5 ms·

Because they are posting pricing, I'm curious about the details. What happens if the rocket fails and loses the payload? Is there insurance included/available?

Because they are posting pricing, I'm curious about the details. What happens if the rocket fails and loses the payload? Is there insurance included/available? Does the customer get a refund?

greedo 7y ago
As with a regular satellite launch, the customer usually buys their own insurance? SpaceX would be on the hook for the launch costs though.
- Rebelgecko 7y ago
  I think that's on a contract-by-contract basis. IIRC NASA still had to pay 80% of the costs for CRS-7, but Spacecom got a free launch after their payload was destroyed (that was kind of a weird case since the explosion happened before the point where their launch insurance would've kicked in, and the damage to the company was much larger than just the cost of replacing the payload)
  - JshWright 7y ago
    > Spacecom got a free launch after their payload was destroyed s/got/are getting/ It's actually scheduled to launch tomorrow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZh82-WcCuo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZh82-WcCuo
hobofan 7y ago
If I'm not mistaken, the company supplying the payload usually has to insure the payload, and depending on the launch companies track record (and therefore risk) they get better/worse conditions. Of course the insurance company will then try to get their money from the launch company in the case of failure.
- greglindahl 7y ago
  I don’t think insurers ever get money from launch providers.
  - hobofan 7y ago
    That's what any insurer worth their salt at least tries to do, isn't it? They try to sue and prove negligence of the party creating the damage. The damaging party then tries to prove that they were not negligent and/or try to prove that someone else was (e.g. the supplier producing the struts in that one SpaceX launch failure).
    - zaarn 7y ago
      Well, insurance is a social game, usually. Everyone pays into the pot and if there is a launch failure, the cost is covered out of this pot. They might go after the launch company to get some of the pot back full but ultimately, so many things can go wrong in rocket science that tracking down negligence is hard and it's usually a sum of 20 different factors that are hard to call "negligence" in most cases. Of course, most of the famous disasters usually are a result of that but for example most cases of a SpaceX booster being lost on landing is simply one of a billion things being 1% out of alignment.
    - greglindahl 7y ago
      Can you point out an example? The amounts of money are large enough that I’d think it would be in the press.
dr_orpheus 7y ago
Satellite insurance is a fairly big industry. The owner of the satellite being launched is responsible for getting said insurance against the satellite. This can cover anomalies during launch [1] or anomalies on orbit where the satellite is lost or can no longer perform its mission [2]. Pretty much all commercial companies will have insurance on their satellites, government satellites are typically "self-insured". [1] https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/satellite-insurance--a-brief-introductory-guide-174465.aspx https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/s... [2] https://spacenews.com/digitalglobe-loses-worldview-4-satellite-to-gyro-failure/ https://spacenews.com/digitalglobe-loses-worldview-4-satelli...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
starik36 7y ago
Coincidental that you mention this. AMOS-6, launching tomorrow on an F9 is getting a free ride, since the previous version of the satellite blew up on the pad.
- mikeash 7y ago
  The insurance for that one got complicated. It was destroyed in a static fire test that would have been a few days before the launch. Their launch insurance wouldn't cover it, because even though it was destroyed by a rocket exploding on the launch pad, it wasn't actually going to launch. They also had marine cargo insurance to cover the satellite before then. However, pre-launch static fires with payload attached are pretty unusual in the launch business and the insurer had no idea this was going to be done. Arguing that they were unaware of the increased risk and that the insured failed to notify them as required, they only made a partial payment on the claim. A lawsuit ensued (no surprise with ~$100 million at stake) and is apparently still ongoing.

Because they are posting pricing, I'm curious about the details. What happens if the rocket fails and loses the payload? Is there insurance included/available? Does the customer get a refund?

greedo 7y ago

As with a regular satellite launch, the customer usually buys their own insurance? SpaceX would be on the hook for the launch costs though.

Rebelgecko 7y ago
I think that's on a contract-by-contract basis. IIRC NASA still had to pay 80% of the costs for CRS-7, but Spacecom got a free launch after their payload was destroyed (that was kind of a weird case since the explosion happened before the point where their launch insurance would've kicked in, and the damage to the company was much larger than just the cost of replacing the payload)
- JshWright 7y ago
  > Spacecom got a free launch after their payload was destroyed s/got/are getting/ It's actually scheduled to launch tomorrow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZh82-WcCuo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZh82-WcCuo

hobofan 7y ago

If I'm not mistaken, the company supplying the payload usually has to insure the payload, and depending on the launch companies track record (and therefore risk) they get better/worse conditions. Of course the insurance company will then try to get their money from the launch company in the case of failure.

greglindahl 7y ago
I don’t think insurers ever get money from launch providers.
- hobofan 7y ago
  That's what any insurer worth their salt at least tries to do, isn't it? They try to sue and prove negligence of the party creating the damage. The damaging party then tries to prove that they were not negligent and/or try to prove that someone else was (e.g. the supplier producing the struts in that one SpaceX launch failure).
  - zaarn 7y ago
    Well, insurance is a social game, usually. Everyone pays into the pot and if there is a launch failure, the cost is covered out of this pot. They might go after the launch company to get some of the pot back full but ultimately, so many things can go wrong in rocket science that tracking down negligence is hard and it's usually a sum of 20 different factors that are hard to call "negligence" in most cases. Of course, most of the famous disasters usually are a result of that but for example most cases of a SpaceX booster being lost on landing is simply one of a billion things being 1% out of alignment.
  - greglindahl 7y ago
    Can you point out an example? The amounts of money are large enough that I’d think it would be in the press.

dr_orpheus 7y ago

Satellite insurance is a fairly big industry. The owner of the satellite being launched is responsible for getting said insurance against the satellite. This can cover anomalies during launch [1] or anomalies on orbit where the satellite is lost or can no longer perform its mission [2]. Pretty much all commercial companies will have insurance on their satellites, government satellites are typically "self-insured". [1] https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/satellite-insurance--a-brief-introductory-guide-174465.aspx https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/s... [2] https://spacenews.com/digitalglobe-loses-worldview-4-satellite-to-gyro-failure/ https://spacenews.com/digitalglobe-loses-worldview-4-satelli...

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

starik36 7y ago

Coincidental that you mention this. AMOS-6, launching tomorrow on an F9 is getting a free ride, since the previous version of the satellite blew up on the pad.

mikeash 7y ago
The insurance for that one got complicated. It was destroyed in a static fire test that would have been a few days before the launch. Their launch insurance wouldn't cover it, because even though it was destroyed by a rocket exploding on the launch pad, it wasn't actually going to launch. They also had marine cargo insurance to cover the satellite before then. However, pre-launch static fires with payload attached are pretty unusual in the launch business and the insurer had no idea this was going to be done. Arguing that they were unaware of the increased risk and that the insured failed to notify them as required, they only made a partial payment on the claim. A lawsuit ensued (no surprise with ~$100 million at stake) and is apparently still ongoing.