Pegasus/SciSat Launch Cost

According to Justin Ray's Spaceflightnow report at
"http://www.spaceflightnow.com/pegasus/scisat1/status.html",
about today's (8/12/2003) planned Pegasus XL launch:

"The launch costs are $21.6 million. The price tag for the
SciSat spacecraft, its instruments and two years of mission
operations is $40 million."

Most of the previous sources I've seen listed Pegasus
launches in the $12-14 million range. $21.6 million seems
a bit steep for putting a 150 kg payload into a 650 km deg
orbit (inclined 73.9 degrees). That's $144,000 per kg!
Taurus, designed to launch three times as much as Pegasus,
was supposed to cost $20-25 million. The spacecraft/mission
cost seems quite reasonable by comparison. (Maybe Canada
should develop its own space launcher, eh?)

- Ed Kyle

Most of the previous sources I've seen listed Pegasus
launches in the $12-14 million range.

It varies depending on what services you want Orbital to provide, but the price
has definitely gone up. I gave a $20M estimate in a recent paper, and the
senior fellow at Orbital who reviewed it didn't challenge that.


Matt Bille
)
OPINIONS IN ALL POSTS ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR

"ed kyle" wrote in message
om...
According to Justin Ray's Spaceflightnow report at
"http://www.spaceflightnow.com/pegasus/scisat1/status.html",
about today's (8/12/2003) planned Pegasus XL launch:

"The launch costs are $21.6 million. The price tag for the
SciSat spacecraft, its instruments and two years of mission
operations is $40 million."

Most of the previous sources I've seen listed Pegasus
launches in the $12-14 million range. $21.6 million seems
a bit steep for putting a 150 kg payload into a 650 km deg
orbit (inclined 73.9 degrees). That's $144,000 per kg!
Taurus, designed to launch three times as much as Pegasus,
was supposed to cost $20-25 million. The spacecraft/mission
cost seems quite reasonable by comparison. (Maybe Canada
should develop its own space launcher, eh?)

Pegasus is the most expensive launcher in the world on a per-pound basis.
It's due to the way Orbital procures its parts and sub-assemblies, as well
as the fact that avionics for rockets just ain't cheap and don't scale down
with the rest of the rocket.

-Colonel K

Colonel K wrote:

"ed kyle" wrote in message
om...
According to Justin Ray's Spaceflightnow report at
"http://www.spaceflightnow.com/pegasus/scisat1/status.html",
about today's (8/12/2003) planned Pegasus XL launch:

"The launch costs are $21.6 million. The price tag for the
SciSat spacecraft, its instruments and two years of mission
operations is $40 million."

Most of the previous sources I've seen listed Pegasus
launches in the $12-14 million range. $21.6 million seems
a bit steep for putting a 150 kg payload into a 650 km deg
orbit (inclined 73.9 degrees). That's $144,000 per kg!
Taurus, designed to launch three times as much as Pegasus,
was supposed to cost $20-25 million. The spacecraft/mission
cost seems quite reasonable by comparison. (Maybe Canada
should develop its own space launcher, eh?)

Pegasus is the most expensive launcher in the world on a per-pound basis.
It's due to the way Orbital procures its parts and sub-assemblies, as well
as the fact that avionics for rockets just ain't cheap and don't scale down
with the rest of the rocket.

-Colonel K

However, Pegasus is frequently the least expensive launcher for a
specific mission. It has the advantage of being able to fly to a
specific area and head in a direction that might require a
propellant expensive "dog leg" from some land launch points.

And so far SeaLaunch does not provide a small launcher
capability.

Mike Walsh

"Michael Walsh" wrote in message
...
However, Pegasus is frequently the least expensive launcher for a
specific mission. It has the advantage of being able to fly to a
specific area and head in a direction that might require a
propellant expensive "dog leg" from some land launch points.

And so far SeaLaunch does not provide a small launcher
capability.

Absolutely true, and I should've indicated that in my post after I qualified
my comment with the "per pound" tag. SciSat - and many, many other small
satellites - would still be waiting to bum hitchhike rides on bigger LVs if
it weren't for Peg.

-Colonel K

Michael Walsh wrote:

And so far SeaLaunch does not provide a small launcher
capability.


Hmmm.... Now maybe there's a market to consider aiming for.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
Michael Walsh wrote:

And so far SeaLaunch does not provide a small launcher
capability.


Hmmm.... Now maybe there's a market to consider aiming for.

SpaceX Falcon.

-Colonel K

In article ,
ed kyle wrote:
That's $144,000 per kg! ... The spacecraft/mission
cost seems quite reasonable by comparison. (Maybe Canada
should develop its own space launcher, eh?)

Believe me, some of us have thought about it. :-) Really hard to get the
Canadian government to fund it, however. Partly there's an ingrained
inferiority complex, a belief that Canada couldn't *possibly* do something
that daring all by itself, so anyone who tries to sell Canada on it must
be a con man. Partly there was a strategic decision made several decades
ago that Canada would not build its own launchers, and whether or not the
old reasons still apply, it has attained the status of religious dogma in
the funding agencies -- even propulsion research tends to be dismissed as
something that Canada Just Doesn't Do. Sigh.
--
MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer
first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! |

(Henry Spencer) writes:

In article ,
ed kyle wrote:
That's $144,000 per kg! ... The spacecraft/mission
cost seems quite reasonable by comparison. (Maybe Canada
should develop its own space launcher, eh?)

Believe me, some of us have thought about it. :-) Really hard to get the
Canadian government to fund it, however. Partly there's an ingrained
inferiority complex, a belief that Canada couldn't *possibly* do something
that daring all by itself,

And this from the country that built the Arrow?

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Now, you want to believe that any successful Canadian launcher would
be shut down after its second flight under pressure from American
politicians, well, *that* would actually be a rational belief. And,
FWIW, sorry about that.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *

(John Schilling) :

(Henry Spencer) writes:

In article ,
ed kyle wrote:
That's $144,000 per kg! ... The spacecraft/mission
cost seems quite reasonable by comparison. (Maybe Canada
should develop its own space launcher, eh?)

Believe me, some of us have thought about it. :-) Really hard to get the
Canadian government to fund it, however. Partly there's an ingrained
inferiority complex, a belief that Canada couldn't *possibly* do something
that daring all by itself,

And this from the country that built the Arrow?

Andlike you said below, shut the program down because the Americans said they
can do better.

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Now, you want to believe that any successful Canadian launcher would
be shut down after its second flight under pressure from American
politicians, well, *that* would actually be a rational belief. And,
FWIW, sorry about that.

Canadains are funny that way, when discussing my plans to build a floating
test platform for small peroxide rockets, I repeatly had to explain that I
can not set the trees on the lakeshore on fire because the platform was in
the middle of the lake and peroxide dissolves in water, not floats on top so
even a tank failure can not spread.. I am still having to do the same
explaination today.

Earl Colby Pottinger