NASASpaceFlight.com Forum
SpaceX Vehicles and Missions => SpaceX Falcon Missions Section => Topic started by: Oort Cloud on 07/02/2014 06:54 pm
-
http://www.inmarsat.com/press-release/inmarsat-appoints-spacex-future-satellite-launches/
Thought this might be of interest.
(I'm new here so apologies if I've put this in the wrong place)
Inmarsat appoints SpaceX for future satellite launches
2 July 2014 – Inmarsat plc (LSE: ISAT.L), the leading provider of global mobile satellite services, today announced that it has selected SpaceX to provide launch services for its S-band satellite and up to two further Inmarsat missions. Under the terms of its agreement with SpaceX, Inmarsat expects to use the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle, but will retain the possibility of using a Falcon 9 as an alternative, providing further launch flexibility.
Rupert Pearce, Inmarsat’s Chief Executive Officer said, “We believe that SpaceX has demonstrated tremendous successful progress in its launch capabilities and is now a fully-credible provider of vehicles to support geostationary missions. We are delighted to be working with SpaceX for the launch of our S-band satellite and other potential future missions for Inmarsat. In view of capacity constraints in the satellite launch market, Inmarsat believes that securing optionality today is an important business safeguard to mitigate future launch schedule risk.”
In June 2014, Inmarsat announced plans to deploy a wholly-owned S-band payload on a satellite jointly owned and funded by Hellas-Sat. In connection with the agreement announced today, Hellas-Sat will jointly and equally fund the cost of the SpaceX launch vehicle. The cost to Inmarsat of the launch vehicle is captured within the previously announced figure of approximately US$200 million for the total deployment programme (including build, launch, insurance and operations).
“As a leading provider in the global satellite communications space for more than 30 years, SpaceX appreciates Inmarsat’s confidence in the Falcon family of vehicles,” said Gwynne Shotwell, President and COO. “SpaceX is proud to partner with Inmarsat on these missions and we look forward to delivering their satellites to orbit.”
In October 2013, Inmarsat announced the purchase of a fourth Inmarsat-5 satellite from Boeing as a spare satellite. In order to ensure launch availability for mid-2016, in line with the fourth satellite delivery schedule, Inmarsat has secured a SpaceX launch vehicle. This will provide certainty as to launch date and cost when a decision is made to launch the fourth Inmarsat-5, either as a replacement satellite or as a fourth satellite with an incremental Ka-band business case.
Finally, Inmarsat and SpaceX have agreed terms for a third launch vehicle opportunity that can be used for other future missions, including potentially for the launch of an Inmarsat-6 generation satellite. The Inmarsat-6 satellites have not yet been designed or ordered and a first launch is targeted only towards the end of the decade.
In relation to the launch options announced today, Inmarsat will make some limited payments before the end of the year which will be captured within updated capital expenditure guidance to be provided with the second quarter results in August.
-
Good to see SpaceX get another contract amid their recent minor set backs. I'm sure many are watching them closely to make sure they come out swinging once OG2 finally goes off, but I doubt anyone would hold back a contract because of it at this point.
That being said, I hope this is picked up by Chris or at least SpaceX and given a proper write up. I'm still trying to figure out the total number of satellites and what the second launch is for.
-
http://www.twst.com/update/66105-inmarsat-plc-inmarsat-appoints-spacex-for-future-satellite-launches
Thought this might be of interest.
(I'm new here so apologies if I've put this in the wrong place)
Welcome to the forum!
I thought it was interesting the press release states that they "expect" to use the FH, but may use the F9. So does that mean they secured a terrific deal as an early adopter of an FH flight, or they scored a so-so deal on an F9 ride- or both?
I also found the press release on their website here: http://www.inmarsat.com/press-release/inmarsat-appoints-spacex-future-satellite-launches/
-
I thought it was interesting the press release states that they "expect" to use the FH, but may use the F9. So does that mean they secured a terrific deal as an early adopter of an FH flight, or they scored a so-so deal on an F9 ride- or both?
I also found the press release on their website here: http://www.inmarsat.com/press-release/inmarsat-appoints-spacex-future-satellite-launches/
I'm guessing that the contract is for a FH with fully reusable first stage cores, but with a F9-expendable as a backup if the FH isn't ready. The F9-expendable would have less performance than the FH.
-
it's written
2 July 2014 – Inmarsat plc (LSE: ISAT.L), the leading provider of global mobile satellite services, today announced that it has selected SpaceX to provide launch services for its S-band satellite and up to two further Inmarsat missions. Under the terms of its agreement with SpaceX, Inmarsat expects to use the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle, but will retain the possibility of using a Falcon 9 as an alternative, providing further launch flexibility.
-
I read it as 1 firm S-Band launch in 2016 with FH-Reusable.
The KA band was meant for ILS but Inmarsat was getting nervous, so it looks like SpaceX will get it, no date identified yet.
The Boeing made L band sat has not been contracted to be built yet, so no date for SpaceX, and is not expected for several years, but SpaceX will be the first choice. (I interpret that as price locked in)
They have 1 L-Band, 1 S-band, 1 KA-band.
I think it depends on the mass of the Sat. It is possible it could squeeze in a F9, if not FH-R will be used.
http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/41121inmarsat-books-falcon-heavy-for-up-to-three-launches (http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/41121inmarsat-books-falcon-heavy-for-up-to-three-launches)
-
I wonder if they want to use FH to put the satellites directly into GEO to greatly extend their on orbit life, with F9 being able to put the satellites in just GTO as a backup?
-
I wonder if they want to use FH to put the satellites directly into GEO to greatly extend their on orbit life, with F9 being able to put the satellites in just GTO as a backup?
I think the trade off is reusability rather than final orbit. They'll fly on a resusable FH if it is ready to go in time, and if not they'll fly on an expendable F9.
Quote from Elon in an article a couple months ago: "Where I basically see this netting out is Falcon 9 will do satellites up to roughly 3.5 tonnes, with full reusability of the boost stage, and Falcon Heavy will do satellites up to 7 tonnes with full reusability of the all three boost stages"
http://aviationweek.com/blog/falcon-9-performance-mid-size-geo
-
I wonder if they want to use FH to put the satellites directly into GEO to greatly extend their on orbit life, with F9 being able to put the satellites in just GTO as a backup?
That would require the Falcon upper stage to survive the hours it takes to reach GEO and the trip through the radiation belts so it could re-start its engine at the appropriate point. The upper stage hasn't demonstrated that ability yet, and it may not be capable of it without some redesign.
-
That would require the Falcon upper stage to survive the hours it takes to reach GEO and the trip through the radiation belts so it could re-start its engine at the appropriate point. The upper stage hasn't demonstrated that ability yet, and it may not be capable of it without some redesign.
We do know that the upper stage for the Thaicom launch survived long enough to take a picture from high in the transfer orbit, >25000km by my estimate. But that only demonstrates camera and communication survival, not necessarily operability as a booster.
-
I wonder if they want to use FH to put the satellites directly into GEO to greatly extend their on orbit life, with F9 being able to put the satellites in just GTO as a backup?
That would require the Falcon upper stage to survive the hours it takes to reach GEO and the trip through the radiation belts so it could re-start its engine at the appropriate point. The upper stage hasn't demonstrated that ability yet, and it may not be capable of it without some redesign.
GPS is direct injection to the radiation heavy MEO. If they intend to compete there, they shouldn't have much trouble doing GSO.
-
From: http://www.spacenews.com/article/satellite-telecom/41500proton-delays-push-global-availability-of-inmarsat-ka-band-service-to
Being built by Thales Alenia Space of France and Italy, the satellite, which Inmarsat calls EuropaSat, is scheduled for launch in late 2016. Though nominally slated to launch on the Falcon Heavy, the 5,900-kilogram satellite also could launch on a Falcon 9, Inmarsat has said.
It does not seem that even a fully expendable Falcon 9 could get to the 1800 m/s deficit GTO with this mass. But it's a lot cheaper and available already. So this seems an interesting potential trade for customers. If the FH is ready, use that. But if there are delays, use a cheaper F9 and accept reduced satellite life since it needs to do more of the delta-V itself. Especially if getting to market at a certain time is crucial, this seems like a sensible backup strategy.
-
The plan is to use FHR for these payloads and recover all 3 boosters. FH should be ready by late 2016 and hopefully as FHR. Being interesting to know how SpaceX price it.
-
From Boeing 701HP page:
"Using XIPS for final orbit insertion conserves even more mass as compared to using an on-board liquid apogee engine. Customers can apply the weight savings to substantially increase the revenue-generating payload at small marginal cost, to prolong service life, or to change to a less expensive launch vehicle (when cost is based on satellite mass)."
The Inmarsat-5 sats have the XIPS thrusts installed, so maybe an expendable F9 could lift the 6100kg sat up to MEO and then it would spend a few months spiraling out to GEO on ion power.
Might be faster than waiting for the Proton fix or an open slot on Ariane.
-
Might be faster than waiting for the Proton fix.
Proton may not have any clients left, outside the Russian government, by the end of '16. That is if they have one or two more problems and SpaceX achieves their flight rate goal and reuseability.
-
I think its great they are picking up customers. Although with so many customers, I'm guessing the waiting line is extremely long!