As the FCC noted…

¶Given the delay in second-generation deployment, Globalstar contends it is “pointless” to meet the deadlines for distributing MSS/ATC terminals incorporating a high-speed, two-way MSS transceiver chipset, and for providing two-way MSS to customers with dual-mode MSS/ATC terminals. Globalstar argues that requiring it to deploy such user terminals “far in advance of the [second generation] constellation (network) availability.. would make no sense and would cause unnecessary expense for Globalstar when…. that equipment’s new, second-generation space capabilities (network) can not be used. Consequently, Globalstar also asks for a 16-month extension of the dates by which its MSS/ATC terminals must come into compliance.

Our guess is…. A complete pass on the lack of mandated user terminals!! After all.. They didn’t ask for one piece of paperwork to validate the launch delay of Skyterra 1.

Boeing provided a letter stating that the Satellite was delayed due to an antenna problem. That was the end of the investigation, even though we both know the storied funding path of Skyterra1 over the years.

Just as Thales provided a letter stating that the Thruster delay from RAFAEL was the main impetus for the delay in delivery of the Globalstar satellites for launch.

However the IB held court on Globalstar requesting hundreds of pages of justification for their launch delay

In it’s ruling, the IB stated:

¶33 “The record indicates” that the thrusters for the first batch of satellites were delivered to Thales more than [REDACTED] after the delivery date specified in the initial manufacturing contract. However, the record NOWHERE INDICATES that late delivery of the thrusters impacted the deployment schedule of the second-generation satellites.”

The interesting point is that the [REDACTED] information in the Order was indeed, contrary to the FCC IB’s statements, clearly available in “The Record” in Globalstara July 6, 2010 letter which Globalstar stated the first six thrusters were originally to be delivered by March 3, 2009. Whereby Globalstar stated that actual delivery of the first Thrusters were not completed until June 1, 2010. A delay of 15 MONTHS. Globalstar provided complete documentation from RAFEL/Thales to support this fact.

But, Somehow the IB could not string together the concept that Thurster delivery delays from March 3, 2009 t June 1, 2010 could some how have delayed the first satellite launch which took place 12 months late and shortly after the delivery of the first batch of Thrusters in June 2010. After all the IB stated in the Order that…” The record NOWHERE INDICATES that late delivery of the thrusters impacted the deployment schedule of the second-generation satellites.” Perhaps the IB didn’t understand that Satellites require Thruster installtion…. “BEFORE THEY ARE LAUNCHED”.

However, it is quite interesting that the IB intentionally REDACTED the publicly available thruster delay information from the Order that would have clearly contradicted their rational.

ORBITRAX