Brian Thorn wrote in message . ..
On 29 Aug 2003 12:45:58 -0700, (ed kyle) wrote:

It would be, but I don't think we'll see it. Since 2000,
inclusive, the combined total of all Atlas, Delta, Titan, and
Shuttle launches have averaged 19.7 launches per year.

True, but we are in a space launch doldrums of major proportions right
now. Both the commercial comsat market and the military satellite
launch pace have been markedly slower in the last four or five years,
as ever-longer-lived satellites haven't needed to be replaced. But
that won't be true too much longer. On the military horizon are Block
IIF Navstars (33 satellites) currently scheduled for about one launch

Navstar IIF and later DMSP 5D are manifested on Atlas V 401's and
Delta IVM's. Navstar IIR and earlier DMSP 5D and TIROS-N have about
the same mass as the later s/c and had Delta II or Titan II LV's. I
saw a price quote of $75 million (on spaceflightnow.com) for the Delta
IVM launnch of DSCS B6. IIRC, even a Delta II 7925 isn't price at $75
million. So, are we (the taxpayers) paying more for putting the later
Navstar and DMSP on EELV's than on a Delta II? Or did the Air Force
get a special deal with Boeing and LM on launches with lower mass s/c?

If the latter is the case, then why isn't NASA getting the same deal
for payloads like Phoenix, using an EELV, and ease design constraints
on payload mass growth? Was the Delta IIH for Phoenix already bought
and paid for?

If Delta IVM and Atlas V 401 are really priced the same as a Delta II
7925, then Delta II s/b ending soon. Ok, there are the lower end 7320
launches, but the high end Taurus or Athena gets close to that
capability and I would hazard a guess that they're also cheaper than a
7320.