|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
High Launch Costs - Result of Physics?
Michael Walsh wrote in message ...
....snip... Sometimes the potential of markets is false. The apparent potential of LEO communication satellites was so interesting that billions were invested and lost. It didn't mean that LEO communication satellites disappeared, the systems are up and running with the organizations that picked them up out of bankrupcy trying to make a buck. Mike Walsh Your last paragraph is the clue. Iridium Satellite LLC is making a reasonable go of it--because they are able to deal with much improved economics. The original LEO systems were all faulty on the basis of economics. IMO, much better service is possible at far, far, lower costs to the ultimate consumer. However, the system design--launch and satellite fabrication and real market--needs to be radically different from what has been tried. This leads to my argument for vertical integration. The people who currently design payloads and the people who currently aim at markets appear to have no concept of what is really possible with respect to frequent, reliable, low-cost, space access. I don't believe I have any misconceptions with regard to the problems of vertical integration; however, I have come to see vertical integration as the only way around the impasse of faulty coordinated planning. This faulty coordinated planning is the legacy of the forty-year-long detour we have taken with respect to what type of space transportion systems are feasible with current technology. All this is admittedly a tough sell in the current environmnet. IMO, a small TSTO system can lower the investment threshhold to $120 million or less for a proof-of-concept phase; I view a low investment threshhold as a basic requirement--in order to have any chance of overcoming the large barrier to any investment in a LEO comsat system at this time. The system I have in mind would eventually require billions for full deployment. The "proof-of-concept" phase is likely to be necessary because of the bad precedents set by current LEO systems. Proof-of-concept would include demonstration of potential economics whereby remote area service (pre-tax and pre- other government add-ons) would be more like $7.50 per week than $7.50 per minute. With respect to the potential economics and quality of service of LEO comsats, there is absolutely no resemblance what has been tried and what, IMO, is possible. Best regards, Len (Cormier) PanAero, Inc. and Third Millennium Aerospace, Inc. ( http://www.tour2space.com ) |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
High Launch Costs - Result of Physics?
M
I hold the opposing view that there are quite a few probable markets out there that would come into the investors zone if the cost of current space launches was not so high. Heck, that's true of a ton of things - there are a lot of things that, if there was a better cost/return relationship, people would invest in. Sometimes the potential of markets is false. The apparent potential of LEO communication satellites was so interesting that billions were invested and lost. Which has made investors even more skittish. It didn't mean that LEO communication satellites disappeared, the systems are up and running with the organizations that picked them up out of bankrupcy trying to make a buck. Mike Walsh Of course, and good luck to them. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
Project Constellation Questions | Space Cadet | Space Shuttle | 128 | March 21st 04 01:17 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 2nd 04 03:33 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | September 12th 03 01:37 AM |
Challenger/Columbia, here is your chance to gain a new convert! | John Maxson | Space Shuttle | 38 | September 5th 03 07:48 PM |