US Commercial Launch business who picks it up?

[edkyle99]

As you know, and have been told repeatedly, but seem intent on ignoring, just because the very top end of one launch vehicle's payload range isn't in another vehicle's range doesn't mean all payloads from the first vehicle can't fly on the second.

There are many GEO payloads that can fly on Falcon 9.  Some of those are currently slated for Proton.  If Proton becomes less desirable or unavailable, those payloads could shift to Falcon 9.

Last year's ILS Proton payloads weighed between 4.9 and 6.1 tonnes, with an average of more than 5.7 tonnes.  All of them were completely out of Falcon 9's range.  Falcon 9 is closer to being Soyuz-class than Proton-class.

 - Ed Kyle

[Vultur]

Those are going subsynchronous.  Falcon 9 v1.1 can only lift maybe 3.5 tonnes to GEO minus 1,500 m/s (so far it has only demonstrated less than 3.2 tonnes).

So what kind of GTO (minus what m/s) will it launch the over 5 tonne SES sats to?

[su27k]

If we're talking this year, shouldn't everyone have a backup launch provider? If so, they can switch to backup?

If we're talking about 2 years out, I would think FH would come into the picture and take up the slack.

[Coastal Ron]

Last year's ILS Proton payloads weighed between 4.9 and 6.1 tonnes, with an average of more than 5.7 tonnes.  All of them were completely out of Falcon 9's range.  Falcon 9 is closer to being Soyuz-class than Proton-class.

This situation will be an opportunity for SpaceX to garner Falcon Heavy orders, since Falcon Heavy has a lot more flight heritage at this point before it's first flight than the Falcon 9 v1.0 did, and Falcon 9 had a lot of orders before it first flew.

But that would only happen if the current customers using or planning to use the Proton want yet another backup in case their normal ones are not available (i.e. they get overbooked because other customers are abandoning Proton too).

Still, I bet SpaceX sales people are working the phones right now trying to sell Falcon Heavy as the logical alternative to the Proton, regardless if there is a political crisis or not.

[baldusi]

Those are going subsynchronous.  Falcon 9 v1.1 can only lift maybe 3.5 tonnes to GEO minus 1,500 m/s (so far it has only demonstrated less than 3.2 tonnes).

So what kind of GTO (minus what m/s) will it launch the over 5 tonne SES sats to?

1,800m/s one and more the second.

[Prober]

SpaceX plans to refly a stage next year.  Having desperate former Proton customers around might make it easier for them to find customers for early flights of F9 using used stages.

is put out of business will Russia want to keep supporting Atlas 5 with engines?

 - Ed Kyle

Ed I see this as a plus.....We can make the RD-180 and with some commercial sales we can get the launch rates up for the engine.

[Prober]

  Even with cheap Russian engines, Antares seems to be only marginally commercially viable at best.

If the U.S. stops U.S. satellites from flying Proton, "commercially viable" changes.  But, of course, Antares cannot handle Proton class payloads and neither can Falcon 9 v1.1. 

 - Ed Kyle

Not just the Proton Ed.....this one would have gone on Soyuz.

The Canadian government removed M3MSat from this launch due to the Ukraine-crisis.

I count 4-5 payloads atm up for grabs and that was a quick look see.

[Vultur]

Those are going subsynchronous.  Falcon 9 v1.1 can only lift maybe 3.5 tonnes to GEO minus 1,500 m/s (so far it has only demonstrated less than 3.2 tonnes).

So what kind of GTO (minus what m/s) will it launch the over 5 tonne SES sats to?

1,800m/s one and more the second.

Ah, thanks.

Interestingly SpaceX website claims 4850 kg to 27 degree GTO for the Falcon 9, but doesn't clarify further that I can see...

http://www.spacex.com/about/capabilities

[baldusi]

Those are going subsynchronous.  Falcon 9 v1.1 can only lift maybe 3.5 tonnes to GEO minus 1,500 m/s (so far it has only demonstrated less than 3.2 tonnes).

So what kind of GTO (minus what m/s) will it launch the over 5 tonne SES sats to?

1,800m/s one and more the second.

Ah, thanks.

Interestingly SpaceX website claims 4850 kg to 27 degree GTO for the Falcon 9, but doesn't clarify further that I can see...

http://www.spacex.com/about/capabilities

185x35768x27deg is a 1,800m/s deficit GTO. But SpaceX stated that they had reserved 300kg of performance for design margin, and thus they can do 5.1tonnes (one of SES) at that GTO and the 5.3tonnes will go lower (subsynchronous GTO). SES stated the first will have a bit extra fuel to compensate the extra delta-v deficit of 1,800. And the second will use a mixture of electric and chemical to take 3 months to GSO.

[Elmar Moelzer]

I also think that all the performance numbers on SpaceX website are with first stage reuse. They have higher margins if they don't reuse. Musk also mentioned once that the engines are only operating at 85% of their maximum performance right now. All that makes me believe that there are still margins in the F9 1.1 that will allow them to take a larger bite of the market, even if it means that that particular F9 wont be reused.

[Prober]

Looking at the list...
just can't see Dnepr flying.   http://www.kosmotras.ru/

PAZ – Dnepr – Dombarovskiy 370/13   

http://www.spacenews.com/article/military-space/37628commercial-earth-observation-european-radar-satellite-operators-see

Something from Orbital or LM ? 
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/athena.html
================
KompSat-3A – Dnepr – Dombarovskiy 370/13

http://www.wmo-sat.info/oscar/satellites/view/481

==============================

June 19 – KazEOSat-1, Deimos-2, SkySat-3, Hodoyoshi-3, Hodoyoshi-4, BugSat-2, BugSat-3, SaudiSat-4, UNSA-SAT 1, ESTELLE, AprizeSat- 9, AprizeSat-10, UniSat-6, Tigrisat, AeroCube6, ANTELSAT, Lemur-1, Serpens, BRITE-Toronto, BRITE-Montreal, NanosatC-Br1 – Dnepr – Dombarovskiy 370/13

===============================

August – Asnaro-1, Hodoyoshi-1, ChubuSat-1, TSUBAME, QSAT-EOS – Dnepr – Dombarovskiy 370/13 (or autumn)
 

[Prober]

If we're talking this year, shouldn't everyone have a backup launch provider? If so, they can switch to backup?

If we're talking about 2 years out, I would think FH would come into the picture and take up the slack.

Where do you find a list of the backups.....would be very interesting to know.

[baldusi]

Those are going subsynchronous.  Falcon 9 v1.1 can only lift maybe 3.5 tonnes to GEO minus 1,500 m/s (so far it has only demonstrated less than 3.2 tonnes).  Proton M/Briz M can lift more than 6.1 tonnes to this orbital energy, and an upgraded version is increasing that to more than 6.3 tonnes.

Here's a list of GTO (GEO-1,500 m/s) capabilities.

1.  Delta 4 Heavy        11.4 tonnes
2.  Ariane 5 ECA         10.0 tonnes
3.  H-2B-304            ~7.0 tonnes
4.  Atlas 551            6.7 tonnes
5.  Atlas 541            6.3 tonnes
6.  Proton M/Briz M      6.1 tonnes
7.  Zenit 3SL            6.1 tonnes
8.  Atlas 431            5.8 tonnes 
9.  Delta 4 5,4          5.8 tonnes
10. Delta IV 4,4         5.7 tonnes
    H-2A-204            ~4.5 tonnes
    Falcon 9 v1.1       ~3.5 tonnes
    Soyuz 2.1b/Freg      3.0 tonnes (Kourou)

So if the comsats get knocked off Proton, there really is only one non-Russian powered alternative that has a reasonable price.  Kourou is going to have to get busy.

 - Ed Kyle

I took the liberty of adding the Atlas 431. Not only is cheaper, but Proton-M has a 4m fairing, thus you don't need a 5m fairing. Also, since Delta IV is now based of the 5,4 core, actually launching a M+(4,4) should cost basically nothing. An its performance would be pretty close to a 5,4. And again, with a 4m fairing, is no problem on the commercial world. The problem with Delta IV is not only price, but lead time (36months), which is unacceptable in the commercial world. I still believe that a Common Avionics M+(4,4) should have been price competitive, but for some reason it isn't.