I'm surprised it's only 80%. Geosynchronous satellite internet is terrible. The latency is usually over 700ms. That makes web browsing painfully slow and gaming impossible. There is no way they can compete with LEO services.
When more of the mega constellations come online, they will probably take most of the remaining customers.
Eric being pretty savage today. But yeah, that sounds dodgy as hell.
I hate to quote Elon but...
Do it!
I just wish it wasn't billionaire vs trillionaire dick measuring, but if the rocket works and helps build a moon base then I'll shut up.
That is a giant rocket. 9x4 with new engines, a 3rd stage, and a big fairing is bonkers. Hopefully they get the new pads up and running for this thing sooner than later.
I did not see that coming. It's hard to blame them between the Falcon 9 fairing limitations and New Glenn and Vulcan groundings.
Cowboy Space? They're a data center first company that's building their own rocket.
This is an interesting move for anyone following along in this space. Has a satellite company ever built their own rocket before?
The industry desperately needs another competitor besides SpaceX. Bonus points if its cheaper too. Hoping the get back online soon.
Flight termination system tests: One of the few cases where "giant explosion" is the desired outcome for a rocket!
Phew, the explosion in the thumbnail scared me for a second
Gotta be dumb AF to waste our most precious resource on this MIC bullshit.
I'm curious if anyone knows more details about the claimed engine demonstrator from 2024?
Sounds like like bringing together disadvantages of both electric and chemical propulsion. High energy usage and poor specific impulse. Does availabily of the fuel offset that enough? There is also the higher thrust than electric propulsion can provide, but that is not as important when already in space.
I wish them best of luck!
no other reusable rocket has achieved a cadence anywhere close that of Falcon 9.
But the whole point of the cadence was that it was necessary for all the startups that were going to start needing launch services. Without demand a non reusable rocket that doesn't require a weekly launch, landing barge operation and booster refurbish is perhaps cheaper and makes better business sense. I don't have sources, do you?
I highly doubt it. ^we're ^both ^guessing With minimal downward pressure on launch price from the rest of the market, they should have been able to make significant profit with every launch. I suspect this has been pivotal in bankrolling Starship development.
SpaceX have essentially become their own "widest market".
That sounds like a bazillion dollar business to me, when you're your own best customer.
Later in the text:
"As for the Rassvet constellation as a whole, its situation is, unfortunately, not bad, although its deployment is progressing extremely slowly."
Starship is expected to contribute high-definition imagery, controllability testing, and rendezvous and docking practice during the roughly two-week period that includes the two planned rendezvous events.
Have we even seen Starship's version of a docking ring yet? I mean not even talking about the ability to transfer material, just have they built a docking ring, and where are they putting it on the rocket?
That said, I am more nervous about blue origin's ability to perform. We haven't really seen this blue moon lander in action. Let's hope they can do their part!
Falcon 9 was going to make space so cheap
Falcon 9 was only ever going to make space as cheap as its next-cheapest competitor. It's been ten years since the first booster landings, and no other reusable rocket has achieved a cadence anywhere close that of Falcon 9.
Has Falcon been a loss leader for spacex?
I highly doubt it. With minimal downward pressure on launch price from the rest of the market, they should have been able to make significant profit with every launch. I suspect this has been pivotal in bankrolling Starship development.
If it was such a cheap system due to reusability why are they scrapping it?
Because Starship has the potential to be even cheaper. Falcon 9 still throws away an upper stage with every launch.
With such a “work horse” as SS why wouldn’t they make it accomodate the widest maker possible?
I think Starlink revenue has now surpassed (or is projected to surpass) all other revenue streams, so Starlink has become. SpaceX have essentially become their own "widest market".
Odd that the status quo of a few years ago is a current crisis. Before spacex there was a waiting list of several years to get to space. Spacex's whole business model was Falcon 9 was going to make space so cheap a cottage industry of satellite manufacturing was going to spring up. That appears to have started happening and then spacex suddenly cancels Falcon. Has Falcon been a loss leader for spacex? If it was such a cheap system due to reusability why are they scrapping it? With such a "work horse" as SS why wouldn't they make it accomodate the widest maker possible?
Stage 3 shutdown. Payload deploy confirmed.
Stage 2 shutdown and separation. Stage 3 ignition.
Boosters shutoff and separation.
Liftoff!
Nationalize SpaceX, for national security.