top | item 20616516

SpaceX Smallsat Rideshare Program

169 points| mulcahey | 6 years ago |spacex.com | reply

80 comments

order
[+] Rebelgecko|6 years ago|reply
With these prices it looks like they're not targeting cubesats, which I'm sure is a relief to the existing rideshare companies. It will be interesting to see how good they are at launching on time. Since SpaceX can shift around Starlink launches to help their schedule, they might have a bit of an advantage over conventional rideshare companies.

>For payloads who run into development or production challenges leading up to launch, SpaceX will allow them to apply 100% of monies paid towards the cost of rebooking on a subsequent mission (rebooking fees may apply).

Without knowing the magnitude of the rebooking fees this isn't a very informative statement.

[+] tlrobinson|6 years ago|reply
How large is the CubeSat launch market?

Also, they do say this:

> Cubesats can be aggregated and launched on a customer provided, ESPA-compatible deployer.

[+] TeMPOraL|6 years ago|reply
Sun-Synchronous Orbit... huh, that one you can't do in Kerbal Space Program.

Turns out SSO is exploiting the fact that Earth isn't a perfect sphere, and so you can use the non-spherically-symmetric gravity field to induce precession in your orbital plane. If you tune the precession go 360° per year, you get a Sun-Synchronous Orbit.

Decent.

--

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-synchronous_orbit#Technica...

[+] ortusdux|6 years ago|reply
What does L-12 and L-6 from the pricing section refer to?
[+] philip1209|6 years ago|reply
Because they are posting pricing, I'm curious about the details. What happens if the rocket fails and loses the payload? Is there insurance included/available? Does the customer get a refund?
[+] dr_orpheus|6 years ago|reply
Satellite insurance is a fairly big industry. The owner of the satellite being launched is responsible for getting said insurance against the satellite. This can cover anomalies during launch [1] or anomalies on orbit where the satellite is lost or can no longer perform its mission [2]. Pretty much all commercial companies will have insurance on their satellites, government satellites are typically "self-insured".

[1] https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/s... [2] https://spacenews.com/digitalglobe-loses-worldview-4-satelli...

[+] hobofan|6 years ago|reply
If I'm not mistaken, the company supplying the payload usually has to insure the payload, and depending on the launch companies track record (and therefore risk) they get better/worse conditions. Of course the insurance company will then try to get their money from the launch company in the case of failure.
[+] starik36|6 years ago|reply
Coincidental that you mention this. AMOS-6, launching tomorrow on an F9 is getting a free ride, since the previous version of the satellite blew up on the pad.
[+] greedo|6 years ago|reply
As with a regular satellite launch, the customer usually buys their own insurance? SpaceX would be on the hook for the launch costs though.
[+] varjag|6 years ago|reply
Heliosync orbit suggests focus on visual Earth observation and surveillance type missions.
[+] garmaine|6 years ago|reply
I think you are thinking of geosync?
[+] dnjdrbdhdbs|6 years ago|reply
What is the rough breakdown of applications for all these cubesats and other satellites?
[+] vonseel|6 years ago|reply
Also curious what the rough breakdown of applicTions is... somehow you have several replies and most about a hamburger menu.

What are satellites even used for these days besides navigation and espionage (limited to a handful of large players, I assume)?

[+] alephnan|6 years ago|reply

[deleted]

[+] Cthulhu_|6 years ago|reply
I'll bite; the cpu power needed to operate and render that hamburger menu is many times more than was used on the Apollo missions to the moon. :p

We've been going into space for 60 years, we've only gone to cyberspace for 30.

[+] ntpeters|6 years ago|reply
SpaceX has one deployment target, how many do front-end devs have? :P
[+] paxys|6 years ago|reply
How much money is SpaceX putting into rocket science vs front-end development?
[+] ideasRgood|6 years ago|reply
The hard part about rocket science is fluid Dynamics, and it's only hard to land.

But my God do the engineering equations for fluid Dynamics are nuts when you have an open, changing, turbulent system.

[+] penagwin|6 years ago|reply
The Engineers are clearly busy making rockets :P
[+] tehlike|6 years ago|reply
Css is hard, by proxy, ui is hard :)
[+] jonplackett|6 years ago|reply
Haha. I had the exact same thought. Lots of images with blocks of white behind white text. And the font is horrible. I guess sacrifices have to be made somewhere when you’re changing the world.
[+] ExodusOrbitals1|6 years ago|reply
They are definitely in the need of extra cash from smallsat market.
[+] rtkwe|6 years ago|reply
The transferable nature of the ride seems like a big gamble pared with their statement that launches won't be held up by co-passengers. Guess they're just counting on the odds that enough passengers will drop out to make the launch uneconomic will be fairly low.
[+] mlindner|6 years ago|reply
This is one launch per year. They already launch about 20 per year for the last few years. The extra cash here is minimal.