SpaceX SmallSat Rideshare Program

[RocketLover0119]

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1158437647280271363

https://www.spacex.com/smallsat

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Planned smallsat missions

[intelati]

Without looking at the webpage my first thought was "Additional payload for Starlink?"

Nope, probably not at all... Can't see if there is any more room within the payload adaptor for addition of more sats... Hmm

[niwax]

Yet another piece in the puzzle for creating a new space market. And that extra mass is downright cheap compared to Ryanair carry-on luggage!

This also seems like a great tool to get in contact with people who might be willing to go on an early Starship mission, at some point SX might provide the launch without the customer knowing what it might launch on.

[Wudizzle]

This is the direction things eventually need to go to realize the potential of cheaper access to space. Train leaving ever 'x' months. Buy your ticket and get aboard. If you don't meet schedule, don't worry there will be another train in 'x' months.

[docmordrid]

😵 😙

dedicated Falcon 9 rideshare missions to SSO for ESPA class payloads for as low as $2.25M per mission, which includes up to 150 kg of payload mass.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

SpaceX clearly think there’s a market worth addressing here, which is quite a change from when Falcon 1 was abandoned because they couldn’t find enough customers for it!

Of course ride share is quite different from having your own dedicated launch, so SpaceX will need to be price competitive. I’m not up on pricing from likes of RocketLab, Virgin Orbit, Firefly etc. How does this SpaceX offer compare?

Worth quoting this from image on OP:

SCHEDULE & FLEXIBILITY

With SpaceX’s SmallSat Program, if you are ready to fly during the scheduled launch period, you will fly. Dedicated rideshare missions will not be delayed by co-passenger readiness. Passengers who run into delays that prevent them from launching can apply 100% of monies paid towards the cost of rebooking on a subsequent mission. Depending on timing of change rebooking fees may apply.

[gaballard]

SpaceX clearly think there’s a market worth addressing here, which is quite a change from when Falcon 1 was abandoned because they couldn’t find enough customers for it!

Of course ride share is quite different from having your own dedicated launch, so SpaceX will need to be price competitive. I’m not up on pricing from likes of RocketLab, Virgin Orbit, Firefly etc. How does this SpaceX offer compare?

I believe Rocket Lab charges ~$5M for a 150kg payload to SSO, putting their per kg price at ~$33,333. At $2.25M for the same payload and orbit, SpaceX is only charging $15k per kilogram, which is undercutting RocketLab by more than half. Didn't really think they'd become competitors, but it looks like SpaceX just went for the jugular.

EDIT: To add to that, it really depends on how often SpaceX launches these missions. RocketLab has Electrons going up every quarter at least, with intent to speed up the process. I think there are three scheduled Falcon rideshares under SpaceX's new program, at one a year. Not sure how much effort SpaceX will really put into it; the low cost should get them a decent stream of revenue, but I think RocketLab will still be the one to go to if you want to get your payload into orbit faster.

[su27k]

SCHEDULE & FLEXIBILITY

With SpaceX’s SmallSat Program, if you are ready to fly during the scheduled launch period, you will fly. Dedicated rideshare missions will not be delayed by co-passenger readiness. Passengers who run into delays that prevent them from launching can apply 100% of monies paid towards the cost of rebooking on a subsequent mission. Depending on timing of change rebooking fees may apply.

They're taking some financial risks here, what if by the scheduled launch period only one $2.25M customer is ready to fly?

On the other hand, if they really stick to this promise, it means the projected internal cost of a reused F9 must be quite low, such that they can risk a rideshare mission with few customers.

[ThomasGadd]

SCHEDULE & FLEXIBILITY

With SpaceX’s SmallSat Program, if you are ready to fly during the scheduled launch period, you will fly. Dedicated rideshare missions will not be delayed by co-passenger readiness. Passengers who run into delays that prevent them from launching can apply 100% of monies paid towards the cost of rebooking on a subsequent mission. Depending on timing of change rebooking fees may apply.

They're taking some financial risks here, what if by the scheduled launch period only one $2.25M customer is ready to fly?

On the other hand, if they really stick to this promise, it means the projected internal cost of a reused F9 must be quite low, such that they can risk a rideshare mission with few customers.

As mentioned above, any unfilled missions they fill with Starlink, no risk.

[su27k]

SCHEDULE & FLEXIBILITY

With SpaceX’s SmallSat Program, if you are ready to fly during the scheduled launch period, you will fly. Dedicated rideshare missions will not be delayed by co-passenger readiness. Passengers who run into delays that prevent them from launching can apply 100% of monies paid towards the cost of rebooking on a subsequent mission. Depending on timing of change rebooking fees may apply.

They're taking some financial risks here, what if by the scheduled launch period only one $2.25M customer is ready to fly?

On the other hand, if they really stick to this promise, it means the projected internal cost of a reused F9 must be quite low, such that they can risk a rideshare mission with few customers.

As mentioned above, any unfilled missions they fill with Starlink, no risk.

Rideshare is going to SSO, Starlink is on a different orbit, they can't share the same launch easily.

But I think I figured why they can risk this, it's because F9's capability far exceed the rideshare payload such that a later rideshare launch can pick up the nearly the entire slack from previous one, this way they don't lose money as long as on average the booking on each launch exceed the cost. For example let's say 2 launches each booked 13 customers at $2.25M, which gives $29.25M total per launch (should leave handsome profit if they get fairing reuse working).

Then let's assume 12 out of 13 customers for the 1st launch is not ready, so they launched one $2.25M customer on the 1st launch. The 12 not ready customers can then fly with the other 13 customers together on the 2nd launch, total payload mass = 25 * 150kg = 3.75t, easy for a F9. After two launches, SpaceX got the same revenue no matter how many customers delayed from 1st launch to 2nd launch.

[speedevil]

For example let's say 2 launches each booked 13 customers at $2.25M, which gives $29.25M total per launch (should leave handsome profit if they get fairing reuse working).

Then let's assume 12 out of 13 customers for the 1st launch is not ready, so they launched one $2.25M customer on the 1st launch. The 12 not ready customers can then fly with the other 13 customers together on the 2nd launch, total payload mass = 25 * 150kg = 3.75t, easy for a F9. After two launches, SpaceX got the same revenue no matter how many customers delayed from 1st launch to 2nd launch.

A very, very much smaller fairing might be an interesting option.
A conventional fairing is a fragile high-tech lightweight expensive thing.
A ~3.6m*5m fairing weighing the same as the stock fairing, is pretty much not.

Certainly an interesting service, it will be interesting to see when it first pops up on the manifest.

It can be viewed as intending to gut RocketLabs et al.

It could also be viewed as trying to encourage development of satellite partners they will need in the future.

[Tommyboy]

The amount of VAFB launches has been reduced considerably since the Iridium contract ended. Launch cadence decreased so much, that it even isn't worthwhile keeping an ASDS on the west coast.
This might be the cheapest way for SpaceX to keep SLC 4E active and in good condition, have enough rotation in west coast cores, and the procedures up-to-date in their employees' memories. These launches also won't come close to the maximum RTLS payload weight, so the drone ship won't be required to keep these launches cheap.
And of course on of SpaceX's motto's: Cheapening access to space for (almost) everyone.

[Dante2121]

What do they mean by L12, L6 etc... pricing.

[intelati]

What do they mean by L12, L6 etc... pricing.

See page 56 on this pdf

Days: As in 12 days to launch and 6 days to launch respectively

[gongora]

What do they mean by L12, L6 etc... pricing.

See page 56 on this pdf

Days: As in 12 days to launch and 6 days to launch respectively

Months, not days.

[intelati]

What do they mean by L12, L6 etc... pricing.

See page 56 on this pdf

Days: As in 12 days to launch and 6 days to launch respectively

Months, not days.

God. Page 54. Should have gone with my gut.

*facepalm*

[theinternetftw]

Looking at the payload adapter in the graphic, it looks like there are six 15" ports and two levels of four 24" ports.  You can pay for the top spot as well, but that's not a standard offering.  Each 15" port is being offered at $2.25M (includes up to 150kg nominal mass).  A 24" port goes for $4.5M (includes up to 300kg nominal mass).

A full house would be 6*$2.25M + 8*$4.5M, or $49.5M.

[philw1776]

Maybe use a smaller cheap "heavy" aluminum fairing costing say ~$250K or whatever.  F9 even with RTLS could handle the extra mass.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Image from SpaceX website. I assume shows something like planned payload adaptor?