Introducing Firefly Space Systems

[QuantumG]

If government contracts have "gotten in the way" of SpaceX, then I hope they get a whole lot more of them.

I'm sure they do too. Not sure what your point is..

I'm not sure what your point is, either.

My point is that Firefly's business plan will probably change once they win government contracts.

[savuporo]

t's not like small launch vehicles don't exist. They do. It's just that there is really not much of an existing market for them beyond a few national payloads.

Most of the payloads are for larger rockets or catch a much cheaper secondary ride. It's much harder to justify entering the small launch vehicle market except as a stepping stone to the MUCH higher revenue medium-to-heavy lift market.

There are pretty comprehensive market reports for various payload classes etc. The whole launch industry sees such small activity levels that there is actually more analysis than launches being done
 
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/media/2014_GSO_NGSO_Forecast_Report_FAA_COMSTAC_July_15_2014.pdf
http://www.sia.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/SIA_2014_SSIR.pdf
( i didnt find the latest Futron links off the cuff )

"Cubesats represented the majority of R&D satellites, but less than 1% of the revenues".

Now, for small companies, if they manage to stay small, capturing 10% of the 1% is enough to survive. But ..

Doctors say that Nordberg has a 50 - 50 chance of living, though there's only a 10 percent chance of that.

[meekGee]

I'm sure they do too. Not sure what your point is..

I'm not sure what your point is, either.

Why let such trivialities get in the way of a good argument?

[Oli]

t's not like small launch vehicles don't exist. They do. It's just that there is really not much of an existing market for them beyond a few national payloads.

Most of the payloads are for larger rockets or catch a much cheaper secondary ride. It's much harder to justify entering the small launch vehicle market except as a stepping stone to the MUCH higher revenue medium-to-heavy lift market.

There are pretty comprehensive market reports for various payload classes etc. The whole launch industry sees such small activity levels that there is actually more analysis than launches being done
 
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/media/2014_GSO_NGSO_Forecast_Report_FAA_COMSTAC_July_15_2014.pdf
http://www.sia.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/SIA_2014_SSIR.pdf
( i didnt find the latest Futron links off the cuff )

"Cubesats represented the majority of R&D satellites, but less than 1% of the revenues".

Now, for small companies, if they manage to stay small, capturing 10% of the 1% is enough to survive. But ..

Cubesats are not Micro and Minisatellites though (~10-600kg). The first report you linked says there will be demand for small sat launchers once they become available (page 70). Given that quite a few companies are aiming for that market, I think there's something to it, but I doubt the market is big enough to sustain many of them.

It's not like small launch vehicles don't exist.

Actually they don't in that payload category.

[savuporo]

Actually they don't in that payload category.

Dnepr regularly launches small sats. China has Kuaizhou. Minotaur and Pegasus still exist. Rokot, Strela, Epsilon, are there. And then on the real low end of the spectrum, already mentioned Shtil and Volna. Even though latter ones havent done many launches, Shtil apparently manifested a couple of new ones just this year.

I guess as a sat builder, the question that i would be asking is what would a new launch provider be giving me that a proven Dnepr wouldn't. ITAR freedom would be one possible answer.

[Oli]

Actually they don't in that payload category.

Dnepr regularly launches small sats. China has Kuaizhou. Minotaur and Pegasus still exist. Rokot, Strela, Epsilon, are there. And then on the real low end of the spectrum, already mentioned Shtil and Volna. Even though latter ones havent done many launches, Shtil apparently manifested a couple of new ones just this year.

I guess as a sat builder, the question that i would be asking is what would a new launch provider be giving me that a proven Dnepr wouldn't. ITAR freedom would be one possible answer.

Dnepr launches like 4500kg into LEO, that's an order of magnitude more than a small sat launcher like Launcher One with 250kg. Rokot, Epsilon, Vega all aunch 1.5t+. Shtil and Volna haven't launched anything for a decade, are they even commercially available?

You're right about Pegasus though, but apparently it costs $55m. Why is it so expensive?

http://innerspace.net/current-launch-vehicles/pegasus-launch-cost-soars-to-55-million/

[savuporo]

Actually they don't in that payload category.

Dnepr regularly launches small sats. China has Kuaizhou. Minotaur and Pegasus still exist. Rokot, Strela, Epsilon, are there. And then on the real low end of the spectrum, already mentioned Shtil and Volna. Even though latter ones havent done many launches, Shtil apparently manifested a couple of new ones just this year.

I guess as a sat builder, the question that i would be asking is what would a new launch provider be giving me that a proven Dnepr wouldn't. ITAR freedom would be one possible answer.

Dnepr launches like 4500kg into LEO, that's an order of magnitude more than a small sat launcher like Launcher One with 250kg. Rokot, Epsilon, Vega all aunch 1.5t+. Shtil and Volna haven't launched anything for a decade, are they even commercially available?

You're right about Pegasus though, but apparently it costs $55m. Why is it so expensive?

http://innerspace.net/current-launch-vehicles/pegasus-launch-cost-soars-to-55-million/

Look at Dnepr's recent launches, they are all multi-manifested small sats.
Shtil is getting back to service apparently soon, according to statements by Makeyev.

I dont doubt that there is room here for a dedicated one-cubesat at a time launcher, just to avoid the need to talk to Russian military to get your university project on orbit. Question is how much.

Cubesat launches/year seem to have hit a temporary peak in 2014, and only because of PlanetLabs.

Thats another thing about smallsats - most of the applications worth any money on market would be constellation apps like Planetlabs, but if you are launching a constellation it just makes a ton of sense logistically to get a bigger cluster of them on a single bigger launch vehicle.

But time will tell, "A rocket a day keeps high costs away" is still very interesting piece of prose.

Oh, and why is Pegasus so expensive ? Because F-1 is not on market.

[savuporo]

Actually, to make a small sat launcher like Firefly, RocketLab or now Lins actually happen, it to have a joint business plan with some cubesat/nanosat application from the get go. I.e. your rocket will have an anchor customer with solid business from the get go for some reasonable capacity and launch frequency.
In case of Firefly, im hoping this actually might be the case, looking at their backers.

[ChrisWilson68]

You're right about Pegasus though, but apparently it costs $55m. Why is it so expensive?

http://innerspace.net/current-launch-vehicles/pegasus-launch-cost-soars-to-55-million/

Because NASA is dumb enough to pay that much?

Companies generally charge as much as they think they can get their customers to pay.

If Firefly actually comes to market, you might see Pegasus costs drop substantially.

[Robotbeat]

...much of it is the fact that 1) Pegasus rarely ever launches these days--which should tell you a little something about Firefly's market--and 2) it's the cheapest US-based rocket that has a good track record (partly because the other rockets haven't flown that much), thus NASA is willing to use it in spite of 1).

[Robotbeat]

Dnepr is actually a pretty good deal. It's about $10-15 million, from what I can gather (though it probably has gone up). That's pretty dang good for 4500kg to LEO (and enough stages to have decent performance beyond LEO) that has had a 20 out of 21 success rate.

[savuporo]

If Firefly actually comes to market, you might see Pegasus costs drop substantially.

F-1 came and went, and the price of Pegasus flight only kept going up

[savuporo]

Dnepr is actually a pretty good deal. It's about $10-15 million, from what I can gather (though it probably has gone up). That's pretty dang good for 4500kg to LEO (and enough stages to have decent performance beyond LEO) that has had a 20 out of 21 success rate.

Shtil was claimed to be insanely cheap, on the order of $100K and the customer wasn't paying for much of anything - Russian navy apparently appreciates launch practice anyway.

[Oli]

Thats another thing about smallsats - most of the applications worth any money on market would be constellation apps like Planetlabs, but if you are launching a constellation it just makes a ton of sense logistically to get a bigger cluster of them on a single bigger launch vehicle.

All right, you've convinced me its hopeless. That can be said about the entering the launch industry in general though. I was trying to be more optimistic for once.

[QuantumG]

Thats another thing about smallsats - most of the applications worth any money on market would be constellation apps like Planetlabs, but if you are launching a constellation it just makes a ton of sense logistically to get a bigger cluster of them on a single bigger launch vehicle.

All right, you've convinced me its hopeless. That can be said about the entering the launch industry in general though. I was trying to be more optimistic for once.

The optimistic argument is that replacement of satellites is best done as soon as possible, and that drives a need for a responsive smallsat launcher.

[Kryten]

Actually they don't in that payload category.

Dnepr regularly launches small sats. China has Kuaizhou. Minotaur and Pegasus still exist. Rokot, Strela, Epsilon, are there. And then on the real low end of the spectrum, already mentioned Shtil and Volna. Even though latter ones havent done many launches, Shtil apparently manifested a couple of new ones just this year.

I guess as a sat builder, the question that i would be asking is what would a new launch provider be giving me that a proven Dnepr wouldn't. ITAR freedom would be one possible answer.

Dnepr launches like 4500kg into LEO, that's an order of magnitude more than a small sat launcher like Launcher One with 250kg. Rokot, Epsilon, Vega all aunch 1.5t+. Shtil and Volna haven't launched anything for a decade, are they even commercially available?

You're right about Pegasus though, but apparently it costs $55m. Why is it so expensive?

http://innerspace.net/current-launch-vehicles/pegasus-launch-cost-soars-to-55-million/

The Chinese Feitian-1 (commercialised Kuaizhou) is now available at about 500kg, but we don't have pricing information.

[Robotbeat]

Thats another thing about smallsats - most of the applications worth any money on market would be constellation apps like Planetlabs, but if you are launching a constellation it just makes a ton of sense logistically to get a bigger cluster of them on a single bigger launch vehicle.

All right, you've convinced me its hopeless. That can be said about the entering the launch industry in general though. I was trying to be more optimistic for once.

Well, Firefly is probably big enough to launch dozens of cubesats at a time. That was what Pegasus did.

It's not like it's impossible, it's jut hard. It's usually a good way to lose a lot of money, but it isn't hopeless.

[jongoff]

Thats another thing about smallsats - most of the applications worth any money on market would be constellation apps like Planetlabs, but if you are launching a constellation it just makes a ton of sense logistically to get a bigger cluster of them on a single bigger launch vehicle.

All right, you've convinced me its hopeless. That can be said about the entering the launch industry in general though. I was trying to be more optimistic for once.

The optimistic argument is that replacement of satellites is best done as soon as possible, and that drives a need for a responsive smallsat launcher.

Well, you also need to realize that most constellations have several discreet planes they're launching into (same inclination, different Right Angle of the Ascending Node). I can't remember how many Iridium has, but it's at least six. In order to move from plane to plane, a plane change maneuver is too painful, so you usually use differential nodal regression--ie you move into a phasing orbit that's either higher or lower than the intended destination orbit, and let the slightly different nodal regression rate compared to your destination plane slowly move your RAAN over into the new position. In the case of LEO, you're kind of limited with how different your orbits can be--go too much lower and you run into air drag issues, go too much higher and you run into radiation issues. I don't have numbers off the top of my head, but I think it means that unless your phasing orbit is really different from your destination orbit (which requires the satellites or dispensers to do a lot of maneuvering), it can take months to go from one plane to another the cheap way.

Basically, I think that past one plane-worth, you hit some diminishing returns for launching more satellites on a single launch. Both due to time-value of money, and the need for more maneuvering capabilities or a more complex dispenser. If the bigger LV is way way cheaper, it might still make sense, but I could see situations where you wouldn't want to take a year to have your system come on line just to fly on a F9, for instance.

Food for thought, hopefully,

~Jon

[Robotbeat]

Totally agreed. If Firefly's rockets are Pegasus XL class, then there should be some work for them launching each plane in a constellation. But that requires lots of smallsat constellations. There will be some, no doubt.

[A_M_Swallow]

Firefire may wish to investigate launching satellites with on board thrusters.  Many primary payload customers do not like secondary payloads that contain propellant and other dangerous materials.