Author Topic: End of U.S. Launch Year  (Read 27134 times)

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8565
  • Likes Given: 1356
End of U.S. Launch Year
« on: 12/21/2007 03:44 am »

Delta 331, the GPS 2R-18 mission, closed out the orbital launch year for the United States.  The flight was the 8th and final Delta 2 launch of the year and the 19th and final U.S. orbital launch attempt of 2007, one more than during 2006.  Only 17 of the 19 U.S. launches were complete successes.  

Cape Canaveral hosted 10 launches, half of which were Delta 2 flights.  KSC handled three shuttle human space launches.  Vandenberg AFB performed four launches, including three by Delta 2 vehicles.  


2007 U.S. Launches by Vehicle (Launches(Failures))

Delta 2                8(0)
Atlas 5                4(1)
STS                         3(0)
Delta 4               1(0)
Minotaur 1      1(0)
Pegasus XL    1(0)
Falcon 1             1(1)

2007 U.S. Launches by Site

Cape Canaveral, Florida          10(1)  
Vandenberg AFB, California              4(0)
Kennedy Space Center, Florida    3(0)
Wallops Island, VA                                       1(0)  
Kwajalein, RMI                                                  1(1)  
 
2007 U.S. Launches by Launch Provider

United Launch Alliance                 13(1)
United Space Alliance/STS         3(0)
Orbital Sciences                                      2(0)
SpaceX                                                              1(1)

BTW, United Launch Alliance fell well short of its plans for the year.  One year ago the consortium announced that it expected to perform 21 launches during the year, including 12 Delta 2, 6 Atlas 5, and 3 Delta 4 missions!  Now ULA says that it expects to perform 23 launches in 2008.

- Ed Kyle


Offline zappafrank

  • Member
  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #1 on: 12/21/2007 05:02 am »
What about SeaLaunch?

They are an an American company but with Ukranian rockets, that should count in the totals.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8565
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #2 on: 12/21/2007 05:07 am »
Quote
zappafrank - 20/12/2007  12:02 AM

What about SeaLaunch?

They are an an American company but with Ukranian rockets, that should count in the totals.

Sea Launch is an international partnership that is only 40% U.S.-owned.  It uses Russo-Ukrainian launch vehicles (that are composed of a majority of Russian content by value) that fly off of a Norwegian platform.  

Boeing, the U.S. Sea Launch partner, does payload integration.  The Ukrainio-Russian-Norwegian personnel do the launches.  The Zenit 3SL launch vehicle fits into the Commonwealth of Independent States launch totals.

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 20
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #3 on: 12/21/2007 06:34 am »
Nice overview, Ed. Wonder what happens to the numbers when Delta II isn't flying anymore.

Analyst

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4183
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 109
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #4 on: 12/21/2007 11:18 am »
Quote
Analyst - 21/12/2007  7:34 AM

Nice overview, Ed. Wonder what happens to the numbers when Delta II isn't flying anymore.

Analyst

EELV launch rates will probably shoot up.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #5 on: 12/21/2007 11:59 am »
Quote
GW_Simulations - 21/12/2007  7:18 AM

Quote
Analyst - 21/12/2007  7:34 AM

Nice overview, Ed. Wonder what happens to the numbers when Delta II isn't flying anymore.

Analyst

EELV launch rates will probably shoot up.

Nope, the EELV costs will limit the number of new projects as well as Constellation costs

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #6 on: 12/21/2007 01:12 pm »
Quote
edkyle99 - 20/12/2007  9:44 PM
BTW, United Launch Alliance fell well short of its plans for the year.  One year ago the consortium announced that it expected to perform 21 launches during the year, including 12 Delta 2, 6 Atlas 5, and 3 Delta 4 missions!

What are the reasons for the discrepancy between planned and executed launches?


Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4183
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 109
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #7 on: 12/21/2007 01:53 pm »
Quote
Lee Jay - 21/12/2007  2:12 PM

Quote
edkyle99 - 20/12/2007  9:44 PM
BTW, United Launch Alliance fell well short of its plans for the year.  One year ago the consortium announced that it expected to perform 21 launches during the year, including 12 Delta 2, 6 Atlas 5, and 3 Delta 4 missions!

What are the reasons for the discrepancy between planned and executed launches?


Damage to LC-37B ruined the Delta IV's year. The January Zenit failure resulted in delays to Atlas, due to similar engines used on the two vehicles. Atlas' year was then completely wrecked by its own failure in June. The delays to the Delta IIs were mostly spacecraft related (I think).

Quote
Jim - 21/12/2007  12:59 PM
Nope, the EELV costs will limit the number of new projects as well as Constellation costs

Surely if launch rates increase, costs will decrease.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8565
  • Likes Given: 1356
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #8 on: 12/21/2007 03:45 pm »
Quote
Analyst - 21/12/2007  1:34 AM

Nice overview, Ed. Wonder what happens to the numbers when Delta II isn't flying anymore.

Analyst

Delta II and Shuttle will probably stop flying about the same time.  They accounted for 58% of U.S. launches this year.  

EELV launch rates will increase a little, but not by much.  There were five EELVs this year.  My understanding is that the rate is supposed to climb, but only to eight or so per year.

There is talk of a new Delta II-class vehicle that could appear after 2010.  Orbital is looking at a "Taurus II".  ATK appears to be proposing an all-solid vehicle with the same payload capability for the Planetspace COTS proposal.  And, of course, SpaceX is working on Falcon 9, which extends beyond Delta II-class.  I believe that at least one of these, but probably only one ultimately, will make it.  These could account for a few launches annually, but probably less than half a dozen.  COTS could end up leading to a steady launch rate, but this is far from guaranteed.

Meanwhile, the Minotaur/Taurus/Pegasus/Falcon 1 category should continue to provide three to six flights per year.

My guess is that U.S. launch totals will fall by about half after 2010 for a few years, plummeting to a dozen or fewer.  We may see a year with less than ten U.S. orbital flights, which hearkens back to the bad old post-Challenger days.  We will almost certainly finally see a year with more orbital launches by China and/or Europe than by the U.S., which will move the U.S. firmly, if not temporarily, out of the realm of "space power" in my opinion.    

 - Ed Kyle

Offline WHAP

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #9 on: 12/22/2007 02:09 am »
Quote
edkyle99 - 20/12/2007  9:44 PM
BTW, United Launch Alliance fell well short of its plans for the year.  One year ago the consortium announced that it expected to perform 21 launches during the year, including 12 Delta 2, 6 Atlas 5, and 3 Delta 4 missions!  Now ULA says that it expects to perform 23 launches in 2008.

Next year will probably be more of the same.  I think there are 6 Atlas V and 3 Delta IV - even with 3 launch pads, that's a lot of Delta II's to make up the rest.  Launcher issues had some effect this year (the 2 Delta IV's at least - I haven't looked at the Delta II's closely to see if launcher or payload issues were worse), but the manifest is typically driven by the spacecraft, and that won't likely change next year.  But here's hoping that it does...
ULA employee.  My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

Offline WHAP

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #10 on: 12/22/2007 02:18 am »
Quote
GW_Simulations - 21/12/2007  7:53 AM
Damage to LC-37B ruined the Delta IV's year. The January Zenit failure resulted in delays to Atlas, due to similar engines used on the two vehicles. Atlas' year was then completely wrecked by its own failure in June. The delays to the Delta IIs were mostly spacecraft related (I think).

In the end, Atlas' year (with respect to # of launches) was unaffected by the issue (I still don't call it a failure) in June.  The two spacecraft that weren't launched (L-28 and ICO) were not ready to launch this year, so the count would be unchanged.
ULA employee.  My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4183
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 109
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #11 on: 12/22/2007 07:59 am »
Quote
WHAP - 22/12/2007  3:09 AM

Quote
edkyle99 - 20/12/2007  9:44 PM
...ULA says that it expects to perform 23 launches in 2008.
...Next year will probably be more of the same.  I think there are 6 Atlas V and 3 Delta IV - even with 3 launch pads, that's a lot of Delta II's to make up the rest...

ULA launch schedule for 2008 (taken from the US Launch Schedule thread):

Date - Satellite(s) - Rocket - Launch Site - Time (GMT)
26 February - NRO L-28 (SDS?) - Atlas V 411 - Vandenberg - 10:15-14:15 - TWINS-B/SBIRS???
13 March - GPS IIR-19 - Delta II 7925 - Canaveral - (GPS-IIRM-6)
21 March - ICO-G1 - Atlas V 421 - Canaveral
16 April? - GeoEye-1 - Delta II 7920 - Vandenberg
17 April? - STSS ATRR - Delta II 7920 - Vandenberg
15 May - NRO L-26 - Delta IV-H -  Canaveral
16 May - GLAST - Delta II 7920H - Canaveral
May - WGS-2 - Atlas V 421 - Canaveral
15 June - Jason 2 - Delta II 7320 - Vandenberg
June - GPS-IIR-20 - Delta II 7925 - Canaveral - (GPS-IIRM-7)
18 July - STSS Demo - Delta II 7920 - Canaveral
20 July - GOES-O - Delta IV-M+(4,2) - Canaveral
July - DMSP-5D3-18 - Atlas V 401 - Vandenberg
August - NRO L-25 - Delta IV-M - Vandenberg
September - WGS-3 - Delta IVM+(5,4) - Canaveral
28 October - LRO/LCROSS - Atlas V 401 - Canaveral
October - GPS-IIR-21 - Delta II 7925 - Canaveral
1 December - SDO - Atlas V 401 - Canaveral
TBD - COSMO-3 - Delta II 7420-10 - Vandenberg
Obviously at least two of those launches will be moved.

That's 19 launches, consisting of 6 Atlas,  4 Delta IV, and 9 Delta II. No idea what the other four are. Probably Delta IIs.

Offline WHAP

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #12 on: 12/22/2007 01:52 pm »
Quote
GW_Simulations - 22/12/2007  1:59 AM

ULA launch schedule for 2008 (taken from the US Launch Schedule thread):

Date - Satellite(s) - Rocket - Launch Site - Time (GMT)
...
1 December - SDO - Atlas V 401 - Canaveral...

I believe SDO has already moved into 2009, so that makes only 18.  The others all look reasonable, but anything more than a few months out has some schedule risk.
ULA employee.  My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4183
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 109
RE: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #13 on: 12/22/2007 02:31 pm »
Quote
WHAP - 22/12/2007  2:52 PM

Quote
GW_Simulations - 22/12/2007  1:59 AM

ULA launch schedule for 2008 (taken from the US Launch Schedule thread):

Date - Satellite(s) - Rocket - Launch Site - Time (GMT)
...
1 December - SDO - Atlas V 401 - Canaveral...

I believe SDO has already moved into 2009, so that makes only 18.  The others all look reasonable, but anything more than a few months out has some schedule risk.

I think it was delayed and then moved back up. Not sure though. I'm going by NASA's schedule for this one.

Offline Frediiiie

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #14 on: 12/31/2007 01:09 am »
The state of US space program is more clear when you break own  launches by commercial vs government.
shuttle 3 govt flights
Atlas 5  4 govt flights
Delta 4H 1 govt flight
Delta 2   5 govt flights 3 commercial flights
Pegasus 1 govt
Minotaur 1 govt
Falcon 1 failed
Sea launch (if you want to count it) 1 failed
That's a total commercial launch manifest of 3.
The difference between growth and bumping along the bottom is commercial launches.
ESA made much of the fact that through 2007 Ariane captured 80% of the commercial launch market.
Ultimately it comes down to one thing.
Costs

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8565
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #15 on: 12/31/2007 03:39 am »
Quote
Frediiiie - 30/12/2007  8:09 PM

The state of US space program is more clear when you break own  launches by commercial vs government.
shuttle 3 govt flights
Atlas 5  4 govt flights
Delta 4H 1 govt flight
Delta 2   5 govt flights 3 commercial flights
Pegasus 1 govt
Minotaur 1 govt
Falcon 1 failed
Sea launch (if you want to count it) 1 failed
That's a total commercial launch manifest of 3.
The difference between growth and bumping along the bottom is commercial launches.
ESA made much of the fact that through 2007 Ariane captured 80% of the commercial launch market.
Ultimately it comes down to one thing.
Costs

I would suggest that it comes down to more than one thing.  Costs, yes, but also government subsidies for the commercial launches that help determine the prices paid for launch by both civil and commercial satellite owners.  And the varying relative value of currencies and wages and health care and retirement and worker safety programs, etc., since the commercial market is international.  

And national policy decisions that force costs up, exemplified by the strange decision to keep and fund two EELV programs when the market should only bear one - and the equally strange decision to develop an unnecessary third national launch system for human missions when two EELV programs already exist that could do the job - or the odd decision made by the U.S. Government to cease production of its most successful and cost-effective launch vehicle, Delta II - the one that performed the only U.S. commercial launches in 2007.

And brute force international politics.  For example, political decisions have kept U.S.-built comsats off of China's launch vehicles for years now.  The world launch scene would look much different today otherwise.

In the end, orbital space flight largely remains under government control.  Government budgets determine how many launches there will be - even of commercial satellites.  Budgets are determined by national defense needs and by a desire to enhance national prestige.      

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Frediiiie

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #16 on: 12/31/2007 05:02 am »
A lot of what you say is true.
National governments do set a lot of the ground rules.
But commercial launches owe allegiance to no one and will go (generally) with the lowest price.
The inability of US launchers to attract commercial customers has got to be worrying.
What is being done about it?
I don't mean COTS. As people are fond of pointing out here SpaceX is at best a long shot.
It's the majors who are bleeding here. Ariane 5 had 6 launches at $211M each
All commercial.
As ESA said they have 80% of the c ommercial market.
(figures from http://www.astronautix.com/articles/costhing.htm)
that's a lot of bucks ULA is not getting.
What are their plans to get some of this in future, or don't they care?

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4183
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #17 on: 12/31/2007 09:27 am »
Quote
Frediiiie - 31/12/2007  2:09 AM
shuttle 3 govt flights
Atlas 5  4 govt flights
Delta 4H 1 govt flight
Delta 2   5 govt flights 3 commercial flights
Pegasus 1 govt
Minotaur 1 govt
Falcon 1 failed
Sea launch (if you want to count it) 1 failed
That's a total commercial launch manifest of 3.

Shuttle, Delta IV and Minotaur are not available to commercial customers. Failures caused commercial launches scheduled for Atlas V, Falcon 1 and Sea Launch to be delayed. Pegasus has always had a low launch rate, and payload issues affected the Delta II.

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #18 on: 12/31/2007 12:09 pm »
Quote
GW_Simulations - 31/12/2007  11:27 AM

Shuttle, Delta IV and Minotaur are not available to commercial customers. Failures caused commercial launches scheduled for Atlas V, Falcon 1 and Sea Launch to be delayed. Pegasus has always had a low launch rate, and payload issues affected the Delta II.

- True for Shuttle and Minotaur. But you have to ask why?
- Delta IV is not offered commercially because Boeing did not want it (for the reasons Ed mentioned).
- Atlas V commercical launches are not delayed by failures. I assume payload issues. Besides, there are not many commercials Atlas V launches planned (for the reasons Ed mentioned).
- Falcon 1 doesn't count until they have demonstrated repeated successful launches.
- Sea Launch is not offering a US vehicle. It is a Russian/Ukraine vehicle.
- Only partially true for Pegasus (late 1990ies).
- What commercial Delta II launch was delayed by payload issues? I don't know one. GLAST, GPS and USAF/NRO do not count.

Analyst

Offline JIS

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1089
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: End of U.S. Launch Year
« Reply #19 on: 12/31/2007 02:14 pm »
Quote
edkyle99 - 31/12/2007  4:39 AM

Quote
Frediiiie - 30/12/2007  8:09 PM

The state of US space program is more clear when you break own  launches by commercial vs government.
shuttle 3 govt flights
Atlas 5  4 govt flights
Delta 4H 1 govt flight
Delta 2   5 govt flights 3 commercial flights
Pegasus 1 govt
Minotaur 1 govt
Falcon 1 failed
Sea launch (if you want to count it) 1 failed
That's a total commercial launch manifest of 3.
The difference between growth and bumping along the bottom is commercial launches.
ESA made much of the fact that through 2007 Ariane captured 80% of the commercial launch market.
Ultimately it comes down to one thing.
Costs

I would suggest that it comes down to more than one thing.  Costs, yes, but also government subsidies for the commercial launches that help determine the prices paid for launch by both civil and commercial satellite owners.  And the varying relative value of currencies and wages and health care and retirement and worker safety programs, etc., since the commercial market is international.  

Atlas 5 option could be more interresting in the future with ever falling USD.

Quote
And national policy decisions that force costs up, exemplified by the strange decision to keep and fund two EELV programs when the market should only bear one

This looks as a standard DoD policy - see F-35 engines or refueling tankers.

Quote
- and the equally strange decision to develop an unnecessary third national launch system for human missions when two EELV programs already exist that could do the job

Ares/Orion is replacement of STS so it doesn't change status quo. Also human rated EELV doesn't exist today.

Quote
- or the odd decision made by the U.S. Government to cease production of its most successful and cost-effective launch vehicle, Delta II - the one that performed the only U.S. commercial launches in 2007.

It increases flight rate of EELV and deletes Delta II related fixed costs.

Quote

And brute force international politics.  For example, political decisions have kept U.S.-built comsats off of China's launch vehicles for years now. The world launch scene would look much different today otherwise.

In the end, orbital space flight largely remains under government control.  Government budgets determine how many launches there will be - even of commercial satellites.  Budgets are determined by national defense needs and by a desire to enhance national prestige.      

 - Ed Kyle

It's not about national prestige. American commsats don't fly american rockets because they can get better deal somewhere else.
'Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill' - Old Greek experience

Tags:
 

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