34 ms·

Don’t want to belittle the achievement but they launched it as in „had it launched by the commercial launch provider SpaceX“, not on a self-developed rocket as

Don’t want to belittle the achievement but they launched it as in „had it launched by the commercial launch provider SpaceX“, not on a self-developed rocket as it sounds like on the first read.

mainecoder 2y ago
Of course, even Europe cannot launch cheaply anymore. Arianespace is crawling to space; they are left for dead. The only serious players are the US and China. It's reached a point where it has become like trying to manufacture a state-of-the-art 5nm chip in a developing nation: possible, but at an absurd cost. You might achieve an initial parametric yield of only 10%, meaning only a tiny fraction of the chips coming off the line meet the basic electrical specifications. Even then, the functional yield (the percentage that actually performs the intended computation correctly at the target speed) might be even lower, say 5%. You'd be throwing away 95 out of every 100 chips, and the cost per usable die would be astronomical due to the sheer expense of acquiring and maintaining the lithography equipment, cleanroom facilities, and specialized expertise – resources that are heavily concentrated in a few leading nations and require years, if not decades, to build from scratch.
- aaronblohowiak 2y ago
  What do you think about RFA?
  - echoangle 2y ago
    And Isar Aerospace is also European and is set to launch tomorrow (although they seem to think it will explode at some point). But I don’t know if they will be particularly cheap.
- wat10000 2y ago
  SpaceX didn't spend an absurd amount of money getting Falcon 9 to where it is. It was a lot, but pretty typical, even somewhat cheap, for developing a brand new rocket. Repeating their feat should be even cheaper, since you won't be taking detours trying out parachutes and such before settling on the final architecture. It's a relatively straightforward application of known technology, not bleeding edge stuff like 5nm chip making. An organization that can produce Ariane 6 should be able to produce a Falcon 9 clone with similar effort. The real problem is overcoming the of the old, slow, expensive way of doing things.
  - notahacker 2y ago
    Funnily enough the European Launcher Challenge just dropped recently, supposed to be modelled on NASA's procurement process that ultimately lead to SpaceX being a thing. But the EUR169m contracts aren't likely to get you a Falcon 9 clone, and there isn't exactly a ton of private capital for newspace sloshing around in Europe If anything Europe has the opposite problem: the launch startups are all far too small to do anything on a Falcon 9 scale. SpaceX did't get to Falcon 9 early either. Sure, Arianespace probably could build a Falcon 9 clone, but it's not something they'd want to self fund, and there's quite a few ESA members that don't want to see most of their budget contributions go to funding the development of a foreign launch monopolist...
  - perihelions 2y ago
    If it's so easy to clone it, where are the clones? I've been reading about Airbus' reusable/recoverable SpaceX-killers for over a decade now. They've yet to have anything to show for their work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adeline_(rocket_stage) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adeline_(rocket_stage) https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33006056 https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33006056 ("Airbus unveils 'Adeline' re-usable rocket concept" (2015)) - "...Airbus says it has been working on the concept since 2010 and has even flight-tested small demonstrators..." (That BBC article predates the first Falcon rocket landing).
    - wat10000 2y ago
      Don't get me wrong, that problem of overcoming the old, slow, expensive way of doing things is huge for any established launch organization. I don't expect Airbus or ULA to get there. But it's not because the technology is so difficult that they can't do it. A new rocket company with a couple billion dollars in funding would have a good chance.
      - trothamel 2y ago
        Note that in doing so, they'd be reaching where SpaceX was a decade ago, and by the time they got there, it seems pretty likely that full reusability will be working a year or so from now, at least for basic earth-orbit flights.
- dmitrygr 2y ago
  > The only serious players are the US and China Forgot one https://www.rocketlaunch.live/?filter=roscosmos https://www.rocketlaunch.live/?filter=roscosmos
  - tonyhart7 2y ago
    russia is poor now that their entire economy is shaken by war, I doubt they would even get competitive in the future even I would award third place to India or CNSA
    - dmitrygr 2y ago
      Luckily for you, the linked site has upcoming schedules to trivially look this up. India has 6 launches upcoming in 2025, Rosskosmos has 8 and Russian military has one more. So Russia is launching 50% more than India in 2025.
      - tonyhart7 2y ago
        roscosmos launch is because they still get contract from NASA to International Space Station
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        lupusreal 2y ago
        Money doesn't change hands for Russia launching astronauts or NASA launching cosmonauts. They're basically bartering for the sake of knowing the station will be manned even if one side gets grounded.
        tonyhart7 2y ago
        "Money doesn't change hands for Russia launching astronauts or NASA launching cosmonauts" did you see my parent comment or not??? I am not trying to question their ability for them get to space, it doesn't matter if you CAN go to space but you didn't have money for it its clear that NASA and Roscosmos collaboration days is numbered and would not continue in the future because geo politic
- dyauspitr 2y ago
  India’s ISRO is definitely a serious player.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Roscosmos is dead to international commercial partners, but are still putting a great deal into space. Third place behind SpaceX and China.
notahacker 2y ago
I mean basically everyone launches their first satellite using a third party launch provider which is usually SpaceX. If there's someone missing credit here it's Endurosat for providing the satellite bus and doing integration work, but the payload and operation which is the novel bit will be Botswanan. It's like you don't have to credit Linus Torvalds or Brendan Eich for their contributions to your first web service... (Fun fact: not only does SpaceX not care about not getting credit for rideshares, they actively request you don't mention them in advance publicity)
- Onavo 2y ago
  Why do they ask you not to mention them publicly?
  - notahacker 2y ago
    I assume because they don't exactly need the promotion, and a ton of small companies on rideshares mentioning SpaceX in advance of missions they then fail to successfully operate (usually through no fault of SpaceX's) isn't good publicity.
  - tonyhart7 2y ago
    SpaceX tired of winning
  - kortilla 2y ago
    Companies frequently do this kind of thing when they don’t want you to use them as promo material through an implied partnership. Because spacex also makes satellites, they don’t want confusion about which satellites are theirs. “MyCompany Partners with SpaceX to launch new communications satellite” is not something their PR team wants to deal with disambiguating.
- mistrial9 2y ago
  the word sovereign does not appear in this reply
- echoangle 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
parsimo2010 2y ago
Very few organizations and even countries can develop both a launch vehicle and a satellite. Botswana has done fine to develop a satellite that integrates onto a rideshare launch. They aren't working with anything close to the headcount or budget of NASA or even the ESA. Edit (rather than reply and make the comment chain long): It's fine that you read it that way. I figure that if the article were about a launch vehicle then it would have been the rocket's name in the title, and if the article were about the satellite then it would have the satellite's name (BOTSAT-1). If Botswana had developed both an orbital launch vehicle and their first satellite then I'd bet the headline would have been sensational.
- echoangle 2y ago
  Maybe my comment should have been more clear. I don’t think it’s surprising or bad that they don’t have their own launch vehicle, I just found the headline a bit misleading because it could sound that way. It’s still a great achievement.
  - hnuser123456 2y ago
    I get what you're saying, something like "Botswana successfully begins orbital operations of its first satellite" would be more accurate, but simply not clickbaity enough.
    - KennyBlanken 2y ago
      It's standard language used by the press. As explained further up the comment chain, very few nations have the capability to even put a satellite into orbit. The notability is that they have a satellite up for their purposes; they're not trying to claim that they did the launch themselves. If this were some random corporation, none of you wouldn't have blinked an eyelid at a title like "Megacorp successfully launches first satellite" when all but 3-4 companies in the world rely on someone else to do the launch. There's more hair-splitting going on here than in a hair salon.
- closewith 2y ago
segmondy 2y ago
But you did mean to belittle the achievement, just like when people say, "I don't mean to offend you but ...", they know they are going to offend you and still choose to by saying what they wanted to say.
- tonyhart7 2y ago
  I like passive aggressive tone
heraldgeezer 2y ago
These types of countries can't even keep power, internet WAN, mobile RAN/Core, infra up on a consistent basis. I knew it had to be something like this. Yes, mask off. Yes, I am tired.
- echoangle 2y ago
  I am not saying that this is the case with Botswana but it could also be a matter of priorities. At least North Korea is able to do orbital launches while the living conditions of an average citizen is less than ideal.
- igravious 2y ago
  I'm curious, which "type" of country are you saying Botswana is? As far as I'm aware of Botswana does not have the power outages of its neighbour South Africa … Perhaps you're right, maybe it is a mask off moment for you … “Botswana, a landlocked country in Southern Africa, has recently made considerable strides in developing a reliable electricity supply network to support its growing economy and improve the quality of life for its citizens. However, occasional power outages and load shedding do still occur during peak demand periods or when there are unforeseen challenges, such as equipment failures or extreme weather events.” https://www.sinalda.com/world-voltages/africa/voltage-botswana/ https://www.sinalda.com/world-voltages/africa/voltage-botswa...
  - heraldgeezer 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - zuminator 2y ago
      > baby being fed this equality all countries are good blergh blergh bs all my life. Nobody in this thread has made anything like those kinds of sentiments. The very fact that we are taking note of Botswana's satellite nearly 70 years after Spitnik 1 makes it quite obvious how much less developed they are in aerospace. I would think that especially if someone is against such things as foreign aid to non-Europeans, and culturally relative assessment of intelligence, that they would be in favor of seeing countries like Botswana take steps to develop home grown expertise in engineering, reducing the need to rely on outside largesse, and coming a step closer to achieving developmental escape velocity.
walrus01 2y ago
Plenty of small nation states have the financial resources and a government ministry-level "space" department that has the money to launch up to like, a 6U size cubesat, but don't have their own launcher. This is in fact more normal than not, if you look at a map of countries which have their own locally developed, frequently-in-use launchers capable of sending at least 100kg to low earth orbit, vs those which do not.
barbazoo 2y ago
I took “launch” a bit less literal. They launch a product, an initiative, whatever.
motorest 2y ago
> Don’t want to belittle the achievement but (...) Yeah, but you kind of are. > (...) they launched it as in „had it launched by the commercial launch provider SpaceX“, not on a self-developed rocket as it sounds like on the first read. Yes, it's the kind of thing that even NASA does nowadays. Cool feat by Botswana. Outstanding.
- vasco 2y ago
  From 1 highschool program in 2006 (TJ3SAT) there's now over 50 high scool programs launching cubesat style satellites. Some use base kits, making the launch even easier. Sure, it's amazing they have a bootstrapping engineering community in Botswana, but this isn't more sophisticated than a high school program with money to pay for the ride up. To compare what NASA does to this seems like a soft discrimination of low expectations, which is so common when referring to developing countries.
  - motorest 2y ago
    > From 1 highschool program in 2006 (TJ3SAT) there's now over 50 high scool programs launching cubesat style satellites. Some use base kits, making the launch even easier. Sure, it's amazing they have a bootstrapping engineering community in Botswana, but this isn't more sophisticated than a high school program with money to pay for the ride up. I think you're trying very hard to grasp at straws to belittle a whole country, while being completely oblivious to the domain. For reference, Ireland launched its first satellite on 2023. Does this give you the right to shit on Ireland's achievement? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_satellites_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_satellites_by_co...
    - vasco 2y ago
      That's funny. Go read up about cubesats friend.
      - Apocryphon 2y ago
        It was from a university. > EIRSAT-1 (Educational Irish Research Satellite-1) is a European Space Agency-sponsored 2U CubeSat developed and built by University College Dublin > The mission of EIRSAT-1 is to advance education in space science and engineering across the whole island of Ireland through collaboration between student teams, higher education institutions and high-tech companies. Actually it looks like most of the first national satellites listed are operated by colleges and universities, not high schools.
epolanski 2y ago
> Don’t want to belittle the achievement You literally did. > as it sounds like on the first read That's your interpretation, the title literally says: "Botswana launches first satellite BOTSAT-1 aboard SpaceX Falcon 9 "
- dmix 2y ago
  Titles on HN often get updated

Don’t want to belittle the achievement but they launched it as in „had it launched by the commercial launch provider SpaceX“, not on a self-developed rocket as it sounds like on the first read.

mainecoder 2y ago

Of course, even Europe cannot launch cheaply anymore. Arianespace is crawling to space; they are left for dead. The only serious players are the US and China. It's reached a point where it has become like trying to manufacture a state-of-the-art 5nm chip in a developing nation: possible, but at an absurd cost. You might achieve an initial parametric yield of only 10%, meaning only a tiny fraction of the chips coming off the line meet the basic electrical specifications. Even then, the functional yield (the percentage that actually performs the intended computation correctly at the target speed) might be even lower, say 5%. You'd be throwing away 95 out of every 100 chips, and the cost per usable die would be astronomical due to the sheer expense of acquiring and maintaining the lithography equipment, cleanroom facilities, and specialized expertise – resources that are heavily concentrated in a few leading nations and require years, if not decades, to build from scratch.

aaronblohowiak 2y ago
What do you think about RFA?
- echoangle 2y ago
  And Isar Aerospace is also European and is set to launch tomorrow (although they seem to think it will explode at some point). But I don’t know if they will be particularly cheap.
wat10000 2y ago
SpaceX didn't spend an absurd amount of money getting Falcon 9 to where it is. It was a lot, but pretty typical, even somewhat cheap, for developing a brand new rocket. Repeating their feat should be even cheaper, since you won't be taking detours trying out parachutes and such before settling on the final architecture. It's a relatively straightforward application of known technology, not bleeding edge stuff like 5nm chip making. An organization that can produce Ariane 6 should be able to produce a Falcon 9 clone with similar effort. The real problem is overcoming the of the old, slow, expensive way of doing things.
- notahacker 2y ago
  Funnily enough the European Launcher Challenge just dropped recently, supposed to be modelled on NASA's procurement process that ultimately lead to SpaceX being a thing. But the EUR169m contracts aren't likely to get you a Falcon 9 clone, and there isn't exactly a ton of private capital for newspace sloshing around in Europe If anything Europe has the opposite problem: the launch startups are all far too small to do anything on a Falcon 9 scale. SpaceX did't get to Falcon 9 early either. Sure, Arianespace probably could build a Falcon 9 clone, but it's not something they'd want to self fund, and there's quite a few ESA members that don't want to see most of their budget contributions go to funding the development of a foreign launch monopolist...
- perihelions 2y ago
  If it's so easy to clone it, where are the clones? I've been reading about Airbus' reusable/recoverable SpaceX-killers for over a decade now. They've yet to have anything to show for their work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adeline_(rocket_stage) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adeline_(rocket_stage) https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33006056 https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33006056 ("Airbus unveils 'Adeline' re-usable rocket concept" (2015)) - "...Airbus says it has been working on the concept since 2010 and has even flight-tested small demonstrators..." (That BBC article predates the first Falcon rocket landing).
  - wat10000 2y ago
    Don't get me wrong, that problem of overcoming the old, slow, expensive way of doing things is huge for any established launch organization. I don't expect Airbus or ULA to get there. But it's not because the technology is so difficult that they can't do it. A new rocket company with a couple billion dollars in funding would have a good chance.
    - trothamel 2y ago
      Note that in doing so, they'd be reaching where SpaceX was a decade ago, and by the time they got there, it seems pretty likely that full reusability will be working a year or so from now, at least for basic earth-orbit flights.
dmitrygr 2y ago
> The only serious players are the US and China Forgot one https://www.rocketlaunch.live/?filter=roscosmos https://www.rocketlaunch.live/?filter=roscosmos
- tonyhart7 2y ago
  russia is poor now that their entire economy is shaken by war, I doubt they would even get competitive in the future even I would award third place to India or CNSA
  - dmitrygr 2y ago
    Luckily for you, the linked site has upcoming schedules to trivially look this up. India has 6 launches upcoming in 2025, Rosskosmos has 8 and Russian military has one more. So Russia is launching 50% more than India in 2025.
    - tonyhart7 2y ago
      roscosmos launch is because they still get contract from NASA to International Space Station
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - lupusreal 2y ago
        Money doesn't change hands for Russia launching astronauts or NASA launching cosmonauts. They're basically bartering for the sake of knowing the station will be manned even if one side gets grounded.
        tonyhart7 2y ago
        "Money doesn't change hands for Russia launching astronauts or NASA launching cosmonauts" did you see my parent comment or not??? I am not trying to question their ability for them get to space, it doesn't matter if you CAN go to space but you didn't have money for it its clear that NASA and Roscosmos collaboration days is numbered and would not continue in the future because geo politic
dyauspitr 2y ago
India’s ISRO is definitely a serious player.
lupusreal 2y ago
Roscosmos is dead to international commercial partners, but are still putting a great deal into space. Third place behind SpaceX and China.

notahacker 2y ago

I mean basically everyone launches their first satellite using a third party launch provider which is usually SpaceX. If there's someone missing credit here it's Endurosat for providing the satellite bus and doing integration work, but the payload and operation which is the novel bit will be Botswanan. It's like you don't have to credit Linus Torvalds or Brendan Eich for their contributions to your first web service... (Fun fact: not only does SpaceX not care about not getting credit for rideshares, they actively request you don't mention them in advance publicity)

Onavo 2y ago
Why do they ask you not to mention them publicly?
- notahacker 2y ago
  I assume because they don't exactly need the promotion, and a ton of small companies on rideshares mentioning SpaceX in advance of missions they then fail to successfully operate (usually through no fault of SpaceX's) isn't good publicity.
- tonyhart7 2y ago
  SpaceX tired of winning
- kortilla 2y ago
  Companies frequently do this kind of thing when they don’t want you to use them as promo material through an implied partnership. Because spacex also makes satellites, they don’t want confusion about which satellites are theirs. “MyCompany Partners with SpaceX to launch new communications satellite” is not something their PR team wants to deal with disambiguating.
mistrial9 2y ago
the word sovereign does not appear in this reply
echoangle 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

parsimo2010 2y ago

Very few organizations and even countries can develop both a launch vehicle and a satellite. Botswana has done fine to develop a satellite that integrates onto a rideshare launch. They aren't working with anything close to the headcount or budget of NASA or even the ESA. Edit (rather than reply and make the comment chain long): It's fine that you read it that way. I figure that if the article were about a launch vehicle then it would have been the rocket's name in the title, and if the article were about the satellite then it would have the satellite's name (BOTSAT-1). If Botswana had developed both an orbital launch vehicle and their first satellite then I'd bet the headline would have been sensational.

echoangle 2y ago
Maybe my comment should have been more clear. I don’t think it’s surprising or bad that they don’t have their own launch vehicle, I just found the headline a bit misleading because it could sound that way. It’s still a great achievement.
- hnuser123456 2y ago
  I get what you're saying, something like "Botswana successfully begins orbital operations of its first satellite" would be more accurate, but simply not clickbaity enough.
  - KennyBlanken 2y ago
    It's standard language used by the press. As explained further up the comment chain, very few nations have the capability to even put a satellite into orbit. The notability is that they have a satellite up for their purposes; they're not trying to claim that they did the launch themselves. If this were some random corporation, none of you wouldn't have blinked an eyelid at a title like "Megacorp successfully launches first satellite" when all but 3-4 companies in the world rely on someone else to do the launch. There's more hair-splitting going on here than in a hair salon.
closewith 2y ago

segmondy 2y ago

But you did mean to belittle the achievement, just like when people say, "I don't mean to offend you but ...", they know they are going to offend you and still choose to by saying what they wanted to say.

tonyhart7 2y ago
I like passive aggressive tone

heraldgeezer 2y ago

These types of countries can't even keep power, internet WAN, mobile RAN/Core, infra up on a consistent basis. I knew it had to be something like this. Yes, mask off. Yes, I am tired.

echoangle 2y ago
I am not saying that this is the case with Botswana but it could also be a matter of priorities. At least North Korea is able to do orbital launches while the living conditions of an average citizen is less than ideal.
igravious 2y ago
I'm curious, which "type" of country are you saying Botswana is? As far as I'm aware of Botswana does not have the power outages of its neighbour South Africa … Perhaps you're right, maybe it is a mask off moment for you … “Botswana, a landlocked country in Southern Africa, has recently made considerable strides in developing a reliable electricity supply network to support its growing economy and improve the quality of life for its citizens. However, occasional power outages and load shedding do still occur during peak demand periods or when there are unforeseen challenges, such as equipment failures or extreme weather events.” https://www.sinalda.com/world-voltages/africa/voltage-botswana/ https://www.sinalda.com/world-voltages/africa/voltage-botswa...
- heraldgeezer 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - zuminator 2y ago
    > baby being fed this equality all countries are good blergh blergh bs all my life. Nobody in this thread has made anything like those kinds of sentiments. The very fact that we are taking note of Botswana's satellite nearly 70 years after Spitnik 1 makes it quite obvious how much less developed they are in aerospace. I would think that especially if someone is against such things as foreign aid to non-Europeans, and culturally relative assessment of intelligence, that they would be in favor of seeing countries like Botswana take steps to develop home grown expertise in engineering, reducing the need to rely on outside largesse, and coming a step closer to achieving developmental escape velocity.

walrus01 2y ago

Plenty of small nation states have the financial resources and a government ministry-level "space" department that has the money to launch up to like, a 6U size cubesat, but don't have their own launcher. This is in fact more normal than not, if you look at a map of countries which have their own locally developed, frequently-in-use launchers capable of sending at least 100kg to low earth orbit, vs those which do not.

barbazoo 2y ago

I took “launch” a bit less literal. They launch a product, an initiative, whatever.

motorest 2y ago

> Don’t want to belittle the achievement but (...) Yeah, but you kind of are. > (...) they launched it as in „had it launched by the commercial launch provider SpaceX“, not on a self-developed rocket as it sounds like on the first read. Yes, it's the kind of thing that even NASA does nowadays. Cool feat by Botswana. Outstanding.

vasco 2y ago
From 1 highschool program in 2006 (TJ3SAT) there's now over 50 high scool programs launching cubesat style satellites. Some use base kits, making the launch even easier. Sure, it's amazing they have a bootstrapping engineering community in Botswana, but this isn't more sophisticated than a high school program with money to pay for the ride up. To compare what NASA does to this seems like a soft discrimination of low expectations, which is so common when referring to developing countries.
- motorest 2y ago
  > From 1 highschool program in 2006 (TJ3SAT) there's now over 50 high scool programs launching cubesat style satellites. Some use base kits, making the launch even easier. Sure, it's amazing they have a bootstrapping engineering community in Botswana, but this isn't more sophisticated than a high school program with money to pay for the ride up. I think you're trying very hard to grasp at straws to belittle a whole country, while being completely oblivious to the domain. For reference, Ireland launched its first satellite on 2023. Does this give you the right to shit on Ireland's achievement? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_satellites_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_satellites_by_co...
  - vasco 2y ago
    That's funny. Go read up about cubesats friend.
    - Apocryphon 2y ago
      It was from a university. > EIRSAT-1 (Educational Irish Research Satellite-1) is a European Space Agency-sponsored 2U CubeSat developed and built by University College Dublin > The mission of EIRSAT-1 is to advance education in space science and engineering across the whole island of Ireland through collaboration between student teams, higher education institutions and high-tech companies. Actually it looks like most of the first national satellites listed are operated by colleges and universities, not high schools.

epolanski 2y ago

> Don’t want to belittle the achievement You literally did. > as it sounds like on the first read That's your interpretation, the title literally says: "Botswana launches first satellite BOTSAT-1 aboard SpaceX Falcon 9 "

dmix 2y ago
Titles on HN often get updated