Costs to launch small 15kg-satellite

[yevaud]

You include rather more than not costs and grants that were not even a part of BU's project. We had no links to MIT, CATSAT, SNOE, etc. Discarding those shows our accrued costs as being approximately six million dollars. Using your own figures.<br /><br />Further: "at too low a level?" I was a 35-years old Electronics Engineer working for the three PI's, one of whom was the Assistant Director of the CSP. You are still and demonstrably wrong.<br /><br />Answer me this, if you are a fount of knowledge in this: what was the aerospace contractor we used for anything involving the actual launch vehicle and any inclusive affairs? <br /><br />For that matter, can you tell me what the experiment was all about?<br /><br />I really think not. <br /><br />Oh, the quote: <i>(Final launch services costs to NASA for the STEDI launches have not been made available to USRA.)</i> In eight years? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

That was my point. Your spacecraft cost $6 million which is without the cost of the launch vehicle. <br /><br />I just include all the costs of the STEDI program which does not include launch services<br /><br />Electrical engineer is low level. Launch vehicle procurement and integration is done at a higher level. <br /><br /><br />AeroAstro<br /><br />2D/3D EUV imaging of the ionosphere<br /><br />I have the spacecraft CDR package, the ARAR, LV ICD .....<br /><br />This is not my quote:<br />"Final launch services costs to NASA for the STEDI launches have not been made available to USRA."<br /><br />It was by your source of funding. <br /><br /><br />In summary, your stated cost of 6 million dollars for TERRIERS does not include the launch vehicle

 

[jimfromnsf]

"You are more than welcome to convince yourself otherwise. That alters nothing."<br /><br />No convincing needed, I am correct and you can't alter that.<br />From<br />http://www.sop.usra.edu/STEDIProgramReport.pdf<br /><br />4.2.4 Launch Vehicle<br />In February 1995, NASA further defined the STEDI launch services and associated costs per mission as follows:<br />Standard Launch Services $6,000,000<br />Payload Processing $200,000<br />GSFC Contractor/Flight Assurance $345,000<br />GSFC Tax and OLS Project Support $217,000<br />Estimated Total $6,762,000 <br />

 

[yevaud]

The costs, per/the line item of the TERRIERS budget, contained costs to both Vandenburg, as we all the associated costs for the launch vehicle, payable to Aero/Astro.<br /><br />I know what was a part of the TERRIERS project and all of the budgetary items thereof. <br /><br /><i>1. "For missions operating their own ground terminal, NASA offered it's assistance in pursuing frequency allocations and the associated operating licenses. This offer included managing the actual frequency allocation and license acquisition for space-ground communications. The STEDI Principal Investigators also has access to standard NASA satellite tracking, data acquisition and communications services at no cost <b>as long as these services were incidental to current operations</b></i>."<br /><br />These were not incidental to the TERRIERS project.<br /><br /><i>Mission teams were expected to use these funds for all instrumentation and spacecraft development costs <b>as well as any costs associated with data acquisition, tracking, and mission operations following the the launch of the spacecraft</b></i>."<br /><br />Such as constant operation of a ground station as well as continual realtime data on the position and orbit of the TERRIERS satellite. This is crucial, which you would know if you understood the scientific basis of the project itself.<br /><br /><i>Since the launches were proposed to be completed during July 1996, <b>no launch vehicle or range costs were to be incurred during Grant Year 4.</b></i><br /><br />That is correct. Prior to that, there <i>were</i> said costs incurred, even if nominal compared to the total amount necessary to actually launch the thing.<br /><br /><i>3.3.2 Launch Services/USAF.....$11,050,000</i><br /><br />And many of these costs were passed on to us.<br /><br />Farther down from that action section of your .pdf about STEDI, it names the PI for TERRIERS, Dan Cotton. I worked directly for Dan, as well as the other PI's, Tim Cook and Jim Vickers (and peripherally wit <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[solarspot]

Correct me if I am wrong; but many of the price figures given in this thread seem to be the price for a full-blown launch vehicle. If the satellite went up as a secondary payload with a larger mission, the launch cost for the satellite would likely be below 1 million USD. Especially for something as small as 15kg...

 

[yevaud]

That depends if, as with the project in question, NASA picked up the bulk of the cost.<br /><br />[they did not pick up <i>all</i> of the costs] <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

You still have to pay at least (and that's a minimum) your 15 kg part of the total "launch" costs.<br /><br />Integration of the payload (even if only 15 kg) into the mission will take lots of time and effort (translate: costs).<br /><br />Hopefully it would be less than a million, but until you run the numbers through the proposed mission (launch) you really don't know. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Mission teams were expected to use these funds for all instrumentation and spacecraft development costs as well as any costs associated with data acquisition, tracking, and mission operations following the the launch of the spacecraft."<br /><br />You don't know what the hell you are talking about.<br />I said nothing about ground stations, missions operations, spacecraft processing etc. But anyways those costs are still "spacecraft" costs<br /><br />I just listed all the STEDI costs, which included TERRIERS, I never said all the STEDI cost were attributed to TERRIERS<br /><br />"3.3.2 Launch Services/USAF.....$11,050,000<br /><br />And many of these costs were passed on to us. "<br /><br />Throwing the BS card. You dont' know squat about launch vehicle cost nor the how the STEDI program was to work. Launch service costs are provided by NASA and not passed to the individual projects.<br />None of those costs were passed to you. Launch service costs are the costs of the launch vehicle and the launch vehicle contractor. They were paid directly by NASA and individual projects had no involvement in this moneys<br /><br />READ VERY CAREFULLY. I only said that you didn't pay for launch vehicle costs and your $5.8 million didn't include it.<br />Never said anything about mission ops or ground station.<br /><br />I don't care about sec 2.8 and 2.9.2. They aren't launch vehicle or even launch costs.<br /><br />My whole point is that you 5.8 million didn't include LV costs.

 

[jimfromnsf]

"[they did not pick up all of the costs]"<br /><br />All the launch vehicle is all the costs

 

[yevaud]

Hmm hmm. So I am working off of one of the actual mission documents - the actual RFP - and you are claiming things based on a post off of the Internet, yet I am wrong? I sat on the steering committee, yet I know not what I am talking about? I got to assist in handling the actual line items of said budget, yet I am clueless, eh?<br /><br />Ah-hah. Ok, right-o.<br /><br />Btw, in the TERRIERS budget, all launch-related and ground-support related costs were all the same overall line item. Everything from ground support, vehicle handling and support costs, launch related costs, uplink/downlink costs, all of it.<br /><br />FYI, when you say "contractor costs picked up by NASA," that would be Aero/Astro, and we most certainly <i>did</i> pay them directly out of our budget.<br /><br />But I suppose your link off of the Internet is the do-all end-all. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

I am only using the internet doc because I can't show the contract.<br /><br />You must have trouble reading. "Btw, in the TERRIERS budget, all launch-related and ground-support related costs were all the same overall line item. Everything from ground support, vehicle handling and support costs, launch related costs, uplink/downlink costs, all of it. "<br /><br />No where in there is LAUNCH VEHICLE costs. "launch related costs" are not LAUNCH VEHICLE costs.<br /><br />"contractor costs picked up by NASA," <br /><br />Again you are not reading,.<br /><br />Aero/Astro is not the launch vehicle contractor. <br /><br />Here is the final proof, did you provide any funding to OSC? NO, because NASA funded them<br />

 

[yevaud]

You really don't read too well, do you. Please go to every post I made, in which I specifically said "Launch costs" and "launch related costs." As in ground support, launch support, package handling, etc.<br /><br />Apparently you convinced yourself I said we paid for the launch vehicle, and I said that nowhere in this thread even once. Not once. <i>Not once</i>.<br /><br />Learn to read, Pal. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

More proof that TERRIERS DID NOT fund the launch vehicle<br /><br />http://msl.jpl.nasa.gov/Programs/stedi.html<br /><br />"Each of the three teams receives about $4.5M to cover design, manufacture, and a full year of science operation. Launch services, procured under the NASA Ultralite Expendable Launch Vehicle (UELV) procurement, are provided by Orbital Sciences' (OSC) Pegasus XL rocket."<br /><br />http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/news-release/releases/1999/h99-060.htm<br />"NASA's cost for the spacecraft is an estimated $6.1 million, which combined with the cost of the launch vehicle totals an estimated $12.3 million."<br /><br />Like you said TERRIERS cost about $6 mil so you never saw the $6 mil for the Pegasus<br /><br />Check and Mate<br /><br />

 

[yevaud]

<i>Check and Mate</i><br /><br />Uh huh.<br /><br />PFfft. Self-declaring victory over something I never said. Damn. That's laughable.<br /><br />You really <i>don't</i> read, do you?! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

Your post <br /><br />"If this helps, I was a part of the TERRIERS satellite project at BU in the mid-90s. It was designed, built, tested there, and launched via a Pegasus from Vandenburg.<br /><br />Total cost was approximately six million from inception to launch. "<br /><br />My post<br />"That was spacecraft costs and not launch vehicle costs. "<br /><br />Your post<br />"No, that was all-inclusive costs including launch costs. I would know, I worked for one of the PI's. "<br /><br />My post<br />"It couldn't have been all inclusive. STEDI missions were given free rides. "<br /><br />So who is wrong. You! You are the one that replied as a negative.<br /><br />The term "launch costs" generally means the launch vehicle. Not the costs that a spacecraft incurs during a launch campaign. <br /><br />You were in the wrong. Admit it. <br /><br />Also someone 'intimately" involved in a launch would know it is VandenbErg AFB. <br /><br />

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Apparently you convinced yourself I said we paid for the launch vehicle, and I said that nowhere in this thread even once. Not once. Not once. "<br /><br />Yes you did by saying "all inclusive"<br /> <br /><br />Google "launch costs" and all the hits are about launch vehicle costs

 

[yevaud]

You are nitpicking, that much is for certain. And I do so appreciate your fabricating something I didn't say out of what I did say.<br /><br />Oh, I have formally grieved your calling me a liar and implying I and every member of the TERRIERS team are incompetents.<br /><br />Have a nice day. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

truth hurts

 

[jimfromnsf]

"You are nitpicking, that much is for certain. And I do so appreciate your fabricating something I didn't say out of what I did say. "<br /><br />I is not nitpicking. You clearly disagreed with me when I Stated "That was spacecraft costs and not launch vehicle costs." by saying "No, that was all-inclusive costs including launch costs"<br /><br />Plain as day that you were in the wrong. No fabrication. You clearly disagreed with my statement.<br /><br />Also history provides the answer of the competency of the TERRIERS team