Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX and Iridium Sign $492M Launch Contract
FleaPlus writes "Following up on the successful first launch of their Falcon 9 rocket, SpaceX has signed a $492M deal for launching several dozen satellites for the Iridium NEXT constellation, the biggest commercial launch deal ever (teleconference notes). This is a needed boost for the US launch industry, which has dwindled to a fraction of the international market due to problematic ITAR arms regulations and high costs. SpaceX's next launch is scheduled for later this summer, carrying the first full version of the Dragon reusable capsule, which will run tests in orbit and then splash down off the California coast."
We need private space industry to really start hummin' and making more deals like this. The only way we are going to make space travel actually doable and useful within our lifetimes (or maybe even our kid's lifetimes) is if the private industry really ramps things up.
Considering how far things have come in just the last decade (hell, even just the last five years) I have high hopes.
Living With a Nerd
and I hope all goes well. This is a significant step in the history of humankind as a space-faring species, a little corporate step sideways...
A transcript of an Australian doco on the US space business "The High Frontier"
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2005/s1358430.htm
The contracts to help the DoD show real growth for some with connections. Some interesting numbers and private sector deals with the US DoD are listed.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
the thing im really excited about is if spacex can get to the point where reusing the first stage merely involves fishing it out of the atlantic after it parachutes down, putting it back on the launch pad, and fuelling it back up. these engines are designed more for reliability, and have proven that through testing through multiple duty cycles. unlike the space shuttle main engines, which require a teardown and rebuild after every flight. we could see the first ever prospect of real reusability, more a car than a dragster in terms of parts wear. especially considering the first stage can complete its mission even with a engine failure at any point during its flight.
This is a needed boost for the US launch industry
With a boost of commercial launches, won't there also be a boost of space junk when these orbiting things are decommissionned 15 years from now? How does that increase collision risks, like the 2009 Iridium/Kosmos collision?
Maybe it's time for thinking about mandatory destruction of satellites at the end of their useful life, instead of trying to make money out of launching things only...
Iridium satellites (both current and next generation) are in LEO, not GEO. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellation
The FCC calls for all US-registered spacecraft to be disposed of at the end of its useful life. This means either decay into the atmosphere within a specific amount of time (25 years, I think) or placement into a "disposal" orbit. For geosynchronous spacecraft, that disposal orbit is one slightly higher, getting it out of the way of operational spacecraft.
Calling Iridium a "commercial launch" is a bit of a stretch. Iridium failed as a commercial venture and the company that runs it now appears to be a transparent pawn of the DoD.
SPLASHDOWN IS NOT A VERB.
It begs the question: whose the one that put these guy's in charge?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Well, it is a living language.
And all words have been used first somewhere.
Most people accept splashdown as a verb. Live with it.
Nice, the old ad populum logical fallacy. Would you like to cite your reference on where you found out that most people accept splashdown as a verb, or would you rather toss my salad instead?
I doubt he could find a cite for that specific verb, but there's no need. One need only demonstrate that most people accept verbing nouns. I can't provide a cite for that, either, but I know from experience it's true for nearly everyone I know. I would venture to say, at this point, one is not a competent speaker of the English language is you cannot comprehend sentences with verbed nouns, as the practice quite widespread.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Well, I guess I can do a trivial Google search. I found a couple of articles on wikipedia where it's been used as a verb without the editors fixing it, space.com seems happy to use the verb in their 2.25pm update, and I have a PDF of a letter from a guy who appears to know what he's talking about.
A google search for "will splashdown" gives a lot more hits. Even "Splashdowned" gives a few.
Hey,I was just pointing out that it's widely accepted in various circles. Language is defined by usage. I've demonstrated splashdown is widely used as a verb.
You got any evidence that I'm wrong. I mean it's all well and good to dismiss my arguments. They're pretty weak. However, I'll take a weak argument over the none whatsoever that you've presented so far. And I'll advise you that insults just make you look stupid - at least to 50% of the people still paying attention to this thread.
I already answered this question in a previous thread, so I will repost it here:
Yeah, funny how it gets a lot easier to run the business when Motorola assumes the 5 billion of debt and sells it to you for $25 million. The success of Iridium Satellite LLC is subsidized by the ashes of the original company.
Proper management made the difference after the sale removed the debt, but even if the company had been properly managed from the beginning, it still would have folded. Even 300k subscribers is not going to pay off that 5 billion monster, not when they're only netting about 14 million a year (when they turn a profit, which they did not for 2010).
I wish them well milking what they can from their cheap windfall. But I laugh at the thought that they might build another multi-billion dollar constellation based off such a pitiful business plan. Yes, their subscribers are GROWING, but only because they can offer such insanely cheap rates without having to pay-off the painful debt.
As soon as they invest in their own new constellation, they will either have to conjure millions of new customers out of thin air, or they will have to raise prices (this will send customers running, so I'm going to go with option one). But since the DoD contracts are already pretty saturated (seriously, does the military need a contract for more than 20k users?), the customer growth would have to come from the commercial or consumer sector. Either way, they are doomed in this approach, and once again, investors are going to be forced to eat the losses and once-again subsidize a "successful" network.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
They are now United Launch Alliance, for their rockets.
They're priced too expensive for commercial customers. Nearly all of their launches are for the U.S. Government. Commercial launches generally use Russian or Ukranian rockets. From what I've read, there have been about 5 launches with Russian rockets to every 1 launch of an american rocket over the course of the last several decades.
The U.S. govt started the EELV program to upgrade the American rockets in about 1995. The American rockets had fallen behind the Russian in terms of launch success rates and reliability. The Delta IV and the Atlas V are results of this program. They appear to be much more reliable than the rockets they replaced. The Atlas V does though use the RD-180, a Russian made engine on the first stage, much to the dismay of some government officials.
Some in the U.S. complain that after the retirement of the Space Shuttle later this year, the U.S. will not have the capability to launch a manned spacecraft. But when launching using the Russian Soyuz, it's hard to beat their launch costs. I mean, U.S. consumers buy foreign made products all the time because they're cheaper. What's the deal with just buying cheaper, foreing launch services?
Spokesbossy for ominous cow herds everywhere.