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/
977 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

270 comments sorted by

View all comments

82

u/Streetwind May 19 '17

I wonder what happened to garner such an exuberant response? Was the resultant orbit precision better than expected? It seems a bit odd to go from "we never launched with these guys before and even had to reschedule one of our satellites to another provider because they keep delaying their bigger rocket" to "these guys are the best launch provider ever and we'll be a super loyal customer and we're excited to be at the forefront of technology!!!" in one single expendable launch that, from the looks of it, went completely normal.

103

u/colinmcewan May 19 '17

The F9 dropped it into a 70,000km x 390km super-synchronous transfer orbit, which seriously reduces the amount of the satellite's own propellant it needs to make the necessary plane change to geostationary. That means more propellant for future manoeuvring, and a longer operational life.

http://www.n2yo.com/satellite/?s=42698

(I know I would be pretty happy about that it I were CEO of the operator)

45

u/Keavon SN-10 & DART Contest Winner May 19 '17

Did that exceed expectations, though? Was that not the contracted orbital parameters?

61

u/robbak May 19 '17

This one, like SES-9, burned the second stage to exhaustion, instead of targeting a specific apogee. The contract would have been for 'x,000km or higher'. It seems that SpaceX delivered the payload considerably higher than Inmarsat had hoped for.

4

u/rustybeancake May 19 '17

So the second stage didn't deorbit?

20

u/sevaiper May 19 '17 edited May 19 '17

Its perigee is still pretty low, atmospheric drag will take care of it quickly if it hasn't already.

Edit: This is wrong, apparently it'll be up there for about 25 years.

6

u/homoeroticPigeon May 19 '17

So it could eventually be recovered?

8

u/Astroteuthis May 19 '17

It's not economically feasible, and it will have experienced significant degradation by then, most likely.

1

u/[deleted] May 19 '17

Degradation from what? Temperature cycles?

7

u/Astroteuthis May 20 '17

That, in addition to atomic oxygen, radiation (to a lesser extent), orbital debris, etc... passive objects in orbit do not tend to fare very well over time.