Quote from: kevin-rf on 03/22/2022 02:12 amWow, why does everything have to have a dark and sinister motive? Sometimes and opportunity for a launch contract is just that and SpaceX had space to accommodate this one. Guess my tinfoil hat is on just a bit to tight.Indeed. I fail to see the mystery here, there are many benefits:- A paying customer (vs self-funded Starlink launches)- Positive PR to both potential customers and the public- Oneweb has some potential customer overlap with Starlink but they also some unique different customer segments that don’t overlap in the near future.Also, since they hope to start launching Starlink with Starship later this year (based on what we are seeing), the Starlink schedule pressure on the F9 flight schedule should become less intense in the fall.It makes sense.
Wow, why does everything have to have a dark and sinister motive? Sometimes and opportunity for a launch contract is just that and SpaceX had space to accommodate this one. Guess my tinfoil hat is on just a bit to tight.
Quote from: Lars-J on 03/22/2022 03:50 amQuote from: kevin-rf on 03/22/2022 02:12 amWow, why does everything have to have a dark and sinister motive? Sometimes and opportunity for a launch contract is just that and SpaceX had space to accommodate this one. Guess my tinfoil hat is on just a bit to tight.Indeed. I fail to see the mystery here, there are many benefits:- A paying customer (vs self-funded Starlink launches)- Positive PR to both potential customers and the public- Oneweb has some potential customer overlap with Starlink but they also some unique different customer segments that don’t overlap in the near future.Also, since they hope to start launching Starlink with Starship later this year (based on what we are seeing), the Starlink schedule pressure on the F9 flight schedule should become less intense in the fall.It makes sense.It makes sense on many levels.Background - Elon is is not scorched earth business competitor and SpaceX is more than Elon. I imagine one of the many reasons Gwen stays with SpaceX (besides being the best job in the business and not BO) is that SpaceX is a can do sort of place that is in the business of making money with the Falcon 9 with great customers - Irridium (and alot of the early SES missions) pretty much paid for SpaceX to learn how to land rockets. SpaceX is a very serious company today with ISS cargo Dragon, ISS Crew Dragon with NASA as the core customer and other private space missions cream on the cake. Elon's BC toy shop (appears as future product development in the budget - which has paying customers with HLS and DearMoon) is core to Elon and not the viability of SpaceX long term if it fails. The secret sauce of SpaceX has always been bang for buck! More for your dollar!So I imagine Gwen called Elon and said she had a call from Neil today and OneWeb would like us to do what what no-one else can do (It is SpaceX all!) and do a deal on the when and how. The price and details would be interesting - obviously the quicker you want to launches the more you would have to pay. The longest timeline being well we will would need to build a new booster or two and you get three flights from each and Spacex gets used boosters to bolster its Starlink launch fleet and 3 months after they enter service (after oneweb launches ) Starlink is getting 2 extra launches a month for probably 2 years - subsidised by One Web. So even if some Starlink launches are deffered and one web subsituted, starlink launches would catch up quickly and be well in front after 6 months or so (once the new boosters built and launching) - the economics of the Falcon 9.So in my mind the question - is how many new boosters would be made as part of this contract and how long till they are made, and at what price the average (total contract etc)- published price is what U$D 60 million for a new booster plus mission costs etc Then the question is does Oneweb pay to bump starlink or not - all about the money. Neil from OneWeb can say well Arriane 6 is coming so that is the long play (and probably not very cheap either - have to wonder if the Oneweb-Arriane contract has penalties for non delivery in there!)Not sure what time pressures Oneweb has to get the network in place to meet their FCC licensing requirements.Whether OneWeb is successful or not, will probably not effect Starlink's viability one way or the other - as we have seen alreday SpaceX-Starlink has a supply problem, not a customer problem (aside from being allowed to market services in various countries with regulatory and politiical hurdles).On the Amazon network (BO) - I imagine Gwen and Elon would have no problem launching the network for them - would even do a great deal on building the Satellites and ground stations as well. Currently Starlink really has first mover advantage (if you consider Irridium II legacy....) So unless BO can achieve cheaper synergies by being a fast follower (which BO has shown no capibility to do so) Starlink should rule!But the world is full of could haves and should of s my 2cents worth.
Quote from: andrewi on 03/22/2022 08:10 am...So I imagine Gwen called Elon and said she had a call from Neil today and OneWeb would like us to do what what no-one else can do (It is SpaceX all!) and do a deal on the when and how. The price and details would be interesting - obviously the quicker you want to launches the more you would have to pay. The longest timeline being well we will would need to build a new booster or two and you get three flights from each and Spacex gets used boosters to bolster its Starlink launch fleet and 3 months after they enter service (after oneweb launches ) Starlink is getting 2 extra launches a month for probably 2 years - subsidised by One Web. So even if some Starlink launches are deffered and one web subsituted, starlink launches would catch up quickly and be well in front after 6 months or so (once the new boosters built and launching) - the economics of the Falcon 9.Who is Gwen?
...So I imagine Gwen called Elon and said she had a call from Neil today and OneWeb would like us to do what what no-one else can do (It is SpaceX all!) and do a deal on the when and how. The price and details would be interesting - obviously the quicker you want to launches the more you would have to pay. The longest timeline being well we will would need to build a new booster or two and you get three flights from each and Spacex gets used boosters to bolster its Starlink launch fleet and 3 months after they enter service (after oneweb launches ) Starlink is getting 2 extra launches a month for probably 2 years - subsidised by One Web. So even if some Starlink launches are deffered and one web subsituted, starlink launches would catch up quickly and be well in front after 6 months or so (once the new boosters built and launching) - the economics of the Falcon 9.
Quote from: OneSpeed on 03/22/2022 08:33 amWho is Gwen?It's Aussie for Gwynne! G'day
Who is Gwen?
Arianespace has its back to the wall.OneWeb might sue them, or may have to sue them, they owe their owners money.No action can be seen or not possible from Arianespace, not on ASI/CSG-2, not on Galaxy 37 or now on OneWeb. Another customer gone.
Quote from: GWR64 on 03/21/2022 07:26 pmArianespace has its back to the wall.OneWeb might sue them, or may have to sue them, they owe their owners money.No action can be seen or not possible from Arianespace, not on ASI/CSG-2, not on Galaxy 37 or now on OneWeb. Another customer gone.Let's just be clear on this point: ASI with CSG-2 is an outsider from discussions on relations between Arianespace, ESA, Member States and their obligation to launch on European carriers.It is not that Arianespace has "lost Italy as a customer", far from it...Italy will soon return (it is already doing so to be honest) to support its rockets: AVIO builds VEGA, VEGA-C and soon VEGA-E.Italian payloads, where possible, will be launched by rockets operated by Arianespace.But this does not exclude that Italy can rely on American launch companies, such as SpaceX or ULA, even in the future.This also derives from the fact that Italy is the only European space agency with an exclusive bilateral collaborative agreement with NASA.So my point is that even though there have been issues with some customer launches, not everyone decides to just say goodbye. Who for political reasons, who for economic reasons, who for other reasons...And I think the same thing on OneWeb: they will return to do business with Arianespace, it's just a matter of time, need and capacity.Is it comfortable for them to have SpaceX now? Of course.Do they have any launches with Arianespace pending? Yup.They will come back... And no one wants to sue whoever has to launch your satellites.
<snip>OneWeb is a UK/Indian company not a European one - what the impact of Brit Exit on the EU and long standing partnerships has yet to be played out - eg Galileo GPS (British built satellite bits and EU launcher etc)This does create an opportunity for ISRO (Indian Space Research Org ? Why - great bang for buck - low cost reliable launchers - dark horse of the Space Industry world) but also gives UK leverage with EU if they use Arianespace launches. Launcher choice has possibly has more to do with politics than economics.How the economics and politics plays out depends on who the main customers are - if they are EU customers - then EU launchers will be used.I think you can expect a mix of EU and Indian launch providers long term for OneWeb is what my crystal ball says...<snip>
Quote from: DreamyPickle on 03/21/2022 01:23 pmQuote from: EnigmaSCADA on 03/21/2022 01:20 pmWere the cancelled OneWeb Russian launches of the type marketed/contracted through Arianespace/Starsem or were they simply directly purchased from Russia by OneWeb? I remember a statement from OneWeb claiming that "ArianeSpace owes them a number of launches". I wonder how ArianeSpace is involved in the deal with SpaceX?It's possible that this is a direct deal between OneWeb and SpaceX and that ArianeSpace will keep owing them a bunch of launches, presumably with Ariane 6.There is no way ArianeSpace brokers launch(es) on Falcon 9, and that opinion is underscored by the fact that there is no mention of ArianeSpace here at all. This is clearly a direct deal between OneWeb and SpaceX.Any contract dispute for any monies already allocated for launches brokered by ArianeSpace will be presumably negotiated or settled in a court of law.
Quote from: EnigmaSCADA on 03/21/2022 01:20 pmWere the cancelled OneWeb Russian launches of the type marketed/contracted through Arianespace/Starsem or were they simply directly purchased from Russia by OneWeb? I remember a statement from OneWeb claiming that "ArianeSpace owes them a number of launches". I wonder how ArianeSpace is involved in the deal with SpaceX?It's possible that this is a direct deal between OneWeb and SpaceX and that ArianeSpace will keep owing them a bunch of launches, presumably with Ariane 6.
Were the cancelled OneWeb Russian launches of the type marketed/contracted through Arianespace/Starsem or were they simply directly purchased from Russia by OneWeb?
I wasn't asking if Arianespace brokered this deal. I was asking if the original Soyuz launches were through Arianespace/Starsem.
I see there is now (perhaps inevitably) heaps of speculation on Twitter about how many additional OneWeb sats can fit into a single F9 payload, compared to Soyuz.This raises a an interesting scenario. SpaceX is already “doing right” by OneWeb by stepping in to replace their lost Soyuz launches at short notice. But surely it is not in their interest to make OneWeb’s launches MORE efficient than the previous Soyuz launches.The rather slow deployment of the OneWeb constellation due to Soyuz’s limitations played in SpaceX’s favour. How does it make sense for them to say - “Hey look, we can now launch 45 of your sats instead of the 34 you could launch on Soyuz?”Surely you don’t want to actively undermine your own interests any more than is absolutely needed.
SN, OneWeb to resume launches in fourth quarter [June 23]
Notably, [OneWeb’s Maurizio] Vanotti said that the agreement, negotiated over less than three days, is for a “few Falcon 9 launches.” The companies had previously declined to say even how many launches were included in the agreement.
.@OneWeb gets @ITU Ok for 8-month extension, to July 2023, to deploy Q/V-band payload after @SpaceX Falcon 9 launch in December. @OneWebSatellit1 @AirbusSpace @anfr. bit.ly/3PgW4Il
This tweet gives us finally some information on the number of OneWeb satellites per launch and the number of launches:https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/15518160211615170573 @SpaceX launches (equivalent to 4 Soyuz OneWeb launches): As one Soyuz could carry 36 sats, the equivalent of 4 Soyuz launches spread over 3 Falcon launches means that there are 48 OneWeb sats on each Falcon launch.
Excluding the dispenser, which I’d like to know the mass of, Falcon 9’s carrying 7,080 kilograms (given each OneWeb sat is 147.5 kilograms).
