4 ms·
The importance is the cost. they are lower priced on reused flights with a 10-20million discount. Regular non reused flights they are about the same price as
by annerajb 8y ago
The importance is the cost.
they are lower priced on reused flights with a 10-20million discount.
Regular non reused flights they are about the same price as competitors (if you count 20millions less the same)
New design launching in three weeks would reduce cost even further price will go down maybe by 10 million but cost should go down by around 50 million
- nkoren 8y ago> about the same price as competitors Um, no? The competitors have had to drop their prices very substantially in recent years, due to competition from SpaceX. Yet they're still somewhere between 50%-300% more expensive. That's far from "about the same price".
- kuschku 8y agoI suggest taking a look at launch prices for a single satellite in an Ariane 5 dual launch, which is cheaper than any non-reused launches SpaceX offers.
- nkoren 8y agoA whole Ariane5 launch costs between $165M and $220M. Divide that by two satellites and it's still more expensive, per satellite, than a Falcon 9 (at $63M) -- and the satellites can't be nearly as heavy. There are instances of the lower berth being sold for as little as $60M, but that is for fairly modest satellites (relative to what an F9 can carry), and is only possible because it's being heavily subsidized by the upper berth. There's no comparison.
- kuschku 8y agoThe cost od the lower bay on an Ariane 5 is 60 million USD. The cost of a launch on Falcon 9 is 62 million USD. That's not 20 million less, that's 2 million more — ofc, finding a second satellite to launch with is with Ariane more time consuming, so you'll not be as agile. And if SpaceX cuts the cost of a non-reusable launch (previously 62mm) by 50mm, to 12mm, that'd be a breakthrough. If you meant to say that they cut the cost of reusable launches (previously 30mm) by 500mm (aka paying people for launching), then lol.
- makomk 8y agoOn the other hand, SpaceX's launch delays have historically cost companies quite a bit due to not having their satellites available when they'd promised their paying customers they would.
- walls 8y agoIf you launched with a second satellite on the Falcon 9, wouldn't it only be 30 million? Seems weird to compare launching multiple payloads with launching one.
- greglindahl 8y agoSpaceX has launched a pair of comsats twice, it was organized by Boeing. However, Boeing hasn't succeeded in selling any more of these pairs. Arianespace has had a lot more success in convincing customers to fit into the upper berth/lower berth size/mass limits.
- dmoy 8y agoIt is a bit disingenuous to neglect to mention that a5'd lower bay payload is half the size of a f9 payload.
- greglindahl 8y agoThe PRICE of the lower bay on Ariane 5 is around $60mm, because of SpaceX. That's not a signal that Arianespace is doing great competing with SpaceX, it's a sign that Arianespace had to lower their price to compete.