Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Canceled (ABS-8) - DISCUSSION  (Read 26311 times)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48138
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81620
  • Likes Given: 36928
SpaceX Falcon 9 - Canceled (ABS-8) - DISCUSSION
« on: 06/01/2015 04:02 pm »
[Oct 2016] Note: Construction of this satellite has been postponed.  There is no current NET date.



ABS very happy with status of ABS-2a, ordering another electric sat from Boeing.

http://spacenews.com/abs-teaming-with-boeing-spacex-for-another-electric-satellite/
« Last Edit: 12/07/2018 12:21 pm by gongora »

Offline Owlon

  • Math/Science Teacher
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Vermont, USA
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 118
Quote
He said ABS-8 will cost “an order of magnitude less” than current-generation geostationary satellites, a feature Choi said is necessary if the satellite industry is to survive the onslaught of terrestrial broadband competition.

Very interesting. That brings the cost of the satellite from the hundreds-of-millions range down to the tens-of-millions, where even the relatively cheap Falcon 9 exceeds the cost of the satellite. Kind of refutes the argument that GEO satellites are inherently expensive and lower launch costs won't increase demand.

EDIT: Never mind--the reduction is in cost per megabit, not total cost
« Last Edit: 06/01/2015 06:05 pm by Owlon »

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2457
  • Liked: 2412
  • Likes Given: 10224
He is discussing cost on a per megabit basis.

Offline Owlon

  • Math/Science Teacher
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Vermont, USA
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 118
He is discussing cost on a per megabit basis.

Ah, yes, I missed that bit in the previous paragraph. Still, I imagine there must be some reduction in the base cost of the satellite to achieve a tenfold decrease in the data throughput cost.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Ah, yes, I missed that bit in the previous paragraph. Still, I imagine there must be some reduction in the base cost of the satellite to achieve a tenfold decrease in the data throughput cost.

It is already a smaller spacecraft than others.  Mass ~cost.

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2443
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 410
  • Likes Given: 14
Ah, yes, I missed that bit in the previous paragraph. Still, I imagine there must be some reduction in the base cost of the satellite to achieve a tenfold decrease in the data throughput cost.

It is already a smaller spacecraft than others.  Mass ~cost.

Moore's Law notwithstanding, I wouldn't be suprised to see Cube sats doing the same job at some of the more huge Telecom and Weather sats in the not too distant future.  At an altitude of 600Km, most of teh Cube sats would be able to give continious, highly detailed weather info from multiple angles and Telecom sats could network on orbit, providing incredible levels of broadband capibilities.
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Liked: 3900
  • Likes Given: 5273
I couldn't find a direct reference, but this SpaceNews article: http://spacenews.com/39801all-electric-satellites-prove-a-tough-sell-for-operators-anxious-for/ indicates that ABS-3A cost around $168 million including the half-share of the under $60 million launch price cited.  This does not appear to include insurance.  That would put the ABS-8 cost to orbit (assuming it is a similar configuration, which is not a given, and assuming it is the sole passenger on the ride) at around $200 million.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Moore's Law notwithstanding, I wouldn't be suprised to see Cube sats doing the same job at some of the more huge Telecom and Weather sats in the not too distant future.  At an altitude of 600Km, most of teh Cube sats would be able to give continious, highly detailed weather info from multiple angles and Telecom sats could network on orbit, providing incredible levels of broadband capibilities.

not true.  There are physical limitations to sensors and transmitters.  It would take too many cube sats to do telecom

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
I think a better counter point would be, in the entire history of com. satellites this is the first time GSO satellites have shrunk in size. (Though only the propulsion has shrunk, not the payload). They keep getting bigger, more bandwidth, more power, bigger antennas)
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline TrevorMonty

By end 2017 they should have choice of F9R at considerably lower launch price <$50m or second payload to half price $35m.

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5304
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #10 on: 06/01/2015 08:16 pm »
By end 2017 they should have choice of F9R at considerably lower launch price <$50m or second payload to half price $35m.
I believe there have been tweets out of SpaceX for negotiations for possible customers for a F9R at the price of ~$40M. Just how real this price is is a question but it jives with conservative eco models for a reused 1st stage (10 times reuse). If ABS goes this raoute as a sole rider they will incurr only a $10M increase in price over their earlier ride cost.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #11 on: 06/02/2015 12:59 am »
By end 2017 they should have choice of F9R at considerably lower launch price <$50m or second payload to half price $35m.
I believe there have been tweets out of SpaceX for negotiations for possible customers for a F9R at the price of ~$40M. Just how real this price is is a question but it jives with conservative eco models for a reused 1st stage (10 times reuse). If ABS goes this raoute as a sole rider they will incurr only a $10M increase in price over their earlier ride cost.

If using a F9R with one 702SP satcom. Would the F9R be able to do GSO insertion directly?

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #12 on: 06/02/2015 02:13 am »
I don't think the current us has the ability to do the long multi hour coast needed.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #13 on: 06/02/2015 02:38 am »
I believe there have been tweets out of SpaceX for negotiations for possible customers for a F9R at the price of ~$40M. Just how real this price is is a question but it jives with conservative eco models for a reused 1st stage (10 times reuse). If ABS goes this raoute as a sole rider they will incurr only a $10M increase in price over their earlier ride cost.

If using a F9R with one 702SP satcom. Would the F9R be able to do GSO insertion directly?
I don't think the current us has the ability to do the long multi hour coast needed.

Nothing that some solar panels and batteries couldm't fixed, if the upper stage have the Delta-Vee available.

Just how much extra service life does a 702SP satcom get with a direct GSO insertion?

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #14 on: 06/02/2015 02:51 am »
I believe there have been tweets out of SpaceX for negotiations for possible customers for a F9R at the price of ~$40M. Just how real this price is is a question but it jives with conservative eco models for a reused 1st stage (10 times reuse). If ABS goes this raoute as a sole rider they will incurr only a $10M increase in price over their earlier ride cost.

If using a F9R with one 702SP satcom. Would the F9R be able to do GSO insertion directly?
I don't think the current us has the ability to do the long multi hour coast needed.

Nothing that some solar panels and batteries couldm't fixed, if the upper stage have the Delta-Vee available.

Just how much extra service life does a 702SP satcom get with a direct GSO insertion?
Batteries alone are sufficient. Maybe a little extra thruster gas.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6466
  • Liked: 4572
  • Likes Given: 5136
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #15 on: 06/02/2015 03:05 am »
If using a F9R with one 702SP satcom. Would the F9R be able to do GSO insertion directly?
They wouldn't have to do the whole GSO insertion to be of value.
ABS is claiming happily that they are getting to orbit a month earlier than scheduled with more solar power.
Raising the orbit goes slowly at first, then faster. 
Any extra impulse could dramatically shorten the time to station.
Plus it would shorten the time spent transiting the radiation belts, which should result in even less damage.
Batteries would be the easy part.  LOX boil-off over six or so hours in exoatmospheric sunlight might be real difficult.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline S.Paulissen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
  • Boston
  • Liked: 334
  • Likes Given: 511
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #16 on: 06/02/2015 04:35 am »
I believe there have been tweets out of SpaceX for negotiations for possible customers for a F9R at the price of ~$40M. Just how real this price is is a question but it jives with conservative eco models for a reused 1st stage (10 times reuse). If ABS goes this raoute as a sole rider they will incurr only a $10M increase in price over their earlier ride cost.

If using a F9R with one 702SP satcom. Would the F9R be able to do GSO insertion directly?
I don't think the current us has the ability to do the long multi hour coast needed.

Nothing that some solar panels and batteries couldm't fixed, if the upper stage have the Delta-Vee available.

Just how much extra service life does a 702SP satcom get with a direct GSO insertion?
Batteries alone are sufficient. Maybe a little extra thruster gas.

While problem neither are the hardest too solve. Lox boil off will be the biggest.
"An expert is a person who has found out by his own painful experience all the mistakes that one can make in a very narrow field." -Niels Bohr
Poster previously known as Exclavion going by his real name now.

Online guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7438
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2332
  • Likes Given: 2891
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #17 on: 06/02/2015 06:26 am »
While problem neither are the hardest too solve. Lox boil off will be the biggest.

I would expect that keeping the RP-1 liquid might be a bigger problem. But I may be wrong.

BTW there was an exchange at the latest congressional hearing. Tory Bruno said, SpaceX cannot do direct GSO insertion and Gwynne Shotwell answered, we can.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9100
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #18 on: 06/02/2015 10:29 am »
I don't think the current us has the ability to do the long multi hour coast needed.

I believe they will need this ability in order to complete the STP-2 mission next year.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - ABS-8 late 2017 / early 2018 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #19 on: 06/02/2015 11:59 am »
RP-1 is fine. LOx boiloff is much less of a problem than liquid hydrogen boiloff.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0