2 ms·
It depends on the costs of the payloads.
by hackuser 10y ago
It depends on the costs of the payloads.
- sounds 10y agoLaunch insurance is also included, and for a very good reason.
- hackuser 10y agoIt's included in SpaceX's/ULA's/whoever's bid? Insurance doesn't reduce the costs of (whatever event you're insuring), it just evens them out. Instead of paying for (e.g.) 1 failure every 25 launches, you pay for 0.04 failures on every launch (plus the insurance company's profit). So the payloads' costs still apply.
- maaku 10y agoFor the price differential we're talking about, it works out in the customer's benefit.
- Mvandenbergh 10y agoI don't think government buys launch insurance and if they do, they shouldn't.
- jessriedel 10y agoEven if an entity is large enough to self-insure, it can make sense to buy insurance if you don't have the internal capacity to estimate the risk accurately. Yes, it might be better to simply hire the risk assessors from the insurance company, but there might be incentive issues. It can also help for external transparency: If the project fails and is self-insured, then people can question whether the risk assessment was correct.
- qaq 10y agoSure does but avg payload cost would need to be 990,000,000 for it to no longer hold true.