Cheap satellite deployment
Discussion
http://blogs.nasa.gov/cygnss/
I'm not sure if I've seen this mentioned on here before (I'm sure it has but I missed it).
Frankly I'm amazed that this hasn't been done before and that more of a fuss hasn't been made of it. I'm guessing that this is a spectacularly simple and cheap (in relative terms) way of launching low earth orbit satellites. Does anyone know the figures?
I'm not sure if I've seen this mentioned on here before (I'm sure it has but I missed it).
Frankly I'm amazed that this hasn't been done before and that more of a fuss hasn't been made of it. I'm guessing that this is a spectacularly simple and cheap (in relative terms) way of launching low earth orbit satellites. Does anyone know the figures?
Are you referring to multiple deployments from one launch? If you are, it's not a new idea and many satellites have been launched using this type of technique.
The downside is that multiple satellites usually means fairly small satellites which in turn tends to mean less capable satellites.
However, as more and more processing power can be crammed into less space, some of these small satellites can do as much as a much bigger satellite ten or more years ago.
The downside is that multiple satellites usually means fairly small satellites which in turn tends to mean less capable satellites.
However, as more and more processing power can be crammed into less space, some of these small satellites can do as much as a much bigger satellite ten or more years ago.
According to Wikipedia, the initial cost was $6million for a basic Pegasus launch, there's one in June that will cost $56million but that also includes "firm-fixed launch service costs, spacecraft processing, payload integration, tracking, data and telemetry and other launch support requirements.".
They're up to 43 launches of that system now so I guess it's relatively routine, being able to lug the rocket up to 40,000 feet using a plane does seem a lot less wasteful than using a disposable rocket but then again I'm not a rocket scientist!
edited to add Wiki link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(rocket)
They're up to 43 launches of that system now so I guess it's relatively routine, being able to lug the rocket up to 40,000 feet using a plane does seem a lot less wasteful than using a disposable rocket but then again I'm not a rocket scientist!
edited to add Wiki link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(rocket)
Eric Mc said:
Are you referring to multiple deployments from one launch? If you are, it's not a new idea and many satellites have been launched using this type of technique.
The downside is that multiple satellites usually means fairly small satellites which in turn tends to mean less capable satellites.
However, as more and more processing power can be crammed into less space, some of these small satellites can do as much as a much bigger satellite ten or more years ago.
Many years ago when I was studying Electronic Engineering at Surrey Uni this was one of their big selling points for their micro satellites, small enough to piggyback onto another launch but packed enough processing power, memory, etc. to do something useful. Must have been pretty successful as they spun a company out of it.The downside is that multiple satellites usually means fairly small satellites which in turn tends to mean less capable satellites.
However, as more and more processing power can be crammed into less space, some of these small satellites can do as much as a much bigger satellite ten or more years ago.
FunkyNige said:
According to Wikipedia, the initial cost was $6million for a basic Pegasus launch, there's one in June that will cost $56million but that also includes "firm-fixed launch service costs, spacecraft processing, payload integration, tracking, data and telemetry and other launch support requirements.".
They're up to 43 launches of that system now so I guess it's relatively routine, being able to lug the rocket up to 40,000 feet using a plane does seem a lot less wasteful than using a disposable rocket but then again I'm not a rocket scientist!
edited to add Wiki link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(rocket)
Every day is a school day. I had no idea the system existed or had been around that long.They're up to 43 launches of that system now so I guess it's relatively routine, being able to lug the rocket up to 40,000 feet using a plane does seem a lot less wasteful than using a disposable rocket but then again I'm not a rocket scientist!
edited to add Wiki link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(rocket)
Virgin galactic are planning to do the same with their launcherOne rocket. They were going to use White Knight Two to launch a 200-235kg payload.
But they have since acquired a 747 to act as carrier, and because the jumbo jet can carry more they are in the process of designing/building a larger version of LauncherOne
But they have since acquired a 747 to act as carrier, and because the jumbo jet can carry more they are in the process of designing/building a larger version of LauncherOne
Sylvaforever said:
I sincerely hope that will be another of Bransons epic failures.
That is extremely nasty and mean minded of you.Why should you wish failure on somebody?
Air launched systems have their place in the overall scheme of launcher options. Their one big drawback will always be that the maximum size of satellite they can launch will always be smaller than a surface launched system. This is down to the limited carrying capacity of the carrier aircraft.
They are ideal for launching smaller payloads into earth orbit.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff