summary：
Another Week, Another Batch of StarlinksSpaceX continues its relentless march to blanket... Another Week, Another Batch of Starlinks
SpaceX continues its relentless march to blanket the globe in internet satellites. On Wednesday, November 5th, 2025, another 29 Starlink satellites were launched from Cape Canaveral. 8:24 p.m. EST, to be exact. The Falcon 9 first-stage booster, on its fifth flight (a detail easily overlooked in the grand scheme), did its job. Satellites deployed just over an hour later. Business as usual, right? SpaceX launches more Starlink satellites from Florida - FOX 35 Orlando
But let's put this launch in perspective. SpaceX now has 8,475 Starlink satellites in orbit. The stated goal? 42,000. That's a five-fold increase from where they are now. If you think of the current constellation as a sprawling suburb, Musk's vision is to turn it into a megacity visible from the moon. The stated aim is to provide high-speed internet globally, especially in remote locations, supporting everything from streaming cat videos to crucial video calls.
The question isn't whether they can launch that many satellites (they clearly can, given their track record of 565 missions). The real question is, what are the long-term implications of saturating low-Earth orbit with this many devices, each with a five-year lifespan?
The Uncomfortable Math of Orbital Lifecycles
Let's do some quick back-of-the-envelope calculations. If each satellite lasts five years, and they're aiming for 42,000, that means SpaceX will need to replace roughly 8,400 satellites per year just to maintain the constellation. That's about 700 satellites a month. What happens when a satellite fails prematurely? What's the buffer? And who's keeping track of all this space junk?
SpaceX touts its reusable launch vehicles as a cost-saving measure and a way to reduce space debris. And that’s true, up to a point. But the sheer volume of launches required to maintain this network is staggering. It's like claiming a fleet of fuel-efficient cars negates the environmental impact of a sprawling, poorly planned suburb. The individual components might be "green-ish," but the overall system? That's a different story.
Starlink currently connects over 7 million people across 150 countries, territories, and markets. Residential services start at $59 a month... or rather, started at $59 a month. The price before October 29th was $59, now it's $80. A 35% price hike, to be more exact, 35.59%. Is that because of increased demand, rising costs, or simply because they can get away with it?
And this is the part of the analysis that I find genuinely puzzling. With 7 million subscribers and a goal of global coverage, that leaves billions of potential customers. Why the price hike? Is it a sign that they're struggling to achieve profitability, or is it simply a matter of extracting maximum value from their existing customer base? Details on their internal financial projections remain scarce (SpaceX being a private company), but the price increase suggests a recalibration of their business model.
SpaceX was founded in 2002 by Elon Musk with the goal of creating reusable launch vehicles and, ultimately, carrying humans to Mars. Lofty ambitions, no doubt. And in 2020, they became the first private company to transport people to the International Space Station. Impressive feats. But Starlink, while a technological marvel, feels less like a stepping stone to Mars and more like a terrestrial cash grab.
Is This Really About Mars?
The stated vision of colonizing Mars seems increasingly disconnected from the day-to-day reality of launching internet satellites. It's as if a company building rockets to the moon decided to start a delivery service to pay the bills. The delivery service might be successful, but does it really advance the lunar program? Or does it simply become a distraction, a source of revenue that overshadows the original goal? It's a question worth pondering as we watch yet another batch of Starlinks ascend into the night sky.
A Reality Check
The dream of Mars is fading under the glare of satellite TV.