SES-8 success plots trajectory for future SpaceX possibilities

[Jim]

Fortunately, Orbcomm was able to get the majority of the data that the satellite was being sent aloft to gather, so while it did not get into the proper orbit and eventually re-entered, the satellite did accomplish most if its mission.

Then why did they file an insurance claim?

[clongton]

Fortunately, Orbcomm was able to get the majority of the data that the satellite was being sent aloft to gather, so while it did not get into the proper orbit and eventually re-entered, the satellite did accomplish most if its mission.

Then why did they file an insurance claim?

Speculation: Probably because the terms of the policy allowed them to.
Bottom line - it was a business decision. If it were me and I could get the cost of the satellite reimbursed to me I would certainly do that.

[cro-magnon gramps]

Fortunately, Orbcomm was able to get the majority of the data that the satellite was being sent aloft to gather, so while it did not get into the proper orbit and eventually re-entered, the satellite did accomplish most if its mission.

Then why did they file an insurance claim?

Quote: "Nothing personal. It's Business!"

[Kabloona]

Fortunately, Orbcomm was able to get the majority of the data that the satellite was being sent aloft to gather, so while it did not get into the proper orbit and eventually re-entered, the satellite did accomplish most if its mission.

Then why did they file an insurance claim?

The real issue, which hasn't been discussed here, is that Orbcomm needed to prove to the insurance company that the prototype worked sufficiently well to satisfy the insurers in taking on the risk of insuring the launch of the next batch of OG2 satellites. If Orbcomm had not been able to satisfy the insurers that the prototype worked sufficiently well, the insurers could/would have required another prototype launch before they would take on the risk of a full "batch" launch of operational sats.

Evidently Orbcomm did satisfy the insurers that, in fact, the prototype worked well enough. Otherwise, they would be requiring Orbcomm to launch another prototype, which as far as we know is not the case.

The $10M payout for the loss is a technicality based on contract terms, not because the satellite failed, but because the LV failed to put it in a survivable orbit. But in fact the insurers apparently consider that the prototype did fulfill its purpose, ie verifying the design. If the insurers weren't satisfied with the  prototype's performance, they'd be making Orbcomm launch another one.

http://www.space.com/18049-spacex-rocket-stranded-satellite-falls-space.html

[baldusi]

Let's not forget that in the first missions Falcon 9 failed to relight the second stage. Yes, it was a bonus and the Dragons were put where they should. But those relight failed. Either the roll control failed, or the relight itself failed, but it didn't worked.
I always think that reliability is attached to mission complexity. A single uppers stage burn profile is a lot more forgiving than a complex GTO like Proton-M, or LCROSS. A GPS mission, for example, is a very complex mission, in a terrible radiation environment. Falcon 9 hasn't demonstrated anything barely complex until SES-8. I seriously doubt it's ready to do the sort of black missions that DIVH does.

[Joffan]

Which is part of why SES-8 was so important, I guess.

As part of SpaceX's "test stuff whenever you can" - example being trying engine relights you don't need - I hope they were monitoring (and perhaps exercising) the upper stage as it passed into that "terrible radiation environment" after the GTO burn.

Also, to disagree on one point,  I think the "barely complex" threshold is comfortably met by Dragon re-entry.  Unless you see a lot of spacecraft returning intact from orbit that I haven't noticed.

[Nomadd]

Also, to disagree on one point,  I think the "barely complex" threshold is comfortably met by Dragon re-entry.  Unless you see a lot of spacecraft returning intact from orbit that I haven't noticed.

He said F9, not Dragon. He has a point. If the Orbcomm deployment had gone well, that could have counted, but SES-8 was the first that had a relight.

[Chris Bergin]

Topic was wandering, as per usual for SpaceX thread (won't be happening in 2014, I can tell you that much).

Splinter thread fro the antenna chat:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33498.0