Launch costs are not the only consideration today for satellite delivery and will unlikely be so in the future. The sole benefit of dedicated small launch vehicles in development is not really lower launch costs. Per kilo of payload, many of these vehicles are actually more expensive than existing EELV class launchers. Responsive dedicated launch for this payload class is the selling point. Iridium chose to fly its next batch of sats on reused F9 boosters, primarily to improve schedule rather than lower costs.
Quote from: john smith 19 on 12/07/2017 08:45 amWRT this thread the question is could ULA be responsive enough to manage a "mass launch" of lots of small individual (100s, not 1000s of Kg) payloads, all different?But won't the satellites be more or less identical if they are forming constellations?
WRT this thread the question is could ULA be responsive enough to manage a "mass launch" of lots of small individual (100s, not 1000s of Kg) payloads, all different?
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 12/07/2017 03:42 pmThere are indications that the GEO sats will get individually larger but not increase in numbers.That MEO sats will probably stay same size (might shrink a little) but have some increse in numbers.That LEO sats will decrease in size greatly and increase in numbers greatly.Vulcan is primarily a GEO and BEO launcher. It's best economic use is in launching to higher delta V requirement orbits. Launching to LEO and even MEO puts Vulcan a severe economic disadvantage to other launchers. Even though it is marginally competitive for GEO and BEO.Head of U.S. Strategic Command Air Force General John Hyten recently said that he favors replacing costly big satellites with constellations of cheaper smaller satellites. It stands to reason that assets in GEO and MEO would be replaced in part by constellations in similar orbits. These would be most-effectively launched in bunches rather than one at a time. - Ed Kyle
There are indications that the GEO sats will get individually larger but not increase in numbers.That MEO sats will probably stay same size (might shrink a little) but have some increse in numbers.That LEO sats will decrease in size greatly and increase in numbers greatly.Vulcan is primarily a GEO and BEO launcher. It's best economic use is in launching to higher delta V requirement orbits. Launching to LEO and even MEO puts Vulcan a severe economic disadvantage to other launchers. Even though it is marginally competitive for GEO and BEO.
One quote says it all:QuoteAs one of nine U.S. combatant commanders, Hyten has a say in how the Pentagon plans investments in new technology. With regard to military satellites, STRATCOM will advocate for a change away from “exquisite” costly systems that take years to develop in favor of “more resilient, more distributed capabilities.”This is the thinking of the new “space enterprise vision” adopted by the Air force and the National Reconnaissance Office, Hyten said. “That vision is about defending ourselves. In that vision you won’t find any of those big, exquisite, long-term satellites.”Emphasis mine
As one of nine U.S. combatant commanders, Hyten has a say in how the Pentagon plans investments in new technology. With regard to military satellites, STRATCOM will advocate for a change away from “exquisite” costly systems that take years to develop in favor of “more resilient, more distributed capabilities.”This is the thinking of the new “space enterprise vision” adopted by the Air force and the National Reconnaissance Office, Hyten said. “That vision is about defending ourselves. In that vision you won’t find any of those big, exquisite, long-term satellites.”
If a hundred or thousand VLEO sats at 400km with 1m phased arrays are collecting that sigint with highly focused beams,
That makes no sense. If you are collecting sigint with a 100m dish at GEO(40,000km), a 1m dish at VLEO(400km) has the equivalent collecting area.
Quote from: AncientU on 12/05/2017 06:34 pm If a hundred or thousand VLEO sats at 400km with 1m phased arrays are collecting that sigint with highly focused beams, Not viable. They are in view too short of time and can't cover all the frequencies. Also, can't have hundred or thousand VLEO sats constellations for each type of mission (sigint, imint, missile warning, tac comm and strat comm)
“I’ve made a call at U.S. Strategic Command that we’ll embrace that as a vision of the future because I think it’s the correct one,” he added. STRATCOM will “drive requirements,” Hyten noted, “And, as a combatant commander, I won’t support the development any further of large, big, fat, juicy targets. I won’t support that,” he insisted. “We are going to go down a different path. And we have to go down that path quickly.”
Just like we have a need to keep solids used in munitions viable, evolving, ... in use, we'll still need to have large NSS capability. So this doesn't mean Vulcan goes away on disaggregation alone. But it does mean a challenge to policy to keep it alive.
My hunch is that ULA/others will need to field a different means for that. And that likely Vulcan needs to get more large govt and possibly commercial payloads than forecast for that manifest.
Your and his emphasis don't carry any weightThose satellites are not his to manage.
USSTRATCOM is responsible for strategic deterrence, global strike, and operating the Defense Department's Global Information Grid. It also provides a host of capabilities to support the other combatant commands, including strategic warning; integrated missile defense; and global command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR).
This is the thinking of the new “space enterprise vision” adopted by the Air force and the National Reconnaissance Office, Hyten said. “That vision is about defending ourselves. In that vision you won’t find any of those big, exquisite, long-term satellites.”
Quote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 12/07/2017 05:17 pmSo its a stupid, silly, assumption that the competitive response to this need will all launch on a large LV to GEO.It would help if you didn't call people "stupid". - Ed Kyle
So its a stupid, silly, assumption that the competitive response to this need will all launch on a large LV to GEO.
That makes no sense. If you are collecting sigint with a 100m dish at GEO(40,000km), a 1m dish at VLEO(400km) has the equivalent collecting area. Same with optical (ground) resolution... lower orbits have inverse square advantage.
Quote from: Jim on 12/07/2017 06:24 pmQuote from: AncientU on 12/05/2017 06:34 pm If a hundred or thousand VLEO sats at 400km with 1m phased arrays are collecting that sigint with highly focused beams, Not viable. They are in view too short of time and can't cover all the frequencies. Also, can't have hundred or thousand VLEO sats constellations for each type of mission (sigint, imint, missile warning, tac comm and strat comm)So, we have a choice... believe you or believe General Hyten:Quote“I’ve made a call at U.S. Strategic Command that we’ll embrace that as a vision of the future because I think it’s the correct one,” he added. STRATCOM will “drive requirements,” Hyten noted, “And, as a combatant commander, I won’t support the development any further of large, big, fat, juicy targets. I won’t support that,” he insisted. “We are going to go down a different path. And we have to go down that path quickly.”http://spacenews.com/stratcom-chief-hyten-i-will-not-support-buying-big-satellites-that-make-juicy-targets/
Quote from: AncientU on 12/07/2017 05:00 pmThat makes no sense. If you are collecting sigint with a 100m dish at GEO(40,000km), a 1m dish at VLEO(400km) has the equivalent collecting area. It doesn't matter, 1m dish at VLEO(400km) is only in sight for a couple of minutes. Also, it will miss many directional signals.
For those playing "post lawyer" LEO here includes substantial variation on VLEO.Also, we're talking smallish things in the 400kg size. And they are not in traditional orbits.Yes, I agree that a Vulcan launch of a single 400KG VLEO sat will not be economic. Duh.As follow on, I'll predict that Ariane 6 and Vulcan will duke it out for remaining geosats that miss the F9/FH bandwagon.Not enough for either to crow about. They've got to do better if they expect to fly 6-10 a year. Could be 2-4 a year.