Amazon Kuiper places largest commercial launch order with ULA, Arianespace, Blue

[Jim]

Boy, the SpaceX bias is really evident in this thread.

[abaddon]

Boy, the SpaceX bias is really evident in this thread.

That's cute Jim, but why don't you tell us something useful?

[Tuts36]

Boy, the SpaceX bias is really evident in this thread.

I'm actually reading this as more of a bias towards reuseable launch, and the economic benefits thereof to the competition. 

[brussell]

Is ABL mentioned anywhere? Didn't Amazon Kuiper contracted (or at least committed) to a bunch of launches with them?

[Jim]

Boy, the SpaceX bias is really evident in this thread.

That's cute Jim, but why don't you tell us something useful?

That is my point, it is useless to such because of the engrained bias.

Comments like "no brainer" reveals it.  You don't have the knowledge or insight to make such a claim.

[abaddon]

Boy, the SpaceX bias is really evident in this thread.

That's cute Jim, but why don't you tell us something useful?

That is my point, it is useless to such because of the engrained bias.

I find your insights valuable, and I know many others do.  Throwing another bone onto the well-worn "SpaceX fan/anti-fan" pile doesn't contribute anything positive.

Comments like "no brainer" reveals it.  You don't have the knowledge or insight to make such a claim.

My comment was that if Amazon wanted to launch right now SpaceX would be a no-brainer.  I'd be happy to listen to your insight into why that comment is inaccurate, if you care to contribute it.

[EDIT] Forgot about those Atlas V launches that are already contracted, clearly that was the contract that F9 would have been competing for, and already lost.

[DanClemmensen]

Why didn't Amazon just do the sensible thing and go with SpaceX for launching Kuiper? Going with SpaceX for the whole Kuiper project would save Amazon many billions of $ and very likely get the whole Kuiper constellation launched considerably sonner. F9 is fully proven and launching about once per week on average while Vulcan, NG, and A6 have not even launched yet with the earliest possible launch of any of these 3 being Vulcan at the back end of this year. Also not to mention SS which may launch before any of those 3 mentioned above.

Is there a source for SpaceX offering better price/schedule/terms than Amazon got through the other 3?

I do not know how we can evaluate the likely launch price offers for Vulcan, Ariane 6, and New Glenn.

SpaceX alleges that F9 will launch at least 65% of the entire world's payload mass to orbit this year. That makes them the de facto market leader and puts them at risk of violating anti-trust law if they fail to provide non-discriminatory pricing. From this, we can conclude that SpaceX would offer the same pricing to Amazon/Kuiper that they did to OneWeb. They might be able to legitimately drop the price a bit by offering a bulk discount, but a higher price might lead to a lawsuit. So, we have a starting point for our guess as to an offering price for F9 launches to Amazon/Kuiper.

For the same anti-trust reason, SpaceX would find it awkward to claim a lack of launch opportunities. If they were willing to bump Starlinks in favor of OneWeb launches, they cannot claim that there are no slots for Kuiper.

I suppose SpaceX could claim that F9 will reach end-of-life before the end of the Kuiper launch schedule, but I think a good anti-trust lawyer would tear this argument to shreds, since it implies that SpaceX would have an alternative in place and the contract could be written to include the use of the alternative.

[JayWee]

Worth remembering there are no satellites yet and we don't have any hints (well, I don't, please correct if I am wrong) when there will be.  Falcon 9 is a no-brainer right now, but if Amazon isn't going to have satellites ready for a while, it makes less sense.

Is ABL mentioned anywhere? Didn't Amazon Kuiper contracted (or at least committed) to a bunch of launches with them?

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/1/22752469/amazon-project-kuiper-prototype-satellite-fcc-2022-abl-space-systems

Amazon’s ambitious satellite-internet project, Project Kuiper, aims to launch its first two prototype satellites in the fourth quarter of 2022, according to an experimental launch license the company filed with the Federal Communications Commission today. Called KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2, the two prototypes are supposed to launch on an experimental new rocket called the RS1, currently being developed by startup ABL Space Systems based in El Segundo, California.

[abaddon]

Worth remembering there are no satellites yet and we don't have any hints (well, I don't, please correct if I am wrong) when there will be.  Falcon 9 is a no-brainer right now, but if Amazon isn't going to have satellites ready for a while, it makes less sense.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/1/22752469/amazon-project-kuiper-prototype-satellite-fcc-2022-abl-space-systems

Amazon’s ambitious satellite-internet project, Project Kuiper, aims to launch its first two prototype satellites in the fourth quarter of 2022, according to an experimental launch license the company filed with the Federal Communications Commission today. Called KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2, the two prototypes are supposed to launch on an experimental new rocket called the RS1, currently being developed by startup ABL Space Systems based in El Segundo, California.

Thanks @JayWee.  Based on the fact that their first orbital prototypes are slated NET Q422, it seems likely the new launcher timeline isn't likely to be a limiting factor, between at least one of Ariane/Vulcan.

[EDIT] I just realized I'm forgetting the Atlas V launches already contracted, which will easily be enough to absorb any launcher delays and covers them for the short term.

[Robotbeat]

SpaceX would have definitely been able to offer a better price and schedule. However, they may not have done so.

I'm wondering if SpaceX just offered Starship.  In that case I could see Amazon being conservative and going with a couple of "new launchers built by reliable old space companies" with some New Glenn being thrown in because Bezos.  Ariane 6 is a conservative design and Vulcan is as well.  Throw in Vulcan supporting Blue Origin as a secondary bonus, and Starship might not look that appealing, given some skepticism about SpaceX hitting their (massively ambitious) targets.

Worth remembering there are no satellites yet and we don't have any hints (well, I don't, please correct if I am wrong) when there will be.  Falcon 9 is a no-brainer right now, but if Amazon isn't going to have satellites ready for a while, it makes less sense.

Ive seen estimates of Atlas V Kuiper launches in the first quarter of 2023, but stuff usually slips.

[Jim]

Why don't people buy iPhones?

[Redclaws]

Why don't people buy iPhones?

Well, matters of personal taste are *usually* considered more important in smartphones than launch vehicles, but what would I know.

Jim,

Do you have any evidence why it’s likely the decision not to use SpaceX *at all* was motivated by something other than commercial animus? “Commercial animus” being defined here as “commercial reasons not related to cost or convenience of service”, in this case, a desire to avoid funding Starlink regardless of the cost.

We have ample evidence of these launchers struggling to win commercial contracts against F9.  It seems truly remarkable that F9 is excluded *entirely*, given it’s by far the most prolific commercial launcher on the market right now.  OneWeb just booked a similar service and chose SpaceX.  Do you really believe SpaceX was unable to offer competitive pricing or schedule options vs *any* of these providers?

[DanClemmensen]

Why don't people buy iPhones?

"People" are not publicly-held corporations with a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. The Amazon board of directors needs to have a defensible economic reason to have not chosen SpaceX, or risk a shareholder lawsuit. "Don't fund your competition" may be defensible.

[abaddon]

Honestly, as per my edits, I forgot Amazon already secured multiple Atlas V launches for the early deployment phase.  It's hardly a stretch to imagine ULA offering F9-competitive pricing for a block buy of nine or whatever Atlas Vs given they need to fly out the remainder of their already purchased RD-180s and the US Govt has to phase them out.

(Before anyone goes "SpaceX amazing people" on me for suggesting ULA had to offer a discount to compete with SpaceX, ULA is on record for wanting to retire Atlas V due to its lack of competitiveness in the commercial market in addition to the Russian engine problem).

Starship vs Vulcan+Ariane+New Glenn is a different proposition.  As I mentioned earlier, going with more conservative launcher designs from proven launch companies isn't really a surprising decision.

[butters]

ULA, Arianespace, and Blue Origin need these bulk orders on their manifests more than SpaceX does, and Amazon needs to cultivate launch service relationships more than they need to launch ASAP for the lowest possible cost. I'm sure Kuiper got an excellent deal relative to what these launch providers would typically charge for a one-off, and whatever the difference might be relative to SpaceX is probably not so large that it would outweigh the long-term strategic considerations.

As much as we can read into Bezos' grand vision for the orbital economy, it seems clear that he envisions many companies engaged in the means of production, not just Blue Origin and certainly not just SpaceX. I think there's some paternalism in play here where Bezos sees himself as responsible for whipping the global (or I guess "free world") aerospace industry into shape to facilitate his objectives and, to an extent, counter the growing dominance of SpaceX.

Elon might weight every decision on the basis of whether it moves his ultimate goal sooner or later in time, but part of the Bezos "gradatim" philosophy is a willingness to trade schedule for an end state closer to his ideals. Sooner and quite possibly cheaper doesn't necessarily carry the day if the result is not "better" in his view. He'll slow down to accommodate the development of more diverse and heterogeneous industrial base because that's a big part of how he wants the future to look.

[matthewkantar]

I am curious to see if any attempt is made to recover fairings on any of the three new rockets. In the case of Vulcan/Atlas, I guess if you are tossing out a billion dollars worth of solids, chasing them in to the drink with a quarter of a billion dollars worth of fairings is no big deal.

[matthewkantar]

Boy, the SpaceX bias is really evident in this thread.

It is clear to me where the bias is. Iphone has many appealing qualities. What appealing qualities do 3 never-before-flown rockets costing at least twice as much have?

[Jim]

It is clear to me where the bias is. Iphone has many appealing qualities. What appealing qualities do 3 never-before-flown rockets costing at least twice as much have?

Buying never flown rockets from experienced providers is not something new.

[Blackjax]

SpaceX would have definitely been able to offer a better price and schedule.

Do we really know this though?  They are already up to 60 launches planned this year and that is huge.  As came up with the oneweb launches, there is a real question of how many launches they can push through their existing manufacturing & launch infrastructure (which they might be unwilling to substantially upgrade due to a desire to move over to starship as soon as practical).  It's possible they can't handle this amount of additional volume without changes they are not interested in making. 

Additionally, given that all three other options have unproven vehicles and have a strong motivation to price competitively to get this business for their unproven vehicles, the prices might not be as bad as everyone is imagining.

I don't know that any of this is true but the potential for it makes me think we should be cautious about assuming with certaintly that SpaceX would be the clear choice.

[TrevorMonty]

While Bezos is chairman of board he isn't CEO anymore and isn't solely responsible for deciding which launch providers Amazon uses. Management may have excluded him from decision making process given he owns Blue and conflict of interests.

Amazon is on a tight schedule and can't risk relying on new RLVs like Neutron and Terran R. A6 and Vulcan maybe new LVs but they are flying lot of flight proven systems and expected to fly in next few months. The other big plus is both companies have excellent launch records.
New Glenn on other hand is riskier option but likely to be cheaper than A6 and Vulcan.

 The initial constellation of 3500 satellites won't be last expect 1000s more over the coming years. There will be other launch contracts in future, by which time the new generation of RLVs will be flying.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk