Author Topic: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.  (Read 29901 times)

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 13
SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« on: 06/09/2014 09:30 am »
I did not read this info anywhere on the forum...

New prices 61,2M for F9, 85M for 6.4t on the FH.
Up from 56,5M and 77M respectively.

Prices for the entire FH performance are no longer quoted.
It makes the FH only 12 percent cheaper than the target for the Ariane 6.

http://www.spacex.com/about/capabilities

Offline Mader Levap

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 976
  • Liked: 447
  • Likes Given: 561
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #1 on: 06/09/2014 10:03 am »
It makes the FH only 12 percent cheaper than the target for the Ariane 6.
Estimated target price for paper rocket (Ariane 6, to be clear) that may very well be already obsolete at arrival is meaningless.
« Last Edit: 06/09/2014 12:20 pm by Mader Levap »
Be successful.  Then tell the haters to (BLEEP) off. - deruch
...and if you have failure, tell it anyway.

Offline rpapo

Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #2 on: 06/09/2014 10:18 am »
Estimated target price for paper rocket that may very well be already obsolete at arrival is meaningless.
Leaving aside the fact that its schedule has been slipping, and slipping (as everything SpaceX-related seems to), just why do you think it will be "obsolete upon arrival"?
Following the space program since before Apollo 8.

Offline peter-b

  • Dr. Peter Brett
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 651
  • Oxford, UK
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #3 on: 06/09/2014 10:20 am »
Estimated target price for paper rocket that may very well be already obsolete at arrival is meaningless.
Leaving aside the fact that its schedule has been slipping, and slipping (as everything SpaceX-related seems to), just why do you think it will be "obsolete upon arrival"?

Mader Levap is referring to the Ariane 6 as "obsolete at arrival", not FH.  Put the pitchfork on the ground and step away slowly.  ;)
Research Scientist (Sensors), Sharp Laboratories of Europe, UK

Offline rpapo

Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #4 on: 06/09/2014 10:26 am »
Mader Levap is referring to the Ariane 6 as "obsolete at arrival", not FH.  Put the pitchfork on the ground and step away slowly.  ;)
Oops.  Too early in the morning here...   :-[  And I'm not a rabid SpaceX fan-boy, foaming at the mouth.  I like what they are doing, but don't worship them as some around here seem to.
Following the space program since before Apollo 8.

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #5 on: 06/09/2014 10:31 am »
It makes the FH only 12 percent cheaper than the target for the Ariane 6.
Estimated target price for paper rocket that may very well be already obsolete at arrival is meaningless.

Stay objective please, if I post facts that prices are moving up. Responding that SpaceX will somehow with magic pixie dust make other launchers obsolete is not really objective.

Fact remains prices went higher and they are now hardly cheaper than Proton, which is losing marketshare to the Ariane 5 ECA. So if the FH ends up with a similar reliability record as the Proton (90% and more for ILS launches) it is uncertain that SpaceX will disrupt the market at these prices.

Anyone claiming that the doom of ils and arianespace due to spacex is inevitable needs to check the facts.

Offline Nathan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
  • Sydney
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #6 on: 06/09/2014 10:38 am »
Wonder how much the other launch companies will increase prices this year too? I assume inflation affects all in the industry.
Given finite cash, if we want to go to Mars then we should go to Mars.

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #7 on: 06/09/2014 10:46 am »
I think their strategy is simple:

Plan A:
1) Contact clients to check if they prefer a reused first stage for a price reduction
2) If clients don't feel the price reduction is worth the risk, go to Plan B

Plan B:
1) Test if F9 first stage can return to launch site
2) Increase prices for disposable cores, therefore making the reused cores more appealing

To sum it up: they want to push clients to the reused cores, keeping some premium clients on the first flight of a new core.
 

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #8 on: 06/09/2014 11:24 am »
1) FH's performance is far greater than Ariane 6. Different classes of rocket by a lot. Apples, oranges etc.

2) has anyone considered the US inflation rate (about 3.3%) + the devaluation of the dollar since the original prices were set?

DM

Offline Mader Levap

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 976
  • Liked: 447
  • Likes Given: 561
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #9 on: 06/09/2014 12:32 pm »
Stay objective please, if I post facts that prices are moving up.
I did not denied that prices of SpaceX rockets went up. I denied that comparison with target price of Ariane 6 is meaningful.

Responding that SpaceX will somehow with magic pixie dust make other launchers obsolete is not really objective.
If they succeed with reusablity, any new expendable rocket will automatically be obsolete. It is as simple as that.

Explanation: old expendables will hang on for a while thanks to their launch history and proven reliability. Brand new expendable LV? No chance of surviving, no point in creating. Ariane 6 IMVHO should be at least partially reusable. Of course, feasibility of that, with solids and all, is completely different question...
Be successful.  Then tell the haters to (BLEEP) off. - deruch
...and if you have failure, tell it anyway.

Offline J-V

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 101
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #10 on: 06/09/2014 12:36 pm »
If they succeed with reusablity, any new expendable rocket will automatically be obsolete. It is as simple as that.

If they succeed with rapid and complete reusability. Shuttle was reusable, but it wasn't cheap. And not only because they threw away SRBs and ET.

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1459
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 914
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #11 on: 06/09/2014 12:41 pm »
As mentioned in another thread 10% is about right for a few years of inflation.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7347
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #12 on: 06/09/2014 12:42 pm »
If they succeed with reusablity, any new expendable rocket will automatically be obsolete. It is as simple as that.

If they succeed with rapid and complete reusability. Shuttle was reusable, but it wasn't cheap. And not only because they threw away SRBs and ET.

Even after more than 30 years of flying, Shuttle was still an experimental vehicle that was never official declared to be fully operational. It was more "rebuildable" than it was "reusable". After every flight there were a significant number of one-of-a-kind tiles that needed to be manufactured and replaced. Each of the 3 RS-25's underwent a complete tear-down and rebuild. The expense of that kind of "reusable" is enormous and extremely labor intensive and time consuming. OTOH, landing an aircraft, refueling it and taking off again is "reusable". That's what SpaceX is aiming for.
« Last Edit: 06/09/2014 12:44 pm by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Mongo62

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 834
  • Likes Given: 156
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #13 on: 06/09/2014 12:46 pm »
I did not read this info anywhere on the forum...

New prices 61,2M for F9, 85M for 6.4t on the FH.
Up from 56,5M and 77M respectively.

Prices for the entire FH performance are no longer quoted.
It makes the FH only 12 percent cheaper than the target for the Ariane 6.

http://www.spacex.com/about/capabilities

1. Price increase for F9: 8.3%

2. US general price inflation since Jan 2011: 7.7%

3. Real increase in price over 3.5 years: 0.6%

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2443
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 410
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #14 on: 06/09/2014 01:08 pm »
Truth be told,

I'm rather suprised it's taken SpaceX this long to up their prices.  They've managed to keep the costs low for about a decade, but it had to happen sooner or later.
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline J-V

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 101
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #15 on: 06/09/2014 01:23 pm »
If they succeed with reusablity, any new expendable rocket will automatically be obsolete. It is as simple as that.

If they succeed with rapid and complete reusability. Shuttle was reusable, but it wasn't cheap. And not only because they threw away SRBs and ET.

Even after more than 30 years of flying, Shuttle was still an experimental vehicle that was never official declared to be fully operational. It was more "rebuildable" than it was "reusable". After every flight there were a significant number of one-of-a-kind tiles that needed to be manufactured and replaced. Each of the 3 RS-25's underwent a complete tear-down and rebuild. The expense of that kind of "reusable" is enormous and extremely labor intensive and time consuming. OTOH, landing an aircraft, refueling it and taking off again is "reusable". That's what SpaceX is aiming for.

Thanks for writing my thoughts! :D Reusability has to be done right for it to be beneficial. If the cost of materials, facilities, work hours etc. to refurbish a rocket is higher than the cost of making a new one, it won't help.

Offline Mongo62

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 834
  • Likes Given: 156
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #16 on: 06/09/2014 02:48 pm »
Thanks for writing my thoughts! :D Reusability has to be done right for it to be beneficial. If the cost of materials, facilities, work hours etc. to refurbish a rocket is higher than the cost of making a new one, it won't help.

STS "reusability" was definitely political in nature. Sure, it ended up as a vastly more expensive (and dangerous to the crew) system than a purely expendable crewed rocket would have been, and this was a quite predictable result, but hey, it's reusable!

The same type of thinking applied to the first Hubble repair mission. It would have been significantly cheaper to simply build, and launch with an expendable rocket, a copy of the Hubble with the correct optics, not to mention that the copy would have had better performance than the repaired original ended up with, and the original un-repaired Hubble could still have been used for spectroscopy and wide-angle imaging, almost doubling the total science return. But it was politically necessary to use STS in a repair mission, even if it was technically and financially an inferior solution.

On the other hand, what SpaceX is trying for is an entirely different animal. The big unknown in my opinion is whether the market will expand to the point where a fleet of reusable launchers makes financial sense. But it certainly looks right now like it should be technically feasible.
« Last Edit: 06/09/2014 02:50 pm by Mongo62 »

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #17 on: 06/09/2014 05:40 pm »
Explanation: old expendables will hang on for a while thanks to their launch history and proven reliability. Brand new expendable LV? No chance of surviving, no point in creating. Ariane 6 IMVHO should be at least partially reusable. Of course, feasibility of that, with solids and all, is completely different question...
If a Spacex reusable gave you the same payload to orbit and is fully reusable.

Which it doesn't and it isn't. The latter should change, the former will not.  :(

The pricing of an RLV (especially when the company both builds and operates it) is not as simple as you think.  :(

I found t very interesting that when Shotwell talked she said a full F9 launch was about $100m, like an Ariane 5, once all the trimmings were included.

Shuttle taught many valuable lessons about reusability. Mainly how not to do it.  :( I will remind people most of the STS's difficulties came from the insane funding profile that Nixon's OMB insisted on. A fair chunk of the rest came from the decision to award the SRB contract to the company rated last in the original selection competition.  :(

Neither is an issue for Spacex.
« Last Edit: 06/09/2014 06:06 pm by john smith 19 »
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline bob the martian

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Liked: 112
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #18 on: 06/09/2014 06:02 pm »
Truth be told,

I'm rather suprised it's taken SpaceX this long to up their prices.  They've managed to keep the costs low for about a decade, but it had to happen sooner or later.

I've often felt that SpaceX were keeping their prices artificially low just to attract business (nothing empirical to base that on, just a gut feeling of "it can't be *that* cheap relative to everyone else").  Not enough to operate at a huge loss, and ISTR them claiming to be profitable, but cash flow has probably been a bit tight.  Now that they've had some successful launches and are sailing into uncharted waters with F9R and DII and MCT and Raptor, they feel justified in adjusting their prices.  I'm surprised it's as little as 10%, honestly.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #19 on: 06/09/2014 06:23 pm »
Now SpaceX will be able to offer 10% off for flights with reused first stages. ;)
« Last Edit: 06/09/2014 06:25 pm by yg1968 »

Offline RocketGoBoom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
  • Idaho
  • Liked: 345
  • Likes Given: 315
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #20 on: 06/09/2014 06:42 pm »
I doubt SpaceX is pricing used 1st stages into the equation yet. Their quote prices are purely for an expendable rocket.

If they start landing first stages in full HD on Youtube, then I expect they will figure out a pricing model and discuss that privately with a few customers to see if anyone wants to be the first test payload at a HUGE discount.

Once they have flown one or two payloads successfully with a used 1st stage, THEN we will likely see an official price listed on their website. At that point they will have a more complete accounting of their costs to do all of this.

Offline 2552

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 522
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #21 on: 06/09/2014 07:38 pm »
One thing that may be interesting is the previous listed prices for 2013 said "Paid in full standard launch prices", while the new prices say "Standard payment plan (2016 launch)". Maybe the new prices take an installment- or milestone-based payment plan into account? Would that amount to paying more in total than an up-front price?
« Last Edit: 06/09/2014 07:40 pm by 2552 »

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #22 on: 06/09/2014 07:47 pm »
2) has anyone considered the US inflation rate (about 3.3%) + the devaluation of the dollar since the original prices were set?
Whenever i hear about these "magic $1000/lb to LEO barriers" etc i keep thinking that this will never happen because inflation will keep outpacing most of the progress being made.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #23 on: 06/09/2014 08:25 pm »
I doubt SpaceX is pricing used 1st stages into the equation yet. Their quote prices are purely for an expendable rocket.

If they start landing first stages in full HD on Youtube, then I expect they will figure out a pricing model and discuss that privately with a few customers to see if anyone wants to be the first test payload at a HUGE discount.

Once they have flown one or two payloads successfully with a used 1st stage, THEN we will likely see an official price listed on their website. At that point they will have a more complete accounting of their costs to do all of this.

Yes, I know. I was just kidding. Elon estimated to be able to offer a 25% discount for reuse of the first stage. 

Quote
Eventually, Musk hopes to outfit the Falcon rockets with landing legs and offer a discount launch service on used rockets.

“Ultimately, I think we could see a drop in cost per launch of 25 percent or more, just from reuse of the boost stage,” he said.

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/37094musk-says-spacex-being-%E2%80%9Cextremely-paranoid%E2%80%9D-as-it-readies-for-falcon-9%E2%80%99s
« Last Edit: 06/09/2014 08:35 pm by yg1968 »

Offline GalacticIntruder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 512
  • Pet Peeve:I hate the word Downcomer. Ban it.
  • Huntsville, AL
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #24 on: 06/09/2014 08:42 pm »
Nothing surprising.

Musk has said before, inflation adjustments, all else being equal.

FH presser 2011.



What's weird is the FH is 85 mil for 6.4mT or less. It was 77-128 mil depending on mass and cross-feed. F9 is already contracted 5300kg.  Heaviest sats built and launched so far was 7055kg (6910kg) on the A5. I wonder if SpaceX sees the GEO sat builders going lighter, targeting the F9 capabilities, and away from A5/A6, Proton, FH etc.

Is the FH-expendable, a victim of the success of F9v1.x?

Since there are very few BLEO launches, FH might rarely be used.  A 3 core reusable FH might make price-performance sense, though.
« Last Edit: 06/10/2014 04:54 pm by GalacticIntruder »
"And now the Sun will fade, All we are is all we made." Breaking Benjamin

Offline cryptoanarchy

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • usa
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #25 on: 06/09/2014 10:08 pm »
2) has anyone considered the US inflation rate (about 3.3%) + the devaluation of the dollar since the original prices were set?
Whenever i hear about these "magic $1000/lb to LEO barriers" etc i keep thinking that this will never happen because inflation will keep outpacing most of the progress being made.

I think we will be there in 5 years.  With three core recovery on the Falcon 9H, when supply outpaces demand we should be there.  With second stage recovery and a full load (up to the limits of full re-usability) that price point will be VERY profitable for SpaceX. 

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #26 on: 06/09/2014 10:37 pm »
It makes the FH only 12 percent cheaper than the target for the Ariane 6.

You use the word "only" as if somehow this indicates SpaceX and Ariane are neck-and-neck.

Really, what it means is that the rocket SpaceX is building today to fly next year has a price that can't even be matched by Ariane in their best-case projections for a rocket that won't fly until next decade, and which has had no detailed design work done at all.  And that in spite of the fact that the SpaceX rocket has far more performance.

Offline Vultur

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1919
  • Liked: 762
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #27 on: 06/10/2014 01:58 am »
2) has anyone considered the US inflation rate (about 3.3%) + the devaluation of the dollar since the original prices were set?
Whenever i hear about these "magic $1000/lb to LEO barriers" etc i keep thinking that this will never happen because inflation will keep outpacing most of the progress being made.

Isn't it really the real (inflation-adjusted) cost that matters, though?

Offline brihath

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 28
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #28 on: 06/10/2014 02:10 am »
In the discussion, it is important not to confuse price with cost and they can adjust independently of each other.  I would not be surprised if the quoted prices are just guidelines and individual launch costs can vary significantly, especially when factoring in potential reusability of the first stage.

I am also confident that Mr. Musk will make sure his pricing structure is consistently cheaper than the competition.

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #29 on: 06/10/2014 04:20 am »
In the discussion, it is important not to confuse price with cost and they can adjust independently of each other.  I would not be surprised if the quoted prices are just guidelines and individual launch costs can vary significantly, especially when factoring in potential reusability of the first stage.

I am also confident that Mr. Musk will make sure his pricing structure is consistently cheaper than the competition.

IIRC Gwynne in her recent interview stated that SpaceX spread their costs evenly across all their launches and this enables them to quote standard prices.  No favourites apparently.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #30 on: 06/10/2014 04:34 am »
Whenever i hear about these "magic $1000/lb to LEO barriers" etc i keep thinking that this will never happen because inflation will keep outpacing most of the progress being made.

Isn't it really the real (inflation-adjusted) cost that matters, though?

Of course, but i have not heard any of the "cheap access to space" preachers ever mention an inflation-adjusted magic $1045.34/lb barrier :)
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline dror

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 730
  • Israel
  • Liked: 245
  • Likes Given: 593
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #31 on: 06/10/2014 05:09 am »
IIRC Gwynne in her recent interview stated that SpaceX spread their costs evenly across all their launches and this enables them to quote standard prices.  No favourites apparently.
She also said that every launch is counted for about 100 mil$.
What does that mean?
Space is hard immensely complex and high risk !

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3628
  • 92129
  • Liked: 1145
  • Likes Given: 360
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #32 on: 06/10/2014 05:39 am »
IIRC Gwynne in her recent interview stated that SpaceX spread their costs evenly across all their launches and this enables them to quote standard prices.  No favourites apparently.
She also said that every launch is counted for about 100 mil$.
What does that mean?

For one thing, it means that they have counted for about 200 mil$ so far this year. Most likely, revenues. And for another thing, they were hoping for as I recall, 10 launches or $1 B this year.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline dror

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 730
  • Israel
  • Liked: 245
  • Likes Given: 593
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #33 on: 06/10/2014 05:48 am »
IIRC Gwynne in her recent interview stated that SpaceX spread their costs evenly across all their launches and this enables them to quote standard prices.  No favourites apparently.
She also said that every launch is counted for about 100 mil$.
What does that mean?

For one thing, it means that they have counted for about 200 mil$ so far this year. Most likely, revenues. And for another thing, they were hoping for as I recall, 10 launches or $1 B this year.
But the price of a single launch is about 56 mil, so where does the diffrence come from?
Space is hard immensely complex and high risk !

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #34 on: 06/10/2014 06:13 am »
IIRC Gwynne in her recent interview stated that SpaceX spread their costs evenly across all their launches and this enables them to quote standard prices.  No favourites apparently.
She also said that every launch is counted for about 100 mil$.
What does that mean?

For one thing, it means that they have counted for about 200 mil$ so far this year. Most likely, revenues. And for another thing, they were hoping for as I recall, 10 launches or $1 B this year.
But the price of a single launch is about 56 mil, so where does the diffrence come from?

Part of that difference is probably that some launches are for Dragon and they get paid for the Dragon mission in addition to the launch vehicle.  Part of the difference is also probably that they charge more for government launches because the government demands much more oversight and paperwork.  And part of the difference might be Falcon Heavy launches above 6 tons to GTO, which are at a higher price.


Offline CuddlyRocket

Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #35 on: 06/10/2014 07:07 am »
In the discussion, it is important not to confuse price with cost and they can adjust independently of each other.

Yeah, when Gwynne Shotwell is talking about winning 100% of the contracts for F9-class payloads at least some of the financial types on the board are going to be asking if SpaceX is pricing under what the market will bear!

If their unit costs of manufacture haven't actually risen - which is possible for what is a new product line - then raising prices by $5 million is an extra $5 million profit per launch!

Offline chapi

  • Member
  • Posts: 44
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #36 on: 06/10/2014 07:31 am »
New prices 61,2M for F9, 85M for 6.4t on the FH.
Up from 56,5M and 77M respectively.

By the way, does anyone know if those price include spacecraft prelaunch processing (fueling... etc. kind of stuff performed by Astrotech), or if they come on top of SpaceX quoted prices?

I have the feeling that these costs are accounted for in some of other launchers standard prices (Proton, for instance).

Thanks

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8839
  • Lower 48
  • Liked: 60430
  • Likes Given: 1304
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #37 on: 06/10/2014 11:19 am »
IIRC Gwynne in her recent interview stated that SpaceX spread their costs evenly across all their launches and this enables them to quote standard prices.  No favourites apparently.
She also said that every launch is counted for about 100 mil$.
What does that mean?

For one thing, it means that they have counted for about 200 mil$ so far this year. Most likely, revenues. And for another thing, they were hoping for as I recall, 10 launches or $1 B this year.
But the price of a single launch is about 56 mil, so where does the diffrence come from?
CRS
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline Mader Levap

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 976
  • Liked: 447
  • Likes Given: 561
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #38 on: 06/10/2014 11:31 am »
at least some of the financial types on the board are going to be asking if SpaceX is pricing under what the market will bear!
Uhh, you know that at this moment Elon Musk answers only to Elon Musk, riiiight?

France is unhappy, and the French don't mince words.
Sounds pretty much hypocritical, considering size of subsidy Ariane is getting every year. At least with SpaceX you get more bang for buck, quite literally (as rocket launches are basically controlled explosions).
Be successful.  Then tell the haters to (BLEEP) off. - deruch
...and if you have failure, tell it anyway.

Offline Foxodi

  • Member
  • Posts: 1
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #39 on: 06/10/2014 11:37 am »
2) has anyone considered the US inflation rate (about 3.3%) + the devaluation of the dollar since the original prices were set?
Whenever i hear about these "magic $1000/lb to LEO barriers" etc i keep thinking that this will never happen because inflation will keep outpacing most of the progress being made.

Isn't it really the real (inflation-adjusted) cost that matters, though?

Isn't the magical price point based on the potential tourism market? The target customers for such a market are the mega-rich, whose wealth is increasing at a far greater rate then inflation, so actually even if launch costs rise in real terms we are still getting closer to the magical price point!
« Last Edit: 06/10/2014 11:44 am by Foxodi »

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #40 on: 06/10/2014 01:45 pm »
Whenever i hear about these "magic $1000/lb to LEO barriers" etc i keep thinking that this will never happen because inflation will keep outpacing most of the progress being made.

Isn't it really the real (inflation-adjusted) cost that matters, though?

Of course, but i have not heard any of the "cheap access to space" preachers ever mention an inflation-adjusted magic $1045.34/lb barrier :)

The point is that we've been talking about the $1,000 per pound barrier since the early 1970s!  In today's dollars, that's $6,000 per pound -- F9 at 13.15Mt for $61.5M is $2,126 per pound and FH at 53 Mt for $128M (now uncertain?) will be $1,184 per pound.  Shuttle at $25,000 and EELVs at $10,000 per pound are(were) still north of the barrier in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Bottom line is the $1000/lb to LEO barrier has been shattered.
Maybe why SpaceX is stirring the pot so vigorously.

And this is without reusable rockets, which could reduce cost by 10x per Shotwell's $5-7M per launch goal.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #41 on: 06/10/2014 02:37 pm »
Welcome to the forum!  I only started posting earlier this year, so it won't take you long to feel like a regular contributor.  Now to the topic at hand...

Isn't the magical price point based on the potential tourism market?

Tourism has not been mentioned as a significant potential market, and I doubt it would be given the challenges involved.  Remember that all the space tourism so far has been to travel to the ISS and spend time there, so it's not the rides to/from space that are important, but the destinations.  And we only have one space-constrained destination right now.

Quote
The target customers for such a market are the mega-rich...

There is an assumption that there is a segment of the wealthy population that would be willing to spend big bucks to travel to space, but just based on the relatively small number of people that have bought tickets on Virgin Galactic I think that segment would be really small.  Too small to risk a business model on.

Musk and company seem focused on the commercial & government launch market for non-crew transportation, but no doubt hope that the government Commercial Crew business leads to Bigelow starting up their private space station business.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Burninate

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #42 on: 06/10/2014 02:53 pm »
Whenever i hear about these "magic $1000/lb to LEO barriers" etc i keep thinking that this will never happen because inflation will keep outpacing most of the progress being made.

Isn't it really the real (inflation-adjusted) cost that matters, though?

Of course, but i have not heard any of the "cheap access to space" preachers ever mention an inflation-adjusted magic $1045.34/lb barrier :)

The point is that we've been talking about the $1,000 per pound barrier since the early 1970s!  In today's dollars, that's $6,000 per pound -- F9 at 13.15Mt for $61.5M is $2,126 per pound and FH at 53 Mt for $128M (now uncertain?) will be $1,184 per pound.  Shuttle at $25,000 and EELVs at $10,000 per pound are(were) still north of the barrier in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Bottom line is the $1000/lb to LEO barrier has been shattered.
Maybe why SpaceX is stirring the pot so vigorously.

And this is without reusable rockets, which could reduce cost by 10x per Shotwell's $5-7M per launch goal.

And those of us who fall into the category of 'Unilaterally Metricated Americans' have started referring to a $1000/kg barrier, to top it all off!

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #43 on: 06/10/2014 04:10 pm »
Bottom line is the $1000/lb to LEO barrier has been shattered.
Maybe why SpaceX is stirring the pot so vigorously.

Yes, 70'ies $1000/lb has been shattered, yet the is no great wave of emigration to O'Neill colonies and constellations of solar power satellites circling the earth. IMHO because launch costs are only a relatively small part of the puzzle.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #44 on: 06/10/2014 04:33 pm »
December 2010 price for F9 was $56m, but that was for 4.68t to GTO. Today's $61m is for 4.85t to GTO. At an average inflation rate of 2% (last 4 years--2011, 2012, 2013, 2014--had an average of 2.05% inflation so this is slightly conservative), the real price per ton to GTO is actually slightly /lower/ for F9 now than it was in 2010 (about 2% lower, actually).

Basically, the real specific price is unchanged.
« Last Edit: 06/10/2014 04:34 pm by Robotbeat »
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 oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5304
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #45 on: 06/10/2014 07:51 pm »
The barrier price point is related to a new space industry lauch capability price point that is needed for the business case to close.

So what new industry is talked about in relation to the $1000/lb.

In 1970's SPS business case closed at $285/lb.  Now it is more like $500/lb.  This is because the US kw/hr busbar prices have not risen at the same rate of inflation.  The barrier is almost directly related to busbar price. The new EPA rules may cause a sharp rise in the busbar prices, in that case the barrier price for SPS will rise also.

Now enough OT and back to SpaceX priceing.  Manpower raises that match inflation is the largest reason for price increases.  If you don't keep saleries up with inflation people leave.  Most of the cost of any LV is the labor and not the material.

Offline CuddlyRocket

Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #46 on: 06/11/2014 10:39 am »
at least some of the financial types on the board are going to be asking if SpaceX is pricing under what the market will bear!
Uhh, you know that at this moment Elon Musk answers only to Elon Musk, riiiight?

I said 'asking' not 'insisting'; there's nothing to stop Elon listening to them! :) (In any event, majority shareholders don't have carte blanche; when acting as a director they still have to take account of the interests of minorities or risk facing a shareholder oppression lawsuit.)
« Last Edit: 06/11/2014 10:40 am by CuddlyRocket »

Offline rpapo

Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #47 on: 06/11/2014 10:52 am »
I said 'asking' not 'insisting'; there's nothing to stop Elon listening to them! :) (In any event, majority shareholders don't have carte blanche; when acting as a director they still have to take account of the interests of minorities or risk facing a shareholder oppression lawsuit.)
Maybe I'm missing something here, but it is my understanding that SpaceX is privately held.  In other words, it does not have stockholders, nor a board acting as their proxy.  Now I am aware that there are a handful of private investors who have provided a certain amount of capital in support of the company, but those investors seem to be happy to let Elon Musk run the show.

AFAIK, it is not at all like the arrangement at Tesla.  As long as Elon manages to avoid going into the red (and thereby requiring more outside investment or loans), he should be able to remain in control.
Following the space program since before Apollo 8.

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #48 on: 06/11/2014 11:44 am »

Bottom line is the $1000/lb to LEO barrier has been shattered.


FYI, starting with Proton in the nineties. With 36M for a Proton K at unsustainable price, later 52M for a 3 Proton K block buy. I don't know what the price of a Proton is now, but those saying I shouldn't compare it with Ariane 6 because it's paper, well around 2000 a Proton was offered as low as US$70M, keep in mind these prices have gone up, yes, but Proton performance is a lot higher than F9.

http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/3-2002/mas/kclrss/?form=print

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #49 on: 06/11/2014 04:34 pm »
Bottom line is the $1000/lb to LEO barrier has been shattered.
Maybe why SpaceX is stirring the pot so vigorously.

Yes, 70'ies $1000/lb has been shattered, yet the is no great wave of emigration to O'Neill colonies and constellations of solar power satellites circling the earth. IMHO because launch costs are only a relatively small part of the puzzle.
There are 2 (possibly 3) parts to this.
1) Those prices must be sustainably low for years for the effect to start to show through given the glacial speed at which new payloads are built.
2) The LV market is one of those where reliability is at least as important as cost. ELV reliability stats are slow to build, easy to damage and prone to peoples perception  that a vehicle is "too cheap" to be reliable.  :( Russia builds their ELVs to a Safety Factor of 2.0, ULA to 1.25. Costa a bit in payload, saves a lot in (expensive) structural analyst hours to prove that no flight load will exceed the wafer thin margins you built your vehicle on.
3) Historically LV suppliers haven't cared if they could return payloads to Earth. Had they been able to the cost of those payloads could have been substantially reduced as a faulty satellite could be returned for repair. No triplicated hardware, no hugely elaborate redundancy management to control it.

Time will tell if Spacex can offer ULA reliability at Ariane prices in the US.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #50 on: 06/11/2014 04:43 pm »

2) The LV market is one of those where reliability is at least as important as cost. ELV reliability stats are slow to build, easy to damage and prone to peoples perception  that a vehicle is "too cheap" to be reliable.  :( Russia builds their ELVs to a Safety Factor of 2.0, ULA to 1.25. Costa a bit in payload, saves a lot in (expensive) structural analyst hours to prove that no flight load will exceed the wafer thin margins you built your vehicle on.
3) Historically LV suppliers haven't cared if they could return payloads to Earth. Had they been able to the cost of those payloads could have been substantially reduced as a faulty satellite could be returned for repair. No triplicated hardware, no hugely elaborate redundancy management to control it.


2. Designing a vehicle to 2.0 vs 1.25 takes the same amount of analyst time.   The model is the model and the loads are the loads.

3.  Not so, payload would have to be over built to handle return loads.

Offline CuddlyRocket

Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #51 on: 06/12/2014 06:40 am »
I said 'asking' not 'insisting'; there's nothing to stop Elon listening to them! :) (In any event, majority shareholders don't have carte blanche; when acting as a director they still have to take account of the interests of minorities or risk facing a shareholder oppression lawsuit.)
Maybe I'm missing something here, but it is my understanding that SpaceX is privately held.  In other words, it does not have stockholders, nor a board acting as their proxy.
No, the difference between a private and public company is not that one has stockholders and the other doesn't; it's that a public company is one that issues share to the public, and which shares are traded on a public market. It's clear that SpaceX has shareholders other than Elon; both from statements of private investors and because they run an employee share scheme.

Quote
Now I am aware that there are a handful of private investors who have provided a certain amount of capital in support of the company, but those investors seem to be happy to let Elon Musk run the show.

They're happy to let Elon run the show as long as they're happy with how he runs the show.

Quote
AFAIK, it is not at all like the arrangement at Tesla.  As long as Elon manages to avoid going into the red (and thereby requiring more outside investment or loans), he should be able to remain in control.

Control gives him wide discretion; but not carte blanche. He still has to take into account the interests of minority shareholders.

But this is getting off-topic. The point I was making was that if SpaceX is winning all the contractual competitions someone would be asking if they were pricing things too cheaply.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #52 on: 06/12/2014 07:56 am »
2. Designing a vehicle to 2.0 vs 1.25 takes the same amount of analyst time.   The model is the model and the loads are the loads.
Not in the coupled loads analysis you have to run for every payload so you don't shake the payload apart or start a resonance in the payload that shakes the LV apart. Since you've commented extensively on "missioni assurance" and the unexpected costs Spacex will incur when when they launch USAF payloads I'd have thought my meaning was obvious.
Quote
3.  Not so, payload would have to be over built to handle return loads.
That would depend on how the fairing was designed to protect a returning payload during re-entry, wouldn't it?
A fairing designed to go both ways would likely be a very different beast to the kind we currently use. Of course for an LV mfg to have done that there would have to have been a market which incentivized them to do so, and that never happened.  :(

MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #53 on: 06/12/2014 01:30 pm »

1.  Not in the coupled loads analysis you have to run for every payload so you don't shake the payload apart or start a resonance in the payload that shakes the LV apart. Since you've commented extensively on "missioni assurance" and the unexpected costs Spacex will incur when when they launch USAF payloads I'd have thought my meaning was obvious.

2.  That would depend on how the fairing was designed to protect a returning payload during re-entry, wouldn't it?
A fairing designed to go both ways would likely be a very different beast to the kind we currently use. Of course for an LV mfg to have done that there would have to have been a market which incentivized them to do so, and that never happened.  :(

1.  1.25 vs 2.0 doesn't change that.   The analysis has to be done either way.  Yes, they would be different models, but the work is the same.

2.  See shuttle.  Landing adds new loads. 
« Last Edit: 06/12/2014 01:30 pm by Jim »

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #54 on: 06/12/2014 07:47 pm »
1.  1.25 vs 2.0 doesn't change that.   The analysis has to be done either way.  Yes, they would be different models, but the work is the same.
Difference is when you run that analysis and the loads are 25% or more higher than maximum you're in a re-design and re-analysis cycle. With the Russian approach you'd have to be 100% out before a new re-design and analysis cycle is needed.
Quote
2.  See shuttle.  Landing adds new loads.
Was a vehicle whose payload take off vertically and landed horizontally ever likely to not have new loads?  :(
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #55 on: 06/12/2014 08:01 pm »

Was a vehicle whose payload take off vertically and landed horizontally ever likely to not have new loads?  :(

Landing in any orientation is going to have different loads than experienced during launch and flight to orbit.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1553
  • Liked: 501
  • Likes Given: 759
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #56 on: 06/12/2014 08:08 pm »
1.  1.25 vs 2.0 doesn't change that.   The analysis has to be done either way.  Yes, they would be different models, but the work is the same.
Difference is when you run that analysis and the loads are 25% or more higher than maximum you're in a re-design and re-analysis cycle. With the Russian approach you'd have to be 100% out before a new re-design and analysis cycle is needed.

What you're describing isn't safety factor; you're describing margins.

Safety factor is off limits. If you have a really high safety factor, you could re-qualify at a lower one, but then you're just admitting you should have picked the lower number in the first place.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #57 on: 06/12/2014 08:09 pm »

Difference is when you run that analysis and the loads are 25% or more higher than maximum you're in a re-design and re-analysis cycle. With the Russian approach you'd have to be 100% out before a new re-design and analysis cycle is needed.

No, because LV loads margin does not translate to spacecraft loads margin.  What margins the launch vehicle is designed to has little bearing on the spacecraft loads.  The spacecraft is designed to the environment specified by the LV. 

Load analysis are redone because the spacecraft is seeing exceedances, not the launch vehicle.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #58 on: 06/13/2014 06:31 am »
No, because LV loads margin does not translate to spacecraft loads margin.  What margins the launch vehicle is designed to has little bearing on the spacecraft loads.  The spacecraft is designed to the environment specified by the LV. 

Load analysis are redone because the spacecraft is seeing exceedances, not the launch vehicle.
There's a reason why they call it a coupled loads analysis.  :(

Superficially there's no way a payload that's somewhere around 30x the mass of the LV can affect the rocket.
But most payloads persist in having no vibration damping and being hard mounted to the LV. So vibration coupling between payload and LV is bi-directional.
Second by second the LV's Cg and Cp change, as do its resonant frequencies.
What's really good to find any dangerous resonances in a structure is to hit it with multiple high amplitude narrow pulses which have a broad frequency spectrum. Firing a bunch of explosive bolts (with their 20 000 lb microsecond wide shock spectrum) should do nicely. MECO's, stage separations, main engine starts are all good too.

Yes it's the payload part that will get re-designed. But it can be because (at some point in the trajectory) the payload will damage the LV and on an EELV that limit is a lot lower than on a Russian or a Spacex LV.

And as we know if you're launching a $1Bn satellite that risk is just too great.

A long time ago the Martin company devised a quick and dirty way to do CLA's with lumped parameters on the LV. The sort of thing today you could incorporate in a Javascript program and it'd still run fast enough.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #59 on: 06/13/2014 07:45 am »
You guys are drifting a bit IMHO.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #60 on: 06/13/2014 10:40 am »
You guys are drifting a bit IMHO.
Fair point.  :)

For a comment from Shotwell on Spacex prices I suggest people look at her presentation on the locked thread on the Spacex board. At around 14:00 she states total revenues per launch are about $100m, which is actually about what Arianspace have charged.

Of course if you can side step the need for any of those "trimmings" and your payload is small enough you can fly F9 and (presumably) get quite a bargain.

Of course what sort of deal the DoD will get (and in the same speech she confirms that NSS launches are the biggest sector of the US launch market, so you'd be crazy not to pursue it as part of your business plans).
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #61 on: 06/13/2014 11:38 am »
But it can be because (at some point in the trajectory) the payload will damage the LV and on an EELV that limit is a lot lower than on a Russian or a Spacex LV.


No, because of 1.25 and the design constraints.  Payloads never get that close to damaging the LV.  Never seen that happen since 2000 and I can ask if it has ever happened since the 80's. 

What the LV gets out of coupled loads deals with control stability and not loads.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #62 on: 06/14/2014 08:25 am »
No, because of 1.25 and the design constraints.  Payloads never get that close to damaging the LV.  Never seen that happen since 2000 and I can ask if it has ever happened since the 80's. 

What the LV gets out of coupled loads deals with control stability and not loads.
Which is a function of what counter loads have to be exerted to counter loads over what time scale. But those loads are moving targets throughout the flight.

However this is indeed off topic for this thread so more on topic would be if you see this as the beginning of Spacex accepting they cannot sustain their relatively low prices or simply a long overdue inflation correction?
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #63 on: 06/14/2014 05:12 pm »
...
However this is indeed off topic for this thread so more on topic would be if you see this as the beginning of Spacex accepting they cannot sustain their relatively low prices or simply a long overdue inflation correction?
That could be because I (and others) already affirmed that it's simply inflation (combined with a more capable vehicle).
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 Jcc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1196
  • Liked: 404
  • Likes Given: 203
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #64 on: 06/14/2014 08:10 pm »
Don't you think supply and demand have something to do with price? 

They have 50 launches on the manifest and can't launch them fast enough. Demand is greater than supply.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #65 on: 06/14/2014 10:07 pm »
Don't you think supply and demand have something to do with price? 

They have 50 launches on the manifest and can't launch them fast enough. Demand is greater than supply.
Then the price would be higher. But really, the reason they have a big manifest and can't launch them fast enough is partially because they can't launch them as fast as they said they could (yet!!). So it's not exactly a good thing right now.
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 john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #66 on: 06/15/2014 02:45 pm »
Then the price would be higher. But really, the reason they have a big manifest and can't launch them fast enough is partially because they can't launch them as fast as they said they could (yet!!). So it's not exactly a good thing right now.
True. Their goal is to launch twice a month but part of the issue is can they do that sustainably for every month?

Time will tell on that one.

That could be because I (and others) already affirmed that it's simply inflation (combined with a more capable vehicle).
That's my view also but the LV services market is not exactly known for its low inflation rates, given the estimated ULA price rises compared to the US inflation rate (even odder given most of the part are made by US workers in the US, so no wild exchange rate fluctuations to deal with).
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #67 on: 06/15/2014 02:51 pm »
If you take into account the improved GTO performance, then regular inflation (ie core CPI, not "aerospace inflation") is enough to explain the entire price increase.
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 Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #68 on: 06/15/2014 04:39 pm »
Then the price would be higher. But really, the reason they have a big manifest and can't launch them fast enough is partially because they can't launch them as fast as they said they could (yet!!). So it's not exactly a good thing right now.
True. Their goal is to launch twice a month but part of the issue is can they do that sustainably for every month?

Time will tell on that one.

we also were told recently that 10 more launches would happen this year.   We now know that also was a hollow statement.
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline Chris Bergin

Re: SpaceX ups prices with almost 10%.
« Reply #69 on: 06/15/2014 04:56 pm »
I can summarize this thread via this:



Locked.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Tags:
 

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