GPP RAN#107 plenary, industry participants described IRIS² as a multi-orbit Ku-/Ka-band broadband constellation adopting 5G NR-NTN specifications; the expected benefits are interoperability with terrestrial mobile networks, multi-vendor terminal support, and a broader equipment ecosystem.

The relevant 3GPP baseline NTN specs include:

Release 17 NR-NTN, which introduced foundational 5G NR satellite support, including architecture and radio adaptations for long propagation delay, Doppler shift, satellite ephemeris/UE location assistance, timing advance, and HARQ operation. The principal study and solutions specifications are 3GPP TR 38.811 and TR 38.821.
3GPP TS 38.300, the NR overall-description specification, which defines NTN architectural support; TS 38.331, which specifies RRC signaling needed for NTN-related configuration and assistance information.
3GPP TS 38.101-5, which defines NR user-equipment RF requirements for satellite/NTN operation. For Ka-band VSAT-type terminals, this includes NTN bands such as n510, n511, and n512, with downlink spectrum in the 17.7–20.2 GHz range and uplink spectrum extending into the 27.5–30 GHz range, depending on band.
Release 18 5G-Advanced NTN enhancements, including further NR-NTN performance and mobility enhancements, as well as expanded satellite spectrum support. Release 18 added NTN band n254 alongside the Release 17 n255 and n256 L-/S-band options.

3GPP Release 19 gives IRIS² a more capable 5G-Advanced NTN standards baseline, but it does not redefine the programme’s core sovereign-connectivity mission or its already-selected multi-orbit architecture. Its practical role is to enable a more interoperable evolution of IRIS² user terminals, gateways, and potentially onboard processing as the constellation is deployed from 2029 onward. Release 19 was frozen in 2026, making it a stable implementation target rather than only a work-in-progress specification.

For IRIS², the most relevant Release 19 NTN enhancements are:

Regenerative-payload support. Release 19 supports an NTN architecture in which a complete 5G gNB may be hosted onboard a satellite, rather than using only a transparent bent-pipe payload. This can reduce dependence on feeder-link and gateway availability, improve latency for certain paths, and enable more flexible routing and service continuity—important attributes for resilient governmental communications.
NR-NTN Phase 3 enhancements. These build on the Release 17 and 18 foundations for NR satellite access, addressing NTN mobility, access, capacity, and performance issues associated with high Doppler, long propagation delay, and fast-moving LEO satellites.
GNSS-independent operation and positioning. Release 19 work includes support for UE access when GNSS is unavailable, as well as positioning enhancements for satellite-only access. Those capabilities have clear relevance for emergency, defence, and resilience use cases where GNSS availability may be degraded, denied, or unreliable.
Enhanced IoT NTN. Release 19 adds store-and-forward operation, IoT-NTN TDD capability, public-warning support, and uplink-capacity improvements. These can support lower-power, delay-tolerant sensing and asset-monitoring applications across critical infrastructure, transport, energy, and remote areas.
Additional NTN spectrum support. Release 19 expands the 3GPP NR-NTN band portfolio, including Ku-band-related work and additional S- and L-band options. This is relevant to the evolution of IRIS² terminals and complementary mobile-satellite services, although the IRIS² broadband layers principally use Ku and military Ka-band spectrum.

IRIS² can use Release 19 to move beyond basic satellite backhaul or proprietary broadband toward a standards-based 5G NTN platform with greater integration into terrestrial 5G networks. Standardization should support multi-vendor terminals, common modem and protocol ecosystems, roaming/interworking possibilities, and a less proprietary ground-segment architecture.

IRIS² has publicly committed to adoption of the 3GPP 5G NR-NTN specification family, but the precise release profile and the definitive set of normative TS requirements for each satellite, gateway, and terminal have not yet been publicly detailed. It would therefore be more accurate to describe the programme as 3GPP 5G NR-NTN-aligned than to assert blanket compliance with every specification or band.

Competitive and regulatory context:

The initiative has drawn U.S. regulatory attention. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr suggested that European restrictions on U.S. satellite operators could invite reciprocal treatment in the United States, while SpaceX has reportedly asked the FCC to examine Eutelsat’s planned constellation expansion.

Luke Pearce of FDM CCS Insight said that Starlink’s use in Ukraine illustrates why the EU seeks a non-U.S.-dependent secure-connectivity capability:

“Ukraine’s use of Starlink on the front line has highlighted how important satellite communications will be in future warfare. The EU is understandably keen not to be reliant on its US partners for this capability.”

Pearce doubts the project can catch up to Starlink, or even Amazon’s planned rollout. IRIS²has been “marred by significant uncertainty and scrutiny” since it was announced in November 2022, and “at times, the project has appeared destined to fail,” he said. Initial services were supposed to launch in 2024. Now, the full system is likely to arrive in 2030 or later, he explained.

“It is therefore materially behind Starlink and will almost certainly remain so. By the time IRIS² is operational, SpaceX will have moved through further generations of satellites, terminals and services. Amazon Leo will also be a much more established competitor. Using standardized technology should broaden the equipment ecosystem, improve interoperability with terrestrial networks and ultimately bring costs down. However, 5G NTN is not a silver bullet. Standardization alone will not overcome the US’s enormous lead in satellite manufacturing, launch capabilities, terminals and overall scale,” said Pearce.

Conclusions:

IRIS² is materially behind Starlink in deployed constellation scale, launch capacity, terminals, and service maturity. Standardized 5G NR-NTN can improve interoperability and reduce ecosystem fragmentation, but it cannot independently offset those scale advantages. IRIS² should therefore be assessed chiefly as a European sovereign-connectivity and resilience program, rather than as a like-for-like retail broadband challenger to Starlink or Amazon Leo.

3GPP Release 19 provides an important 5G-Advanced NTN evolution path for IRIS². In addition to Release 17/18 NR-NTN baseline capabilities, Release 19 introduces support for regenerative satellite payloads, enhanced LEO mobility and access procedures, GNSS-independent operation, improved positioning, and expanded IoT-NTN functions including store-and-forward delivery. These features could improve the resilience, interoperability, and terrestrial-network integration of later IRIS² system increments.

The applicable ITU-R NTN satellite Recommendation is currently ITU-R M.2177-0 (February 2026), Detailed specifications of the satellite radio interfaces of IMT-2020. It identifies the “3GPP 5G-NTN: RIT” and “3GPP 5G-NTN: SRIT” as the IMT-2020 satellite radio interfaces. The Recommendation explicitly covers NR-NTN and IoT-NTN and points to 3GPP global core specifications rather than reproducing the full 3GPP technical corpus.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

References:

https://www.lightreading.com/satellite/eutelsat-hails-5g-ntn-to-take-on-american-giants

EU spectrum proposal

PCMag report

FCC Chairman Carr’s post

European Consortium 5G NTN transmission paves the way for standards based direct to device (D2D) connectivity

Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) Tutorial: Architecture, Spectrum, and Technical Foundations

Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTNs): market, specifications & standards in 3GPP and ITU-R

ITU-R recommendation IMT-2020-SAT.SPECS from ITU-R WP 4B to be based on 3GPP 5G NR-NTN and IoT-NTN (from Release 17 & 18)

From LPWAN to Hybrid Networks: Satellite and NTN as Enablers of Enterprise IoT – Part 2

Telecoms.com’s survey: 5G NTNs to highlight service reliability and network redundancy

InterSAT extends Pan-African satellite services via Ku-band on Eutelsat 70B satellite

Orange France satellite Internet based on Eutelsat Konnect VHTS satellite

France’s Eutelsat nears deal to buy UK satellite internet company OneWeb

Jio’s LEO satellite constellation authorized by IN-SPACe: 5 Tbps over India with 3GPP Rel 17 and 18 NTN Alignment

Posted on July 19, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

Executive Summary:

India’s space sector has taken another decisive step toward global competitiveness with the Indian National Space Promotion and Authorization Center (IN-SPACe) granting a key technical authorization to Reliance Jio for a proposed Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite constellation of approximately 1,600 satellites. The scale and ambition of the program place it firmly within the same category as leading non-terrestrial network (NTN) initiatives such as SpaceX’s Starlink, Amazon’s Project Kuiper, and Eutelsat OneWeb, while signaling India’s intent to build indigenous capability in space-based broadband infrastructure.

Constellation Scale and Architecture:

At ~1,600 satellites, Jio’s planned constellation is smaller than Starlink’s first-generation deployment (~4,400 satellites, with longer-term plans exceeding 10,000), but comparable to Amazon’s Project Kuiper (~3,236 satellites planned) and significantly larger than OneWeb’s first-generation system (648 satellites). This places Jio in an intermediate design space—large enough to deliver meaningful aggregate capacity and coverage, yet potentially more optimized for regional rather than fully global service.

The announced aggregate capacity of up to 5 Tbps suggests a high-throughput satellite (HTS) architecture leveraging aggressive frequency reuse and multi-spot beam designs. By comparison:

Starlink is estimated to already deliver tens of Tbps of global capacity, enabled by dense constellation scaling, advanced phased-array antennas, and increasingly, optical inter-satellite links (ISLs) [2.].
Kuiper targets multi-Tbps capacity with a strong emphasis on cloud integration via AWS, though it remains pre-commercial as of mid-2026.
OneWeb focuses more on enterprise, maritime, and government backhaul, with comparatively lower aggregate throughput but strong QoS guarantees.

Note 1. ISLs (Inter-Satellite Links) are direct communication connections between spacecraft in orbit, allowing them to route data to one another without first sending it down to an Earth station. This creates a dynamic space mesh network, which dramatically reduces data latency, increases coverage, and bypasses the need for costly ground gateways.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

A key technical question for Jio will be whether it incorporates optical ISLs in its initial deployment. Starlink’s Gen2 architecture relies heavily on ISLs for mesh networking and latency optimization, reducing dependence on ground gateway density. In contrast, OneWeb’s first-generation system lacks ISLs, relying instead on a dense ground station network. Jio’s architectural choice here will directly influence both latency performance and ground infrastructure cost.

Reliance Jio plans to deploy 1,600 LEO satellites to build a space-based communication network. AI-generated image via Business Standard.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Spectrum Strategy and Link Budget Considerations:

Although Jio has not publicly disclosed its frequency plan, it is likely to align with Ku- and Ka-band allocations, consistent with global LEO broadband systems. Starlink and Kuiper both rely heavily on Ka-band for feeder links and Ku/Ka for user links, while also exploring V-band () for future capacity scaling.

For India-specific deployment, spectrum coordination presents both an opportunity and a constraint. Domestic prioritization could streamline regulatory approvals, but coexistence with incumbent satellite operators and terrestrial 5G services will require careful interference management. This is particularly relevant as 3GPP NTN bands increasingly intersect with traditional satellite allocations.

From a link budget perspective, enabling both fixed broadband and direct-to-device (D2D) services within the same constellation introduces competing design requirements. High-throughput broadband favors higher frequencies and larger user terminals, while D2D requires lower link margins, robust coding, and potentially sub-GHz or S-band spectrum to reach handheld devices.

Direct-to-Device and 3GPP NTN Alignment:

Jio’s emphasis on direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity places it at the forefront of a critical industry transition: the integration of NTN into the 3GPP ecosystem. Releases 17 and 18 define the foundational architecture for NTN support, including adaptations for:

Large propagation delays and Doppler shifts in LEO systems
Modified random access and timing advance procedures
Satellite-aware mobility and handover mechanisms
Power-efficient waveform adaptations for handheld devices

Starlink has taken an early lead in this domain through its partnership with T-Mobile, leveraging mid-band PCS spectrum to enable D2D messaging services. AST SpaceMobile, while not a direct LEO broadband competitor, has demonstrated high-throughput D2D links using large phased-array satellites. Apple’s emergency SOS feature (via Globalstar) represents a narrower but commercially successful implementation of NTN for consumer devices.

Jio’s differentiation may lie in tighter vertical integration with its terrestrial network. Unlike Starlink, which operates largely as an overlay network, Jio can embed NTN capabilities directly into its 5G—and eventually 6G—core architecture. This opens the door to unified authentication, billing, and service continuity across terrestrial and satellite domains, consistent with the 3GPP vision of seamless TN–NTN convergence.

Latency, Backhaul, and 5G/6G Integration:

Operating in LEO, Jio’s system can achieve round-trip latencies on the order of comparable to Starlink and significantly lower than geostationary systems (). With ISLs, latency for long-distance routes can even approach or outperform terrestrial fiber in certain scenarios, depending on routing efficiency.

For India, one of the most compelling use cases is satellite-based backhaul for rural and remote base stations. While fiber deployment remains uneven across the country, a LEO-based backhaul layer could enable rapid expansion of 5G coverage without the need for extensive terrestrial infrastructure. This aligns with ongoing 6G research, where integrated TN–NTN architectures are expected to support ubiquitous coverage and network resilience.

In comparison to Jio:

OneWeb has already established a strong position in cellular backhaul, including partnerships in emerging markets.
Starlink is increasingly targeting enterprise and mobility segments, including aviation and maritime.
Kuiper is expected to leverage AWS edge integration for enterprise and cloud-native applications.

Jio’s advantage lies in its domestic scale and control over both access and core network layers, enabling tighter optimization of end-to-end service delivery.

Manufacturing, Launch, and Economic Viability:

Deploying a 1,600-satellite constellation requires industrial-scale manufacturing and launch capabilities. SpaceX’s vertical integration—spanning satellite production and launch via Falcon 9 and Starship—has been a key enabler of Starlink’s rapid deployment. Amazon is pursuing a mixed launch strategy (ULA, Blue Origin, Arianespace), while OneWeb relied heavily on international launch providers.

Jio’s approach will likely depend on partnerships, potentially leveraging ISRO’s launch capabilities alongside commercial providers. However, achieving cost efficiency comparable to Starlink remains a significant challenge, particularly in satellite mass production and user terminal pricing.

User equipment (UE) economics will be especially critical for D2D services. While fixed terminals can subsidize higher costs, mass-market D2D requires integration into standard smartphones without significant cost premiums. This is an area where chipset ecosystem alignment—Qualcomm, MediaTek, and others—will play a निर्ण role.

Strategic and Geopolitical Implications:

Beyond technical considerations, Jio’s LEO initiative reflects broader geopolitical and industrial policy trends. India is positioning itself to reduce dependence on foreign satellite infrastructure while building domestic capability across the space value chain. This aligns with parallel efforts in semiconductor manufacturing, AI infrastructure, and 6G research.

At the same time, the global LEO market is becoming increasingly competitive and capacity-rich. The risk of oversupply, pricing pressure, and regulatory fragmentation is non-trivial. Jio’s success will depend not only on technical execution but also on its ability to carve out a differentiated market position—potentially focusing on South Asia, enterprise services, and tightly integrated telecom offerings.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

LEO Systems Serving India:

Key parameters of LEO constellations relevant to India’s satellite broadband market.

Parameter	Reliance Jio (IN-SPACe-approved)	Starlink (India)	Amazon Kuiper (India)	OneWeb / Eutelsat
Status in India	IN-SPACe technical nod, ITU filings to follow	Licensed with 600 Gbps cap	Capacity proposal ~3 Tbps, not yet technically cleared	Operating via prior satcom approvals
Satellites (global plan)	~1,600 LEO satellites (India-centric)	>5,000 deployed, >10,000 planned	3,236 planned	648 (Gen1 complete)
Aggregate capacity in India	4.5–5 Tbps over Indian territory	600 Gbps approved capacity	~3 Tbps proposed	Regional multi‑Gbps, enterprise/backhaul focused
Approximate altitude	LEO shells, ~500–1,200 km (India coverage)	LEO shells around ~540–570 km	LEO ~590–630 km	LEO ~1,200 km polar
Optical ISLs	Not disclosed / TBD	Active laser ISLs in newer sats	Expected but not fully specified publicly	None in Gen1; relies on gateways
Primary service focus	Nationwide broadband, mobile backhaul, potential D2D	Global consumer broadband and enterprise	Broadband plus AWS edge/cloud integration	Enterprise, maritime, aviation, government backhaul

Jio’s IN-SPACe-cleared system targets 4.5–5 Tbps over India with ~1,600 satellites, compared to Starlink’s currently approved 600 Gbps and Kuiper’s proposed 3 Tbps capacity in the Indian market.”

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Evolution of 3GPP NTN support from 5G NR to 5G‑Advanced and early 6G:

Jio’s IN‑SPACe‑approved constellation is architected to align with NR‑NTN capabilities introduced in 3GPP Rel‑17 and extended in Rel‑18, enabling integrated satellite–terrestrial broadband and potential direct‑to‑device services over India’s existing 5G and future 6G infrastructure. NTN support in 3GPP Releases:

Rel‑15 / Rel‑16 – Baseline 5G NR (Terrestrial)
- Label text: “TN‑only architecture; NR defined for terrestrial cells and standard mobility.”
Rel‑17 – Initial NTN Support
- Label text: “Introduction of NR‑NTN for LEO/GEO satellites and HAPS; adaptations for delay, Doppler, and satellite link budget.”
Rel‑18 – 5G‑Advanced NTN Enhancements
- Label text: “Improved NTN mobility, QoS, power efficiency; building blocks for direct‑to‑device scenarios and tighter TN–NTN integration.”
Beyond Rel‑18 / early 6G – Native TN–NTN Convergence
- Label text: “Unified terrestrial–satellite architecture, AI‑assisted RAN control, ubiquitous coverage; NTN treated as a first‑class component of 6G systems.”

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

References:

https://www.business-standard.com/companies/news/reliance-jio-gets-in-space-approval-for-1-600-satellite-leo-network-126071700270_1.html

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/telecom/telecom-policy/reliance-jios-1600-leo-satellite-plan-gets-in-space-technical-nod-moves-closer-to-indias-first-homegrown-constellation/articleshow/132447556.cms?

European Consortium 5G NTN transmission paves the way for standards based direct to device (D2D) connectivity

Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) Tutorial: Architecture, Spectrum, and Technical Foundations

Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTNs): market, specifications & standards in 3GPP and ITU-R

Ookla: Starlink a viable competitor for hybrid 5G/NTN services due to network performance improvements and larger coverage area

From LPWAN to Hybrid Networks: Satellite and NTN as Enablers of Enterprise IoT – Part 2

Telecoms.com’s survey: 5G NTNs to highlight service reliability and network redundancy

Keysight Technologies Demonstrates 3GPP Rel-19 NR-NTN Connectivity in Band n252

ITU-R recommendation IMT-2020-SAT.SPECS from ITU-R WP 5B to be based on 3GPP 5G NR-NTN and IoT-NTN (from Release 17 & 18)

India approves backhaul satellite connectivity via VSAT for telecom services; BharatNet tender coming soon

European Consortium 5G NTN transmission paves the way for standards based direct to device (D2D) connectivity

Posted on July 14, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

Executive Summary:

Satellite connectivity advanced meaningfully this past week as the European Trantor consortium reported the first 5G NTN transmission over a Hispasat satellite on July 8th. This is an important step because it moves NTN from proof-of-concept demonstrations toward a standards-based implementation path aligned with 3GPP’s non-terrestrial network work. In telecom terms, interoperability is the real gating factor: NTN only becomes architecturally relevant if it can integrate cleanly with 3GPP-defined access, mobility, and service procedures rather than remaining a proprietary satellite overlay.

From a technical perspective, the signal here is that NTN is evolving beyond its initial role as satellite backhaul for remote coverage and into direct-to-device (D2D) access using standard cellular devices and network functions. That transition brings a new set of engineering challenges: synchronization and timing, mobility management, spectrum coordination, terminal power efficiency, and seamless handover between terrestrial and non-terrestrial domains. The “pre-6G” label is appropriate because these developments point to a converged terrestrial-plus-space access architecture, not a standalone satellite niche.

Sanford Bernstein’s warning that direct-to-device satellite can increase competitive pressure on terrestrial network operators is credible because it erodes one of the incumbents’ traditional advantages: exclusive control over wide-area coverage. If NTN systems can support messaging, emergency connectivity, and eventually broader mobile services, then operators face substitution pressure in segments where they historically monetized coverage gaps, roaming resilience, and service continuity. This does not displace terrestrial networks, but it does reduce the ability of carriers to price certain coverage and resilience attributes as premium differentiators.

The most likely industry response is partnership rather than confrontation. Mobile operators will probably position NTN as a complementary resilience layer for coverage extension, disaster recovery, IoT continuity, and premium service tiers, rather than as a replacement for terrestrial RAN investment. At the same time, vendors and standards bodies will continue pushing multi-orbit, multi-band, and multi-vendor interoperability as the condition for commercial viability. For editorial purposes, the key question is whether NTN matures as an operator-integrated extension of the mobile network or as an adjacent service layer that partially bypasses terrestrial incumbents.

3GPP Evolution to 6G:

Image Credit: Ericsson

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Key Technology Takeaways:

The first 5G NTN transmission over a Hispasat satellite marks a meaningful step from lab validation to standards-aligned deployment.
3GPP NTN work in Release 19 is the key enabler because interoperability, not just link feasibility, will determine commercial viability.
ITU-R SWG 4B1 – Satellites in Next Generation Access Technologies will likely rubber stamp 3GPP NTN specifications which will then become ITU-R recommendations.
NTN is evolving from satellite backhaul for remote coverage into direct device access for standard cellular endpoints.
The hardest technical problems are shifting toward timing, mobility, spectrum coordination, device power efficiency, and seamless terrestrial/non-terrestrial handover.
“Pre-6G” is the right framing because NTN is becoming part of a hybrid terrestrial-plus-space access architecture.
Direct-to-device satellite services can pressure terrestrial operators by reducing their exclusive control over last-mile coverage and resilience.
The most likely carrier strategy is partnership and bundling, using NTN for coverage extension, disaster recovery, and IoT continuity rather than full substitution.
Multi-orbit, multi-band, and multi-vendor interoperability will be essential if NTN is to become a durable commercial platform.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

References:

https://www.hispasat.com/en/press-room/press-releases/archivo-2026/491/the-trantor-project-has-successfully-completed-its-work-on-the-development-of-5g-advanced-and-pre-6g-satellite-networks

https://www.3gpp.org/technologies/ntn-overview

https://www.ericsson.com/en/blog/2024/10/ntn-payload-architecture

Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) Tutorial: Architecture, Spectrum, and Technical Foundations

Posted on June 11, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

by Paresh Panchal, Principal Engineer – Charter Communications

Abstract:

Several Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) related articles have appeared on the IEEE ComSoc Techblog over the past year. They include: Alan J Weissberger’s market overview (December 2025), the Keysight/Samsung frequency band n252 demonstration (January 2026), the Telecoms.com survey summary (July 2025), and the enterprise IoT hybrid-network article (January 2026). These contributions provide useful market context and early deployment perspective, but they do not fully address the engineering considerations that determine how an NTN system is actually designed, dimensioned, and deployed.

Importantly, they do not examine the 3GPP Release 18 NTN architecture options (A1–A4), which define key implementation choices for operator and satellite network integration. They also do not analyze NTN band planning and its regulatory variability across CEPT and FCC jurisdictions, or the propagation-delay effects that must be accounted for in HARQ timing, scheduling, and other RAN procedures. These issues are central to practical deployment planning and to the selection of an appropriate NTN architecture for a given use case.

This article fills that gap by providing a practitioner-oriented technical reference that complements the existing market-level coverage with engineering detail, e.g. NTN deployment options, spectrum applicability, and protocol-level implications. It is intended to serve as a practical guide for engineers and network planners assessing NTN architecture, spectrum strategy, and protocol behavior in real deployment scenarios. You can read my entire article at https://wireless-vector.com/ntn-article.

Here’s a concise summary:

Orbital Classes Set the Constraints:

Orbit choice drives every downstream decision. LEO (500–2,000 km) gives near-terrestrial latency (3–15 ms) but needs large constellations and Doppler pre-compensation for ~7.5 km/s satellite velocity. MEO (8,000–20,000 km, 27–43 ms) balances coverage and delay. GEO (~35,786 km, 120–140 ms) is fixed-position with HARQ effectively disabled — fine for broadband and IoT, not real-time voice. HAPS (8–50 km) is quasi-terrestrial, under 1 ms.

Four Architecture Options, One Real Decision:

3GPP Release 18 defines four NTN architectures (A1–A4), split along two axes: payload type — bent-pipe transparent relay vs. regenerative on-board gNB — and terminal type — UE served directly vs. through a ground Relay Node.

Spectrum: Two Bands, Two Jurisdictions:

FR1-NTN uses S-band (n256) and L-band (n255/n254) below 6 GHz with conducted RF requirements — n256 has the broadest operator interest given its IMT-MSS allocation and global roaming potential. FR2-NTN uses Ka-band (17.3–30 GHz) with radiated (OTA) requirements, reflecting phased-array terminals. Critically, band applicability is regional: n512 applies in CEPT countries, n511 in the USA and FCC-aligned jurisdictions. Operators planning service across both regions need to validate band selection during planning, not after satellite procurement — this is the single most common spectrum-planning oversight in early NTN programs.

Propagation Delay: Where NTN Breaks Terrestrial Assumptions:

5G NR’s HARQ timing, scheduling, and timing-advance procedures were built for microsecond-scale terrestrial delay. NTN introduces delays of milliseconds to hundreds of milliseconds. For GEO, Release 18 specifies timing advance values up to 1,282,172 Tc — over 19,000 times the terrestrial NR maximum. That’s not a parameter tweak; it changes how uplink timing is managed entirely. For LEO, the bigger issue is often Doppler: a satellite moving at ~7.5 km/s introduces frequency offsets that must be pre-compensated at the UE or satellite to preserve waveform integrity. For MEO, the practical adaptation is HARQ process extension and longer scheduling windows.

Three Things Worth Knowing Before You Deploy

Drawing on experience deploying timing-synchronization systems across thousands of terrestrial cell sites, three points stand out for operators evaluating NTN:

Timing infrastructure maturity matters more than people expect. Operators without strong precision-timing discipline on their terrestrial networks will find GEO/MEO timing advance values genuinely difficult — this isn’t an incremental extension of existing systems.
Architecture choice is a capex decision disguised as a technical one. A1 vs. A2 isn’t really about latency preference; it’s about whether you’d rather spend on satellite payload complexity now or accept ground-segment round-trip delay indefinitely.
Hybrid NTN/terrestrial, not standalone NTN, is what’s actually getting deployed. O-RAN’s open interfaces let the same RAN Intelligent Controller managing terrestrial cells extend to NTN parameters via the E2 interface — this is the path most operators are taking in practice.

Conclusions:

3GPP Release 18 gives operators a mature, well-specified set of choices for NTN — four architecture options with clear trade-offs, a band plan that bridges satellite and terrestrial spectrum, and explicit protocol adaptations for propagation delay that terrestrial 5G never had to consider. The decisions are more consequential than they look on paper. Starting from what Release 18 actually specifies, rather than from market framing, is the right way into an NTN deployment program. A more detailed technical reference — including full FR1/FR2-NTN band tables and a deployment readiness checklist — is available at wireless-vector.com/ntn-article.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

References:

3GPP, “NR and NG-RAN Overall Description,” Technical Specification TS 38.300, Release 18, 2024. [NTN architecture options A1–A4.]

3GPP, “NR; UE radio transmission and reception; Part 5: Satellite Access RF and performance requirements,” Technical Specification TS 38.101-5, Release 18, 2024.

3GPP, “NR; Physical channels and modulation,” Technical Specification TS 38.211, Release 18, 2024. [Timing advance and Doppler compensation for NTN.]

3GPP, “Solutions for NR to support Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN),” Technical Report TR 38.821, Release 16, 2021.

CEPT Electronic Communications Committee, “ECC Decision (05)01 on the use of the band 27.5–29.5 GHz by Earth Stations in Motion (ESIM),” as amended, 2005/2013.

Federal Communications Commission, “Satellite Communications,” Code of Federal Regulations Title 47, Part 25.

About the Author:

Paresh Panchal is a wireless communications professional with deep expertise in RAN systems and architecture, network design, performance engineering, and network analytics. He’s been an active contributor to radio access network innovation with deep expertise in 5G/4G/CBRS RF design and optimization, specializing in cloud-native and O-RAN environments. Proven track record across multi-vendor, multi-country engagements covering greenfield and commercial networks. Core competencies span RF network modeling, performance analytics, and cross-functional program execution. Inventor with 25+ patent applications in radio network technologies.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

References:

Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTNs): market, specifications & standards in 3GPP and ITU-R

Ookla: Starlink a viable competitor for hybrid 5G/NTN services due to network performance improvements and larger coverage area

Enterprise IoT and the Transformation of UK Telecom Business Models – Part 1

From LPWAN to Hybrid Networks: Satellite and NTN as Enablers of Enterprise IoT – Part 2

Keysight Technologies Demonstrates 3GPP Rel-19 NR-NTN Connectivity in Band n252 (using Samsung modem chip set)

Telecoms.com’s survey: 5G NTNs to highlight service reliability and network redundancy

ITU-R recommendation IMT-2020-SAT.SPECS from ITU-R WP 5B to be based on 3GPP 5G NR-NTN and IoT-NTN (from Release 17 & 18)

China ITU filing to put ~200K satellites in low earth orbit while FCC authorizes 7.5K additional Starlink LEO satellites

Samsung announces 5G NTN modem technology for Exynos chip set; Omnispace and Ligado Networks MoU

Open Cosmos introduces global space-based LEO satellite service for IoT monitoring

Tutorial: LEO Satellite Internet connectivity, D2D, and major providers

Posted on May 24, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

Satellite Orbits:

Satellite connectivity operates across three orbital tiers:

Geostationary (GEO) satellites have been the dominant platform for decades, powering telecommunications, TV broadcasting, weather forecasting, military surveillance, rural internet, and satellite phones. Positioned 36,000 kilometres above the equator, a single GEO satellite covers nearly a third of the planet, but the distance creates a 500–700 millisecond signal delay that makes video calls and real-time services impractical. Each satellite is roughly the size of a school bus and requires its own rocket launch.
Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) satellites sit between 2,000 and 36,000 kilometres above Earth’s surface, with a latency of 70–120 milliseconds. The satellites range from car-sized to van-sized, with a few deployable per launch. MEO satellites are used for GPS and other global navigation systems but have never played a significant role in consumer connectivity.
Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites sit at just 300 to 2,000 kilometres above Earth’s surface, bringing latency down to 20–50 milliseconds — on par with home broadband. Their small, flat-panel design, roughly the size of a dining table, allows dozens to be stacked into a single rocket, significantly lowering the cost per satellite. Modern LEO constellations also link satellites directly via laser, forming a mesh network in space. Instead of every signal bouncing through a fixed ground gateway, data travels between satellites and descends at the nearest point, allowing LEO signals to reach oceans, disaster zones, and remote communities that no ground infrastructure will ever serve.

LEO satellites sit between 300 and 2,000 kilometres above Earth, completing an orbit every 90 to 120 minutes and covering different parts of the globe as they move. They communicate with ground stations or through inter-satellite links that relay data between satellites. Supporting infrastructure includes gateway stations, network operation centers, and data centers that manage satellite movements, route traffic, and maintain service reliability. For users, accessing LEO services requires a small satellite terminal — typically a dish — with power and a subscription plan. As shown in the figure below, users connect to a local Wi-Fi network linked to the dish. Data is transmitted to LEO satellites, relayed to a ground station, and then routed through fiber-optic networks to data centers or cloud platforms. The process is reversed for the return signal, completing the connection in milliseconds.

Importantly, LEO satellites are revolutionizing Direct-to-Device (D2D) communications by acting as cell towers in space, allowing standard, unmodified smartphones and IoT sensors to connect seamlessly without terrestrial infrastructure. By utilizing standard mobile-carrier spectrums or dedicated satellite bands, these fast-moving satellites bypass localized coverage gaps to provide ubiquitous, text, voice, and data services in remote, rural, and maritime areas, as well as critical backup during disasters.

LEO satellite internet functional block diagram:

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Regulatory approval is central to LEO satellite deployment. Providers must typically obtain spectrum licenses, comply with national rules for ground infrastructure, and secure approval for service provision. Requirements vary widely across jurisdictions — from registration to multi-stage authorization processes. Competition from incumbent internet service providers may constrain market entry and expansion. As a result, services may be restricted or delayed even where technical coverage exists.

LEO connectivity also has practical limitations. Terminals require an unobstructed view of the sky, making installation easier in open areas but more difficult in dense urban environments where buildings or trees block the signal. Tropical downpours, heavy rain, or storms can cause signal attenuation and reduce throughput. Compared with terrestrial systems such as fibre-optic or mobile networks, LEO services may deliver less consistent performance, particularly in urban areas, and speeds can drop during peak demand.

Providers of LEO satellite connectivity:

Company	Country of origin	Geographic focus	Target market	Notes
Starlink — SpaceX	United States	Global	Individual/residential, enterprises, maritime and aviation, telecommunications, defense, government	Largest LEO satellite network, with 9,000+ operational satellites as of January 2026, a number that continues to grow.
Amazon Leo (formerly Project Kuiper)	United States	Global	Individual/residential, enterprises, maritime and aviation, telecommunications, defense, government	Roll-out to customers begins this year. Integration with Amazon’s existing infrastructure could offer advantages for e-commerce and cloud computing services.
OneWeb — Eutelsat	France	Global	Enterprises, maritime and aviation, telecommunications, defense, government	Wholesale partnerships, with a focus on enterprise and government, and a constellation of 600+ satellites.
Telesat — Lightspeed	Canada	Asia, Australia, North America	Enterprises, maritime and aviation, telecommunications, defense, government	Mid-scale operator, designed specifically for enterprise-grade and government connectivity.
Sat.One	Australia	Australia, New Zealand	Communities, enterprises, maritime and aviation, telecommunications, defense, government	Operates as a service integrator, leveraging OneWeb’s LEO satellite network.
GuoWang	China	Asia-Pacific region	Individual/residential, enterprises, maritime and aviation, telecommunications, defense, government	Both focus on supporting China’s government communications, underserved areas in China, and regional broadband. While global expansion is emerging, concerns around data governance, privacy, and geopolitical risk may limit international adoption. GuoWang is targeting 13,000 satellites; Qianfan is planning 15,000 satellites.
Qianfan (Spacesail)	China	Asia, Africa, Latin America	Individual/residential, enterprises, maritime and aviation, telecommunications, defense, government

The global space economy is projected to reach US$1.8 trillion by 2035, driven largely by LEO constellations. However, value creation is likely to be concentrated among a small number of providers controlling key parts of the value chain, Financial barriers to entry remain significant, varying depending on mission scope and technical ambition. Amazon Leo (formerly Project Kuiper) will cost more than US$10 billion, while full deployment of SpaceX’s Starlink is estimated at US $20–30 billion.

A mix of private and state-backed operators is developing LEO constellations with different strategies in satellite numbers, coverage, and target markets. Chinese-backed LEO operators GuoWang and Qianfan represent a strategic shift, both advancing rapidly towards full operation with a dual mandate of serving domestic communications and extending broadband connectivity across the Indo-Pacific and beyond. Their emergence could reshape strategic choices for governments in the region.

Where LEO satellite delivers:

LEO satellites are not a universal solution to connectivity gaps, nor a replacement for terrestrial networks. In most countries, fibre-optic and mobile infrastructure will remain the primary source of broadband connectivity. Their value lies in specific contexts: serving remote communities beyond the economic reach of terrestrial investment; providing resilient backup when ground networks fail; and supporting connectivity where no viable alternative exists.

LEO satellites are increasingly used to enhance resilience in countries with extensive fiber-optic networks or high exposure to natural disasters. They can provide automatic failover — near instantaneous transition to a standby system — during submarine cable outages, power failures, or other disruptions, maintaining communications and supporting emergency response. In December 2024, earthquakes in Vanuatu disrupted contact with national disaster authorities until Starlink was activated. In April 2025, a blackout in Spain and Portugal cut power to thousands of mobile towers, halving terrestrial network capacity — Starlink maintained connectivity via ground stations in Italy.

The main advantage is network independence: LEO satellites operate separately from terrestrial infrastructure and continue functioning when ground systems fail. Integrating LEO satellites into national disaster frameworks, rather than relying on ad hoc deployment, would maximize resilience.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

References:

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/low-earth-orbit-satellites-closing-indo-pacific-digital-divide

https://www.telecoms.com/satellite/satellite-disruption-how-leo-and-d2d-are-impacting-telecoms

Analyst firms wide forecasts for the LEO satellite direct-to-device (D2D) market

Analysis: SpaceX FCC filing to launch up to 1M LEO satellites for solar powered AI data centers in space

Blue Origin announces TeraWave – satellite internet rival for Starlink and Amazon Leo

Open Cosmos introduces global space-based LEO satellite service for IoT monitoring

China ITU filing to put ~200K satellites in low earth orbit while FCC authorizes 7.5K additional Starlink LEO satellites

Amazon Leo (formerly Project Kuiper) unveils satellite broadband for enterprises; Competitive analysis with Starlink

GEO satellite internet from HughesNet and Viasat can’t compete with LEO Starlink in speed or latency

Ookla on the Global D2D Market

Posted on May 14, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

Direct-to-device (D2D) satellite connectivity is emerging as a practical extension of non-terrestrial networks (NTNs), enabling standard smartphones to communicate directly with satellite systems without specialized user equipment. Within the 3GPP ecosystem, NTN capabilities were standardized (3GPP specs become standards by being rubber stamped by ETSI and ITU-R) beginning with 3GPP Release 17, establishing a framework for satellite-terrestrial interoperability and expanding the potential reach of mobile broadband beyond the footprint of terrestrial radio access networks.

D2D services could reduce persistent coverage gaps, especially in rural, maritime, and other underserved environments where terrestrial deployment is constrained by economics or geography. However, commercially available services today remain limited, with most deployments focused on messaging and other low-throughput applications rather than full mobile broadband.

From a market perspective, D2D and NTN have broad implications for mobile network operators (MNOs), satellite operators, equipment vendors, and regulators. That strategic importance helps explain why companies such as Apple, Amazon, SpaceX, and AST SpaceMobile are investing in this segment, alongside broader ecosystem activity around 3GPP-based NTN architectures.

Image Credit: Ookla

Ookla® has contributed to the discussion with a high-resolution poster showing global Speedtest® usage data for D2D services, along with a detailed market study on the D2D landscape. The analysis is based on Android devices that register with D2D-capable satellite systems from Starlink, Skylo, and Lynk, providing an early empirical view of how NTN-based connectivity is being used in practice.

Looking ahead, continued investment in larger satellite constellations and additional spectrum holdings should improve D2D capacity, coverage, and service robustness. As the technology matures, the industry is likely to move from narrowband messaging toward richer data services, with 3GPP NTN providing the standardization path for broader ecosystem scale-up.

For mobile network operators, the long-term effect could be a rebalancing of investment priorities at the edge of network coverage, particularly in sparsely populated regions. That may reduce the incentive for some rural tower builds and alter the demand outlook for parts of the RAN infrastructure supply chain.

Looking ahead, continued investment in next-generation satellite constellations, coupled with expanded spectrum access, is expected to enhance D2D performance and capacity. Key players—including Starlink, AST SpaceMobile, and Amazon’s Project Kuiper—are targeting higher data rates and broader service capabilities, with the objective of extending beyond narrowband messaging to support more data-intensive applications.

For MNOs, the evolution of D2D introduces potential shifts in network planning and capital allocation, particularly at the margins of coverage. Satellite-based augmentation could reduce the economic rationale for terrestrial infrastructure deployment in sparsely populated areas, with downstream implications for tower companies and certain segments of the radio access network (RAN) supply chain.

From a policy perspective, D2D also has the potential to reshape universal service frameworks and coverage obligations. Regulators seeking to expand connectivity may increasingly incorporate NTN-based solutions into their policy toolkits, prompting a reassessment of long-standing assumptions regarding the role of terrestrial infrastructure in achieving nationwide coverage. In that sense, D2D is not just a satellite story. It is becoming a broader telecom architecture shaped by 3GPP specifications and the convergence of terrestrial and non-terrestrial mobile networks.

References:

https://www.ookla.com/articles/the-global-d2d-footprint-in-2026-poster-download

Analyst firms wide forecasts for the LEO satellite direct-to-device (D2D) market

Ookla: D2D satellite connectivity surged 24.5% during last 9 months; Starlink’s footprint expansion leads the way

Ookla: Starlink a viable competitor for hybrid 5G/NTN services due to network performance improvements and larger coverage area

GSA: 5G Non Terrestrial Networks, 5G SA and 5G Advanced gain momentum

Analysis: Amazon <- Globalstar – a strategic move for D2D and spectrum parity

Direct-to-Device (D2D) satellite network comparison: Starlink V2 (Starlink Mobile) vs “Satellite Connect Europe”

Deutsche Telekom selects Iridium for NB-IoT direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity

Standards are the key requirement for telco/satellite integration: D2D and satellite-based mobile backhaul

MTN Consulting: Satellite network operators to focus on Direct-to-device (D2D), Internet of Things (IoT), and cloud-based services

Analyst firms wide forecasts for the LEO satellite direct-to-device (D2D) market

Posted on May 11, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

LEO satellite direct-to-device (D2D) technology looks promising. Telecom analyst firms see D2D as a fast-growing but still early-stage market, with forecasts ranging from roughly 22% to 49% revenue CAGR depending on scope and whether they are measuring total D2D services or smartphone satellite D2D specifically. But that’s not happening now. T-Mobile chief Srini Gopalan, who said the service so far had generated “a lot less usage” than anticipated.

The most common near-term view is that basic D2D will add modest operator revenue at first, but the long-term market could become multi-billion-dollar as broadband and richer services mature. Here are a few analyst forecasts:

MarketsandMarkets projects the D2D market to rise from USD 0.57 billion in 2025 to USD 2.64 billion by 2030, a 35.6% CAGR.
Mordor Intelligence projects the direct-to-device satellite connectivity market from USD 4.08 billion in 2025 to USD 13.80 billion by 2031, a 22.37% CAGR.
Omdia forecasts smartphone satellite D2D revenue to reach USD 11.99 billion by 2030, with a 49.4% revenue CAGR from 2026 to 2030.
Counterpoint Research expects 46% of all smartphones shipped by 2030 to be D2D-capable. That implies D2D is moving from a niche satellite feature toward a mainstream handset capability, driven by chipset integration and broader device support.
Juniper Research thinks the number of monthly active users will top 150 million by 2031. The analyst firm suggests a temporary access model, similar to roaming or travel eSIMs, where consumers purchase access in a particular area for a set period. Juniper thinks connectivity alone won’t be enough to attract consumers. It believes operators will have to bundle the satellite service into rewards programs or roaming access.
Analysys Mason expects operators launching D2D in 2026 to see about a 1% annual revenue uplift from basic services alone, with much larger upside once broadband D2D becomes available.
TelecomTV reports a similar view from Analyst Brad Grivner, who says D2D could give MNOs around a 1% annual revenue uplift and also improve retention and upsell opportunities.

The spread in forecasts mostly reflects different definitions of the market, different start dates, and whether the analyst counts only current narrowband services or also future broadband D2D. In practical terms, the consensus is that D2D will start as a coverage and messaging feature, then evolve into a broader connectivity platform as device support and satellite capacity scale.

Analysts consistently point to 3GPP NTN standardization (rubber stamped by ETSI and ITU-R), more satellite-ready smartphones, and large-scale LEO deployments as the main catalysts. They also emphasize emergency messaging, rural coverage, IoT, industrial connectivity, and enterprise resilience as the first meaningful demand pools. D2D market growth is being driven by a mix of coverage gaps, new device support, and expanding enterprise use cases. The strongest themes across analyst and industry reports are universal connectivity, IoT demand, LEO satellite buildout, and 3GPP NTN standardization.

Image Credit: Digital Regulation Platform

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Main D2D growth drivers:

Coverage expansion. Analysts say D2D is filling a major gap in rural, remote, maritime, and disaster-prone areas where terrestrial networks are weak or unavailable.
3GPP NTN standards. Standardized non-terrestrial networking is making satellite connectivity more practical for mainstream devices and accelerating ecosystem adoption.
LEO constellation growth. More low-Earth-orbit satellites, along with falling launch costs and better satellite economics, are increasing capacity and improving latency.
Smartphone integration. As more phones become satellite-capable, D2D can move beyond niche emergency features into broader consumer usage.
Enterprise IoT demand. Logistics, mining, agriculture, utilities, and energy firms want reliable connectivity for remote assets, monitoring, and worker safety.
Disaster resilience. Climate-related outages and emergency-response needs are pushing governments and operators toward backup connectivity solutions.
Carrier-satellite partnerships. Cooperation between MNOs and satellite operators is speeding commercialization and helping services reach scale.

The D2Dmarket is still starting with messaging, emergency connectivity, and narrowband IoT, but analysts expect growth to broaden as device support and satellite capacity improve. In short, D2D grows fastest where it solves a clear pain point: no coverage, weak resilience, or expensive remote connectivity.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

References:

https://www.lightreading.com/satellite/making-the-most-of-satellite-d2d

Satellite direct-to-device services

Ookla: D2D satellite connectivity surged 24.5% during last 9 months; Starlink’s footprint expansion leads the way

Ookla: Starlink a viable competitor for hybrid 5G/NTN services due to network performance improvements and larger coverage area

GSA: 5G Non Terrestrial Networks, 5G SA and 5G Advanced gain momentum

Analysis: Amazon <- Globalstar – a strategic move for D2D and spectrum parity

Direct-to-Device (D2D) satellite network comparison: Starlink V2 (Starlink Mobile) vs “Satellite Connect Europe”

Deutsche Telekom selects Iridium for NB-IoT direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity

Standards are the key requirement for telco/satellite integration: D2D and satellite-based mobile backhaul

MTN Consulting: Satellite network operators to focus on Direct-to-device (D2D), Internet of Things (IoT), and cloud-based services

GSA: 5G Non Terrestrial Networks, 5G SA and 5G Advanced gain momentum

Posted on April 17, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

5G NTNs:

During an April 16th webinar titled “GSA Snapshot: 5G networks, spectrum & devices,” Joe Gardiner, market analyst at CCS Insight and a member of the GSA research team, said GSA data through March 31st reveal that 97 operators in 70 countries have announced they are investing in LEO satellite D2D technology.

“There’s a lot of interest in this area, but there’s also a lot of interest and movement towards 3GPP standards (see Note below), and the convergence of the terrestrial and the non-terrestrial standards map” starting with 3GPP Release 17, Gardiner observed.

Skylo, for example, is following a standards-based approach and already has D2D partnerships with operators such as Orange in France, Verizon and Vodafone IoT.

“Other players are [also] looking to use the standards-based approach, and looking to purchase the spectrum that’s compatible with the standards,” Gardiner said.

Note that 3GPP is not a SDO- it depends on ETSI and ITU-R to rubber stamp its specs and transpose them into official standards.

Image credit: GSA

He said that “Part of the reason Amazon is acquiring satellite Globalstar, was because of the spectrum assets that Globalstar has.” Gardiner added that a “lot of trials are taking place that are looking at the next stage of the standards, Release 18 with 5G NR NTN services.”

Gardiner referenced the trial announced by the European Space Agency (ESA), together with Airbus Defence and Space, Eutelsat OneWeb, and industry partners in November 2025.

In addition, Spain’s Sateliot is following the standards-based approach and has launched a Series C financing round to raise €100 million (US$117 million) to help fund the deployment its IoT-focused 5G satellite constellation. “We expect more trials like this to take place over the next few months and years,” Gardiner said. There is a “movement towards using mobile satellite services (MSS) spectrum,” although the drawback with this spectrum is the current lack of compatible mobile devices on the market.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

5G SA and 5G Advanced:

Ian Fogg, a research director at CCS Insight, who also works within the research team at the GSA, talked up the move towards 5G standalone (SA) and 5G Advanced networks.

“Globally, we have 184 operators in 74 countries investing in 5G standalone. This is publicly. 28.5% of all 5G networks are now 5G standalone. So there’s real momentum happening here,” Fogg said.

Source: GSA

5G Advanced “is something that’s happening at the moment. We have 36 operators globally publicly saying they’re investing in 5G Advanced. We’ve seen eleven 5G Advanced networks commercially launched,” Fogg said, citing activity in China, Canada, Japan, Kuwait and Vietnam.

“I think what will happen in the next few years is we’ll see the gap between an operator adopting 5G standalone and 5G Advanced narrowing, because if you go to 5G standalone, it’s a natural thing to move fairly quickly on to 5G Advanced, if possible, because you get a lot more capabilities once you’re on a 5G advanced network,” he added.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

References:

https://www.lightreading.com/satellite/satellite-d2d-moving-into-the-mainstream-for-mobile-players—gsa

https://gsacom.com/webinar/5g-networks-spectrum-devices/

Orange set to claim European satellite first

Skylo’s trajectory toward the ‘standardized sky’ looks to include multiple orbits

MWC2026: Skylo makes universal connectivity a reality; Vodafone IoT teams with Skylo for satellite connectivity

Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTNs): market, specifications & standards in 3GPP and ITU-R

ITU-R recommendation IMT-2020-SAT.SPECS from ITU-R WP 5B to be based on 3GPP 5G NR-NTN and IoT-NTN (from Release 17 & 18)

Analysis: Amazon <- Globalstar – a strategic move for D2D and spectrum parity

Enterprise IoT and the Transformation of UK Telecom Business Models – Part 1

From LPWAN to Hybrid Networks: Satellite and NTN as Enablers of Enterprise IoT – Part 2

Keysight Technologies Demonstrates 3GPP Rel-19 NR-NTN Connectivity in Band n252

Telecoms.com’s survey: 5G NTNs to highlight service reliability and network redundancy

Dell’Oro: Mobile Core Networks +15% in 2025; Ookla: Global Reality Check on 5G SA and 5G Advanced in 2026

Dell’Oro: RAN Market Stabilized in 2025 with 1% CAG forecast over next 5 years; Opinion on AI RAN, 5G Advanced, 6G RAN/Core risks

Dell’Oro: RAN market stable, Mobile Core Network market +14% Y/Y with 72 5G SA core networks deployed

AT&T deploys nationwide 5G SA while Verizon lags and T-Mobile leads

Direct-to-Device (D2D) satellite network comparison: Starlink V2 (Starlink Mobile) vs “Satellite Connect Europe”

Posted on March 5, 2026 by Alan Weissberger

Executive Summary:

1. Starlink is preparing a new Direct-to-Device (D2D) constellation to provide satellite fill-in services and has renamed their V2 D2D services as Starlink Mobile. This rebrand coincides with the introduction of their next-generation V2 satellites, which aim to provide 5G-like broadband speeds (up to 150 Mbit/s) directly to unmodified smartphones. With 650 direct-to-cell Starlink satellites active, part of a constellation of almost 10,000 Starlink satellites of various kinds, that roaming service now offers connectivity to 32 countries across six continents. Today, Starlink V1 D2D has 10 million active users a month – and the company expects to top 25 million by the end of 2026.

Where Starlink V1 delivers text and what Nicolls described as “light data,” meaning only for selected apps, Starlink V2 (Starlink Mobile) will deliver what was called “terrestrial-like connectivity.” In good conditions, “it should look and feel like you’re connected to a high-performing 5G terrestrial network.” To make that happen, V2 will need both new frequencies – the same globally-licensed S-band Starlink will use for emergency alerts – and new, much larger satellites.

Image Credit: ZUMA Press Inc/Alamy Stock Photo

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. European operators have launched “Satellite Connect Europe“ to offer wholesale D2D services to mobile carriers. Satellite Connect Europe is actually a joint venture between AST SpaceMobile and Vodafone. It will primarily use satellites provided by AST SpaceMobile to offer direct-to-device (D2D) services in Europe. The venture is building a dedicated, sovereign European constellation, with plans to establish an operations center in Germany.

Five major mobile network operator groups will deploy D2D satellite mobile broadband services across Europe. The agreements cover CK Hutchison, Orange, Sunrise, Telefonica and Vodafone, with customer trials scheduled to start this summer (2026). The service is expected to launch around the end of 2026, with demonstrations planned in Romania before then.

Role of 3GPP NTN specifications:

Both of these initiatives are dependent on 3GPP-based non‑terrestrial networking (NTN) specs, introduced primarily in Release 17 and enhanced in Release 18 to enable direct satellite-to-device connectivity using 5G NR (new radio) and IoT (NB-IoT/eMTC) protocols. 3GPP detailed NTN specs include TR 38.821 (architecture), TS 38.101-5 (user equipment radio performance), and TS 38.104 (base station requirements), supporting LEO/GEO orbits and S/Ka-band spectrum.

3GPP Release 17 introduced NR‑NTN and IoT‑NTN profiles, defining waveform adaptations, timing and Doppler compensation, mobility procedures, and MSS band mappings so that satellite and terrestrial RANs interoperate under a single 5G system architecture. These NTN specs will be submitted to ITU-R WP 4B for rubber stamping as ITU-R recommendations (official standards).
Both the Starlink and Satellite Connect Europe/AST initiatives map their radio interfaces and mobility behavior to these NTN specifications over time, which should let future 5G devices with NTN support hand over natively between cell towers and satellites without custom stacks.

These two D2D initiatives differ in radio design, spectrum, and integration models with mobile operators which provide the actual end point connections as follows:

Starlink D2D technical details:

Starlink’s Direct‑to‑Cell satellites use software‑defined radios and large phased‑array antennas so each LEO satellite behaves like a moving LTE/NR macro cell in space.
Unlike standard Starlink Ku/Ka user terminals, the D2D layer transmits and receives in allocated terrestrial/mobile bands (roughly 800–2000 MHz) to talk directly to 3GPP LTE/NR chipsets in unmodified handsets, using TDD LTE initially.
The payload compensates for fast LEO motion (~550 km altitude, ~7.5 km/s) with Doppler pre‑correction and timing advance logic in the satellite SDR so that ordinary UE modems still see acceptable frequency and timing error.
Onboard beamforming and beam‑hopping allow very narrow spot beams and dynamic power control, which is critical to protect terrestrial networks sharing IMT spectrum and to deliver enough link budget for small handset antennas at long slant ranges.
Backhaul from the D2D layer uses Starlink’s existing Ku/Ka links and optical inter‑satellite links into the ground segment, so D2D traffic can be routed either to the MNO’s core via gateways or across the Starlink mesh to another region.

Service model and 3GPP spec alignment:

Starlink positions Direct‑to‑Cell as a “fill‑in” layer: SMS/low‑rate data first, then higher‑rate NR‑NTN services as 3GPP Release 17+ NTN features become available in commercial chipsets.
The network integrates at the EPC/5GC interface so MNOs can advertise satellite coverage as just another PLMN/RA, letting devices roam seamlessly between terrestrial eNB/gNBs and the Starlink NTN cells, subject to roaming and spectrum agreements.

Satellite Connect Europe D2D technology:

Satellite Connect Europe is a wholesale platform that exposes AST SpaceMobile’s LEO D2D satellite RAN to European MNOs, with ground stations in multiple EU markets providing regional gateways, traffic anchoring, and regulatory control within European jurisdiction.
AST’s constellation uses very large phased arrays in LEO to form direct 4G/5G broadband links to standard smartphones, targeting multi‑Mbps throughput per device over IMT and MSS spectrum, again without any handset hardware or software changes.
The ground segment is designed so that radio resource control, data handling, lawful intercept, and policy enforcement for European traffic all sit under EU‑based operational control, which is a key differentiator versus non‑European satellite operators.
Integration work with operators such as Telefónica and Orange focuses on core‑network interconnect, mobility management between terrestrial 4G/5G sites and satellite cells, and using D2D mainly for rural coverage and resilience in outages or disasters.

Comparison — Starlink vs Satellite Connect Europe:

Aspect	Starlink D2D	Satellite Connect Europe / AST
Primary spectrum	Mobile mid‑bands (LTE/NR IMT), Ku/Ka for backhaul	IMT + MSS bands exposed via AST’s LEO payloads
Device support	Standard LTE/NR phones, starting with LTE TDD	Standard 4G/5G smartphones, broadband‑class links
Constellation role	Global fill‑in layer on top of existing Starlink mesh	European‑focused wholesale access to AST constellation
Control plane	SpaceX‑operated RAN, MNO integration at core level	EU‑based ground stations, MNO‑first governance and policy
Standards trajectory	Migrating from LTE to full NR‑NTN as device support matures	Positioned explicitly as 4G/5G D2D aligned with NTN evolution

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Addendum: Starlink deal with Deutsche Telekom:

In a partnership with Starlink, Deutsche Telekom will bring mobile communications to areas where network expansion is particularly challenging, for example due to nature conservation requirements or demanding topography.

“We provide our customers with the best mobile network. And we continue to invest heavily in expanding our infrastructure,” said Abdu Mudesir, Board Member for Product and Technology at Deutsche Telekom. “At the same time, there are regions where expansion is especially complex due to topographical conditions or official constraints. We want to ensure reliable connectivity for our customers in those areas as well. That is why we are strategically complementing our network with satellite-to-mobile connectivity. For us, it is clear: connectivity creates security and trust. And we deliver. Everywhere.”

“We’re so pleased to bring reliable satellite-to-mobile connectivity to millions of people across 10 countries in partnership with Deutsche Telekom,“ said Stephanie Bednarek, VP of Starlink Sales. “This agreement will be the first-of-its-kind in Europe to launch Starlink’s V2 next-generation technology that will expand on data, voice and messaging by providing broadband directly to mobile phones.“

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

References:

https://www.3gpp.org/technologies/ntn-overview

https://itbrief.co.uk/story/satellite-connect-europe-seals-five-mno-trial-deals

https://www.telekom.com/en/media/media-information/archive/telekom-and-starlink-satellite-to-mobile-for-europe-1103000

https://www.lightreading.com/satellite/at-mwc-spacex-execs-tout-starlink-v2-and-a-key-carrier-partner-for-it

References:

FT: SpaceX considering Starlink Direct-to-Consumer mobile service & terrestrial cellular network infrastructure in the U.S. (See Comments below the article)

References:

References:

References:

References:

References:

Satellite Orbits:

References:

References:

Comparison — Starlink vs Satellite Connect Europe:

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Addendum: Starlink deal with Deutsche Telekom:

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

References:

Archives

Archives

Recent Posts