Intelsat Signs First Commercial Falcon Heavy Launch Agreement with SpaceX

[psloss]

Edit: ISTR either Gwynne or Elon teased a new contract at one of the COTS press conferences - presumably this is that.

Ms. Shotwell...can't remember if it was the pre-launch on the 18th or post-launch on the 22nd.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Usually the LV's are booked about 3 years or more in advance of the launch, usually coinciding with the contracting of the building of a sat. What new sat build contracts has Intelsat done lately?

BTW 3 years puts this FH flight 2015 or later. Plenty of time to get it operational even with getting a equitorial launching direction pad available.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Intelsat did a contract for two new birds in sept 2011 based on Systems/Loral 1300 platform which weighs ~5500kg. The timeframe for launch of these two sats are 2014 and 2015.

These two would definitly be candidates for the cheaper FH $85M config which would also make the FH one of the cheapest LV's that can launch this size of payload.

Edit added:
http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/intelsat-30.htm

DLA-1 has a LV Ariane-5ECA for a 2014 launch but the DLA-2 for a 2015 launch does not.

[satlaunch]

Intelsat also have IS-28 and IS-29 satellites, which will be based on SS/L 1300, estimated launch in 2015 or beyond.

[krytek]

Edit: ISTR either Gwynne or Elon teased a new contract at one of the COTS press conferences - presumably this is that.

Ms. Shotwell...can't remember if it was the pre-launch on the 18th or post-launch on the 22nd.

If I'm not mistaken, she actually hinted at several.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Intelsat also have IS-28 and IS-29 satellites, which will be based on SS/L 1300, estimated launch in 2015 or beyond.

IS-28 and IS-29 looks to be launched after DLA-2. So they may be candidates for FH as well. If the FH launches a year from now that would be the time for also booking one of those on FH at that time. Intelsat seems to like launching the backup sats that are on orbit spares on a different LV from the first one. This gives them several business advantages to protect from launch slips due to problems with any one LV.

[butters]

I could be wrong but I doubt that the first Falcon 9 version 1.1 will fly before the CRS-1 and 2 flights. So I would expect the CRS-1 and 2 flights and the first Vandenberg Falcon 9 version 1.1 flight to fly before the FH test flight.

I thought that the FH test flight comes before the first F9v1.1 flight, qualifying the M1D and other aspects of the F9v1.1?

[cro-magnon gramps]

Edit: ISTR either Gwynne or Elon teased a new contract at one of the COTS press conferences - presumably this is that.

Ms. Shotwell...can't remember if it was the pre-launch on the 18th or post-launch on the 22nd.

If I'm not mistaken, she actually hinted at several.

just searching the May 18th pre-launch briefing;
     at 45min a question was asked about the manifest; and Gwynne goes into a rambling list of the various signed agreements, and at 46.5m she says there are a number of missions they haven't been public about, and there is one that they just signed that week, which they will have a press release on next week;

[Halidon]

I could be wrong but I doubt that the first Falcon 9 version 1.1 will fly before the CRS-1 and 2 flights. So I would expect the CRS-1 and 2 flights and the first Vandenberg Falcon 9 version 1.1 flight to fly before the FH test flight.

I thought that the FH test flight comes before the first F9v1.1 flight, qualifying the M1D and other aspects of the F9v1.1?

No way they'd launch the 3-core heavy before the 1-core v1.1, I would think.

[cro-magnon gramps]

I could be wrong but I doubt that the first Falcon 9 version 1.1 will fly before the CRS-1 and 2 flights. So I would expect the CRS-1 and 2 flights and the first Vandenberg Falcon 9 version 1.1 flight to fly before the FH test flight.

I thought that the FH test flight comes before the first F9v1.1 flight, qualifying the M1D and other aspects of the F9v1.1?

No way they'd launch the 3-core heavy before the 1-core v1.1, I would think.

somewhere over the last week, Elon said that he expects the F9 v1.1 to be on the pad in Vandenburg, for it's test flight, either late in the year or early in the new year; they have to have it up and ready for next year, as it is going to be doing the ISS cargo runs which Gwynne talked about at the pre launch briefing on the 18th; once they have those launching, I can see them taking production of the first stage, and combining 3 for a FH, but not until they have serviced the ISS successfully first;

[Ronsmytheiii]

And considering the cross feed system that is a really smart plan.

It has been previously mentioned that Falcon Heavy will not always use cross feed,  would bet that this launch will only need a tricore design rather than relying on an unproven technology.

[beancounter]

And considering the cross feed system that is a really smart plan.

It has been previously mentioned that Falcon Heavy will not always use cross feed,  would bet that this launch will only need a tricore design rather than relying on an unproven technology.

Doesn't seem to take SpaceX very long to turn 'unproven technology' into proven spaceflight systems.

[Jim]

And considering the cross feed system that is a really smart plan.

It has been previously mentioned that Falcon Heavy will not always use cross feed,  would bet that this launch will only need a tricore design rather than relying on an unproven technology.

Doesn't seem to take SpaceX very long to turn 'unproven technology' into proven spaceflight systems.

they have yet to use unproven technology.

[Robotbeat]

And considering the cross feed system that is a really smart plan.

It has been previously mentioned that Falcon Heavy will not always use cross feed,  would bet that this launch will only need a tricore design rather than relying on an unproven technology.

Doesn't seem to take SpaceX very long to turn 'unproven technology' into proven spaceflight systems.

Not really much if any of what SpaceX has done is really "unproven technology." Falcon 9 (conceptually) is barely different from Zenit, except it uses more and simpler gas generator engines for the first stage. Even so, they could probably pull it off. If they ground test it first.

[Ronsmytheiii]

Even so, they could probably pull it off. If they ground test it first.

I dont doubt that, just doubt that a customer would bet two expensive satellites on the success of cross-feed after a single test flight so early, tricore design is a proven design in comparison.

[Robotbeat]

Even so, they could probably pull it off. If they ground test it first.

I dont doubt that, just doubt that a customer would bet two expensive satellites on the success of cross-feed after a single test flight so early, tricore design is a proven design in comparison.

On the contrary, if the first test flight uses cross-feed, it'll probably be safer for the customer to use cross-feed on their own flight, keeping things as close to the previous flight as possible.

Even so, we'll see how long the cross-feed feature sticks around.

[SpacexULA]

Doesn't seem to take SpaceX very long to turn 'unproven technology' into proven spaceflight systems.

Actually until SpaceX recovers a stage, propulsivly land a capsule returning from space, or does a VTVL with a vehicle ruffly the size of a ELV 1st stage they will really not have done anything that is "unproven technology".

To date they seem to be trying to take the best lessons learned from Silicon Valley, Russian Aerospace, NASA, and the EELV program and mix them all together while trying very hard to avoid "unproven technology or practices".

SpaceX is much more evolutionary than revolutionary.

[tigerade]

SpaceX is much more evolutionary than revolutionary.

Quoting because this deserves emphasis.

[dbhyslop]

SpaceX is much more evolutionary than revolutionary.

Quoting because this deserves emphasis.

But in some situations evolutionary is revolutionary.  Apple, for instance, didn't invent the three products responsible for their success today; the mp3 player, the smartphone, the tablet.

If SpaceX succeeds in reducing launch costs by carefully curating proven technologies from seventy years of rocketry that's possibly more meaningful than if they had done so by inventing unobtainium.

[Proponent]

From the fifth paragraph of the SpaceX press release:

"Falcon Heavy is the most powerful rocket in the world and historically is second only to the Apollo-era Saturn V moon rocket."

I'm glad to see the SpaceX propaganda machine is alive and well (Energiya, anyone?  Possibly even the N-1?).  This reminds me of the earlier claim that Dragon is the only spacecraft ever to provide the crew with escape options all the way from the launch pad to orbit.