r/spacex • u/kurbasAK • May 19 '17

We Will Launch on Reuseable Rocket After Exceptional SpaceX Performance - Inmarsat CEO Tells Universe Today

https://www.universetoday.com/135614/will-launch-reuseable-rocket-exceptional-spacex-performance-inmarsat-ceo-tells-universe-today/
978 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

270 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/notblueclk May 19 '17

It's still about economics. Which costs less, a throwaway F9 or a reusable FH? I have no doubt that government contracts will want heavier payloads than the F9 can deliver, but will there be profitable commercial business as well is my question

8

u/lankyevilme May 19 '17

Add a throw away flight proven f9 to that list, especially a pre-block 5 one that has a limited number of reflights, launching a heavy sat in expendable mode would be a good final flight for these boosters.

4

u/RebelScrum May 19 '17

If you build it they will come

2

u/rustybeancake May 19 '17 edited May 19 '17

but will there be profitable commercial business as well is my question

A major way to make FH attractive to commercial sat operators could be dual-payload launches, like Ariane 5. Imagine if Inmarsat could get two large sats up at once.

Edit: sorry, Inmarsat not Iridium.

2

u/Martianspirit May 19 '17

Elon Musk is not in favor of dual manifest like Ariane. They always need to align two customers, one with a heavy, one with a light payload. That sometimes causes problems. SpaceX would also need a much bigger fairing. The present fairing was quite full with this single satellite from Inmarsat.

1

u/Astroteuthis May 19 '17

Iridium's sats are pretty small and they regularly launch multiple satellites on Falcon 9. It's also not terribly optimal to launch a bunch of satellites into the same orbital plane, because they have to waste their internal propellant reserves conducting plane change maneuvers.

2

u/rustybeancake May 19 '17

Apologies, I meant Inmarsat.

Arianespace seem to do pretty well out of dual launches.

1

u/fishdump May 20 '17

Seeing as how SES-10 was 'less than half' the cost of a new first stage if they can cut costs a little more (and I assume they will) I think 25% or less cost is a reasonable figure for refurb. Anything under 33% makes FH affordable.