Quote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 12/07/2017 11:08 pmFor 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.Good points. Very on topic for the future of Vulcan. While not optimized for LEO (I'd suggest that means anywhere below the inner Van Allan belt) Vulcan has substantial payload capability. If it could deploy a full ring of satellites in one launch at a necessary inclination that would be a significant capability.Likewise the massive growth of software defined radio means that sigint payloads could be highly flexible. The question becomes "What bands do we need to cover world wide" but "What bands do we need to cover at what times at this inclination" ?But I would suggest the joker in the pack is the Kessler effect. More high value military targets in low(ish) Earth orbit --> more likely hood of anti satellite activity --> more risk of debris cascade. However that would not be an issue for Vulcan.
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.