A insider once said in the Chinese forum that the cost of CZ5 would be slightly higher than one billion yuan(~150 million dollars)
Hello all lovers of astronautics. The table below is in great demand among the Russian-speaking segment of the Internet. In the English-speaking segment, I did not find anything like this, so I decided to translate it.https://aboutspacejornal.net/2017/09/21/comparative-cost-of-launching-payloads-into-space-on-different-launch-systems/If you find errors or inaccuracies in the translation or numbers, write, I will correct
I don't think Vega is 5m dollars. More like $35m.
A lot of date was inaccurate I thought. The cost of Soyuz-2 is higher than Falcon9s, and the baseline of Atlas-5 is 109M
Quote from: SmallKing on 10/28/2017 02:36 pmA lot of date was inaccurate I thought. The cost of Soyuz-2 is higher than Falcon9s, and the baseline of Atlas-5 is 109MI don't think that Soyuz-2 is more expensive than Falcon, but pay attention for what year prices. Where did the information about Atlas V?
Five Soyuz rocket launches and associated services were valued at 397 million euros, according to the commission's contract announcement in January. The launch price was higher than Galileo officials expected, complicating the already-mounting budget trouble.
Quote from: Guardian700 on 10/28/2017 02:44 pmQuote from: SmallKing on 10/28/2017 02:36 pmA lot of date was inaccurate I thought. The cost of Soyuz-2 is higher than Falcon9s, and the baseline of Atlas-5 is 109MQuoteFive Soyuz rocket launches and associated services were valued at 397 million euros, according to the commission's contract announcement in January. The launch price was higher than Galileo officials expected, complicating the already-mounting budget trouble.https://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1007/07galileo/It's about Souz-ST 80 million. Launch from the Guiana Space Centre in French Guiana. This is the Europeans are launching, for them is more expensive ...
Quote from: SmallKing on 10/28/2017 02:36 pmA lot of date was inaccurate I thought. The cost of Soyuz-2 is higher than Falcon9s, and the baseline of Atlas-5 is 109MQuoteFive Soyuz rocket launches and associated services were valued at 397 million euros, according to the commission's contract announcement in January. The launch price was higher than Galileo officials expected, complicating the already-mounting budget trouble.https://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1007/07galileo/
Quote from: Guardian700 on 10/28/2017 02:44 pmQuote from: SmallKing on 10/28/2017 02:36 pmA lot of date was inaccurate I thought. The cost of Soyuz-2 is higher than Falcon9s, and the baseline of Atlas-5 is 109MI don't think that Soyuz-2 is more expensive than Falcon, but pay attention for what year prices. Where did the information about Atlas V?https://www.rocketbuilder.com/start/configure
Hi! On November 14, launch of the Delta II and the satellite JPSS 1, so adding Delta II to the table. But unfortunately found the cost of launch only for 2009. If someone has a new information, please write.
There won't be any more Delta II rockets made (this is the next to last one).
There's a US government report online from last summer that has two charts with prices for commercially available rockets. The first chart is on page 22, the second chart is on page 30.http://www.gao.gov/assets/690/686613.pdf
Quote from: rayleighscatter on 11/12/2017 12:48 pmThere's a US government report online from last summer that has two charts with prices for commercially available rockets. The first chart is on page 22, the second chart is on page 30.http://www.gao.gov/assets/690/686613.pdfMany thanks!!! Changed!
It's even better than it looks - there's a typo in the table. The SpaceX entry should be 2684 $/kg, not 2864.This is immediately clear when you ask how Proton can be comparable. They payload is 23,000 vs 22,800, or about 1% more. But the cost is more than 1% higher. So at least one of the numbers must be wrong, and it's SpaceX.
There is a typo in the first chart (table 4). It is $2684 per kg, not $2864 per kg for the Falcon 9. According to @LouScheffer.Quote from: LouSchefferIt's even better than it looks - there's a typo in the table. The SpaceX entry should be 2684 $/kg, not 2864.This is immediately clear when you ask how Proton can be comparable. They payload is 23,000 vs 22,800, or about 1% more. But the cost is more than 1% higher. So at least one of the numbers must be wrong, and it's SpaceX.http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42617.msg1714471#msg1714471
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 11/13/2017 09:35 pmThere is a typo in the first chart (table 4). It is $2684 per kg, not $2864 per kg for the Falcon 9. According to @LouScheffer.Quote from: LouSchefferIt's even better than it looks - there's a typo in the table. The SpaceX entry should be 2684 $/kg, not 2864.This is immediately clear when you ask how Proton can be comparable. They payload is 23,000 vs 22,800, or about 1% more. But the cost is more than 1% higher. So at least one of the numbers must be wrong, and it's SpaceX.http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42617.msg1714471#msg1714471Before I change, who is LouScheffer? And why does he think so?
No need for reputation here. The table itself has all the data. The cost is 61.2 million. The payload is 22,800 kg. That gives a cost of $2684/kg. But the cost per kg entry, on the same line, says $2864. Seems pretty clear this is just a typo, since your calculator can show you that $2684 is the correct value.
The actual physical pages are 27 and 35 respectively. It's quite a range of $/Kg of mass, with over a decade in range.
Better than nothing
Just a question: why is price per kg the most quoted criteria regarding prices of launch?When contracting a launch, you don't say "we only take up 50% of your mass capabilities, we will only pay 50% of the launch". You pay for a launch, unless you do some ride share mission. Launches have fixed costs, and potentially NRE costs for different payload interface structures (if multiple payloads were on flight)Also generally payloads do not get up to the 80% to 100% capacity range of the launch vehicles; you would actually be paying a much higher $/kg on those missions. edit: I feel like it's akin to buying a sedan vs an SUV/Minivan. The SUV/Minivan may cost $38k vas $26k of a sedan, but the SUV holds 7 people. You are saying "I'm paying $5.4k per person with a SUV vs $6.5k for a sedan" even though you only carry 4 people.
I think this NASA presentation contains a lot of relevant info for this topic:https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170009968.pdf
Just a question: why is price per kg the most quoted criteria regarding prices of launch?
Quote from: Davidthefat on 12/15/2017 07:11 pmJust a question: why is price per kg the most quoted criteria regarding prices of launch?It's a fair question and the answer is it does give a single metric across the whole range of LV's. But you're right, you don't buy lift by the lb or Kg, you buy by the launch. The other issue is a small LV simply can't carry the load, in the same way a car can't tow a 40ft container. If you want that you need an 18 wheeler. A more subtle point is those prices only apply to full loads. Musk has talked of sub 1000$/lb for FH launches provided there are more than 4 a year and they are fully loaded IE to 50+tonnes, suggesting multiple ride shares will be needed if people actually want to get that low a price per Kg to orbit.
Dear Guardian700, is it possible to make the boxes wider? It is somehow laborious to read sometimes. Good work, btw.
Quote from: Kosmos2001 on 01/17/2018 08:34 amDear Guardian700, is it possible to make the boxes wider? It is somehow laborious to read sometimes. Good work, btw. Many thanks. The width is only 900 px max. There is no place to expand, unfortunately ...
Agreed with Kosmos2001. Also, why the limit?