Predicted vs actual launch rates

[Dalhousie]

I am having a discussion elsewhere over whether or Musk/SpaceX oversell their capability.

Facts are always useful, but I am having trouble with the links to predicted launches in past years.  Actual launches are of course a matter of public record.

Thanks

[macpacheco]

I am having a discussion elsewhere over whether or Musk/SpaceX oversell their capability.

Facts are always useful, but I am having trouble with the links to predicted launches in past years.  Actual launches are of course a matter of public record.

Thanks

They are ramping up production. F9R production is scaling up still. Process and methods are still being streamlined.
I wouldn't use the last 3 months as predictors of 2014 track record.

But delays happen in the aerospace industry. Space is hard. He made it abundantly clear he wants zero launch failures, delays are infinitely preferable to payloads lost.

We still don't know the reason for the CRS-3 delay. How about we at least wait until that launch before speculating further on this matter. They could launch Orbcomm ahead of CRS-3.

[Dalhousie]

I am looking at past claims, not present ones.

[Lars_J]

I am looking at past claims, not present ones.

Google is your friend. Use it. You clearly have something specific in mind but are not saying what it is.

[Robotbeat]

An update on the SpaceX Multiplier??

[IRobot]

I think 2014 will be a good gauge of their true capability. Past launches rates are not enough for a future extrapolation.

[hop]

I am having a discussion elsewhere over whether or Musk/SpaceX oversell their capability.

Facts are always useful, but I am having trouble with the links to predicted launches in past years.  Actual launches are of course a matter of public record.

If you are talking about other providers, the various launch schedule threads in this forum should give you a pretty decent record.

Using the internet archive wayback machine on various published schedules could also useful, e.g.
http://fpd.gsfc.nasa.gov/launches.html
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/schedule/
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Launchers/Launch_schedule
http://www.itc.nl/research/products/sensordb/launch_schedule.aspx

To make a meaningful comparison you'd also have to get into whether slips were payload, provider or external factors.

It's noteworthy that most providers don't provide a manifest nearly as far out as SpaceX does.

[Robotbeat]

NET means No Earlier Than.

[Dalhousie]

I am looking at past claims, not present ones.

Google is your friend. Use it. You clearly have something specific in mind but are not saying what it is.

I have stated exactly what I want.

[beancounter]

I am looking at past claims, not present ones.

Google is your friend. Use it. You clearly have something specific in mind but are not saying what it is.

I have stated exactly what I want.

Ok so you want to talk about overselling capability.  Well so far SpaceX have delivered the payloads that they've been contracted for with one exception that I know of.  There may have been one other but customers have not deserted SpaceX in 'droves' due to delays as some predicted.
Let's look at capability:
Launch vehicles F1 to F9  to F9v1.1 - increasing capabilities in areas such as avionics, engine arrangements, engine out, etc
Engines- Kestral and Merlin 1 to M1C (and vac) to M1D (and vac) and moving onto Raptor - increasingly capable; Draco to SuperDraco
SpaceCraft -  Dragon Cargo (increasing capability for NASA requirements eg. power capability), onto DragonCrew
Pads - started with 1 now have what 4 in the works
Manufacturing - increasing production efficiencies and capacities
Design - increased capability evidenced by increasing product capability
R&D - GH, GH2, F9R, Raptor, and apparently MCT
Management - increasing capability evidenced by the fact that the company is still in existence and increasing it's customer base.
Funding streams - originally Musk, some VCs, then DoD, and now add NASA and substantial income stream wrt launch customers and some actual launches.
Launches - 2013 they did 3; this forum predicts 8 for 2014 (so far 1 out of 1) but there's an expectation that they could reasonably do more.
Launch failures F9 - none  unless you want to argue about the engine out issue however that's been done to death and the primary payload was successfully delivered.

So what exactly are you on about.  SpaceX hasn't oversold it's capabilities; it's living up to even the wildest expectations and if you doubt that then perhaps you should listen to what SES as a customer had to say about them.  IIRC they used the term 'game-changer'.  Sure they've moved more slowly than hoped for but that's only to be expected in the space business.

Edit:  Add to capability the fact that they are moving toward DoD certification for launching sensitive payloads.  Possibly met the 3 out of 3 successful launch requirements already.
Cheers.

[Avron]

We still don't know the reason for the CRS-3 delay. How about we at least wait until that launch before speculating further on this matter. They could launch Orbcomm ahead of CRS-3.

I don't see that happening, but SpaceX is not communicating..

[Dalhousie]

Lars:

You clearly have something specific in mind but are not saying what it is.

No hidden agenda.  Just a request for information

Avron:

Ok so you want to talk about overselling capability.

Never said they were.  Simply asked for some information.

Avron again

So what exactly are you on about.

Read my post.  There is no need to be defensive.

Hop

Using the internet archive wayback machine on various published schedules could also useful...

Finally, someone understands and gives something useful.  Just what I wanted. Thank you.

Edited: fixed attribution and quotes - thank you.

[Robotbeat]

Robotbeat:

You clearly have something specific in mind but are not saying what it is.

No hidden agenda.  Just a request for information
...

That was LarsJ, not me.

[dcporter]

Glad you got what you needed. Sorry about the bad behavior, jeeze. Beancounter what gives? The OP didn't even specify a side of the argument. OP: Robotbeat wasn't who said that, he said the jocular bit about the SpaceX Multiplier, which is what we call their endemic schedule slips round these parts.

[Robotbeat]

Hey, I remember that the SpaceX Multiplier had some predictive power! Not just jocular.

[Avron]

Robotbeat:

You clearly have something specific in mind but are not saying what it is.

No hidden agenda.  Just a request for information

Avron:

Ok so you want to talk about overselling capability.

Never said they were.  Simply asked for some information.

Avron again

So what exactly are you on about.

Read my post.  There is no need to be defensive.

Hop {quote]Using the internet archive wayback machine on various published schedules could also useful...

Finally, someone understands and gives something useful.  Just what I wanted. Thank you.
[/quote]


say what ?? you sure you have the correct quotes..

[dcporter]

Jocular as in friendly and generally upbeat. Agreed that the SXM is nicely predictive (for a given phase of the company's operations) and is exactly what the OP is after.

[Joffan]

I am having a discussion elsewhere over whether or Musk/SpaceX oversell their capability.

Facts are always useful, but I am having trouble with the links to predicted launches in past years.  Actual launches are of course a matter of public record.

Thanks

Dalhousie, how many people have to say something other than you expect before you accept that your vague statement above doesn't clearly specify what you would like to know?

So far we know that you are having trouble with links. Sorry to hear about that. Now, what do you actually want?

[Lar]

People, let us all be excellent to each other. And fix quotes.

[edkyle99]

I am having a discussion elsewhere over whether or Musk/SpaceX oversell their capability.

Facts are always useful, but I am having trouble with the links to predicted launches in past years.  Actual launches are of course a matter of public record.

Thanks

Here are a couple of early documents that presented lists of planned launches.  As you will see, SpaceX was over-optimistic on the time-line of this early development, but was not too far out of line when it came to annual launch rates that we are seeing with operational launches.

 - Ed Kyle