SPACEX ANNOUNCES THE FALCON 9

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">Check out the Jobs section of SpaceX--they are looking to hire a lot of people. I bet they got another investor or two.</font>/i><br /><br />They have a pretty good list of customers already lined up: 8 plus the $100 miilion IDIQ contract. That should help give investors some confidence.<br /><br />By the way, Bigelow Aerospace is also hiring:<br />http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/employment.html</i>

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">Check out the Jobs section of SpaceX--they are looking to hire a lot of people. I bet they got another investor or two.</font>/i><br /><br />They have a pretty good list of customers already lined up: 8 plus the $100 miilion IDIQ contract. That should help give investors some confidence.<br /><br />By the way, Bigelow Aerospace is also hiring:<br />http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/employment.html</i>

 

[grooble]

And they are led by a guy with passion, who works because he wants to and not because he has to.

 

[grooble]

And they are led by a guy with passion, who works because he wants to and not because he has to.

 

[mikejz]

Another thought, that Falcon-9S9 Still is priced under the typical launch cost for a Com sat. I think this might be very intresting, becasue with over twice the payload that means that the amount of fuel that a GEO COM sat could be increased a great deal and thus its service life could be pushed to around 25 years.

 

[mikejz]

Another thought, that Falcon-9S9 Still is priced under the typical launch cost for a Com sat. I think this might be very intresting, becasue with over twice the payload that means that the amount of fuel that a GEO COM sat could be increased a great deal and thus its service life could be pushed to around 25 years.

 

[mikejz]

Another thought It would take about 5 Falcon 9S9 Launches to acheve a simalar payload as a SDHHLV and cost only $390 Million, even if you assume that you will need 6 or 7 flights to get the same effective payload as opposed to SDHHLV Launch, it still costs less than half as much.

 

[mikejz]

Another thought It would take about 5 Falcon 9S9 Launches to acheve a simalar payload as a SDHHLV and cost only $390 Million, even if you assume that you will need 6 or 7 flights to get the same effective payload as opposed to SDHHLV Launch, it still costs less than half as much.

 

[nacnud]

A comsat is going to be worth vastly more than the cost of a launch on a falcon. Even with todays launch costs comsats are much more costly than the launch vehicle. There an opportunity here for a manufacture to develop a much less costly comsat. We talk about $ per lb what about $ per transponder or $ per mbit/s?

 

[nacnud]

A comsat is going to be worth vastly more than the cost of a launch on a falcon. Even with todays launch costs comsats are much more costly than the launch vehicle. There an opportunity here for a manufacture to develop a much less costly comsat. We talk about $ per lb what about $ per transponder or $ per mbit/s?

 

[mikejz]

From my understanding most of the cost of Com sat is in the solar cells.

 

[mikejz]

From my understanding most of the cost of Com sat is in the solar cells.

 

[kdavis007]

This is cool.... <br /><br />It seems like that SpaceX can do it faster and cheaper than NASA....

 

[kdavis007]

This is cool.... <br /><br />It seems like that SpaceX can do it faster and cheaper than NASA....

 

[nacnud]

Really, I didn't know that thanks. I wonder what is so expensive about space capable solar cells? <br /><br />With the rate of development of comunication technology, especialy wireless servies it might not be worth spending so much for long lasting sats but then again I don't know much about the business. How do you think slashing the cost of launch might effect things?

 

[nacnud]

Really, I didn't know that thanks. I wonder what is so expensive about space capable solar cells? <br /><br />With the rate of development of comunication technology, especialy wireless servies it might not be worth spending so much for long lasting sats but then again I don't know much about the business. How do you think slashing the cost of launch might effect things?

 

[mikejz]

Solar cells are expensive because they are the highest performace cells out there--as COM sats really need tons of power by space terms. Add the complexity of a solar wing and batteries and you have a lot of money. I've never seen a breakdown of the costs of a COM sate, but I bet it would be intresting.<br /><br />For the most part satellites operate best in a broadcast or high bandwidth applications. IE TV(both broadcast and others like backhauls, news reports, etc) along with lots of data servies (credit card processing, news wires, and a like)<br /><br />In terms of technology, COM satellites are the dumb terminals of the information age--they simply consisit of transponders that repeat whatever they hear; they could care less if the signal was analog, digital, HDTV, it does not care less. <br /><br />2-Way Internet or voice communications by a traditional GEO bird are hindered by the signal lag. <br /><br />Power per transponder does go up as time goes on, but that is about it for direct benefits from the technology. A large part of the mix is steady business (like C-Band birds for Cable distro) There is a new band (Ka) and spot beaming that might mix things up if things pan out however. <br />

 

[mikejz]

Solar cells are expensive because they are the highest performace cells out there--as COM sats really need tons of power by space terms. Add the complexity of a solar wing and batteries and you have a lot of money. I've never seen a breakdown of the costs of a COM sate, but I bet it would be intresting.<br /><br />For the most part satellites operate best in a broadcast or high bandwidth applications. IE TV(both broadcast and others like backhauls, news reports, etc) along with lots of data servies (credit card processing, news wires, and a like)<br /><br />In terms of technology, COM satellites are the dumb terminals of the information age--they simply consisit of transponders that repeat whatever they hear; they could care less if the signal was analog, digital, HDTV, it does not care less. <br /><br />2-Way Internet or voice communications by a traditional GEO bird are hindered by the signal lag. <br /><br />Power per transponder does go up as time goes on, but that is about it for direct benefits from the technology. A large part of the mix is steady business (like C-Band birds for Cable distro) There is a new band (Ka) and spot beaming that might mix things up if things pan out however. <br />

 

[mikejz]

Elon posted this on anther site:<br /><br />Elon Musk said... <br />Falcon 5 has lower payload for two reasons:<br /><br />1. SpaceX originally planned to upgrade the Merlin 1 to 100klbf sea level. Instead, the upgrade is only to 85klbf and resources are being focused on the Merlin 2.<br /><br />2. The Falcon 5 is carrying a lot of extra tankage on the first stage.<br /><br />The first reason explains about two thirds of the difference and the second reason one third.<br /><br />Falcon 1 paylod dropped by 100kg due to no reliable Al-Li source.<br />

 

[mikejz]

Elon posted this on anther site:<br /><br />Elon Musk said... <br />Falcon 5 has lower payload for two reasons:<br /><br />1. SpaceX originally planned to upgrade the Merlin 1 to 100klbf sea level. Instead, the upgrade is only to 85klbf and resources are being focused on the Merlin 2.<br /><br />2. The Falcon 5 is carrying a lot of extra tankage on the first stage.<br /><br />The first reason explains about two thirds of the difference and the second reason one third.<br /><br />Falcon 1 paylod dropped by 100kg due to no reliable Al-Li source.<br />

 

[vt_hokie]

<font color="yellow"><i>"that means that the amount of fuel that a GEO COM sat could be increased a great deal and thus its service life could be pushed to around 25 years."</i></font><br /><br />Hahaha...yeah, in theory, but in reality I think they have a hard enough time building satellites that don't fail well before the propellant is depleted even with today's shorter service lives!

 

[vt_hokie]

<font color="yellow"><i>"that means that the amount of fuel that a GEO COM sat could be increased a great deal and thus its service life could be pushed to around 25 years."</i></font><br /><br />Hahaha...yeah, in theory, but in reality I think they have a hard enough time building satellites that don't fail well before the propellant is depleted even with today's shorter service lives!

 

[mikejz]

From everything I read, the prop supply is the biggest factor in a birds life.

 

[mikejz]

From everything I read, the prop supply is the biggest factor in a birds life.

 

[vt_hokie]

Well, I don't want to say anything that'll get me in trouble, but let's just say I've seen my share of malfunctioning pieces of crap that won't last long enough to see their propellent reserves depleted! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />