[HN Gopher] End of an era: Final Delta IV heavy rocket carries N...
___________________________________________________________________
End of an era: Final Delta IV heavy rocket carries NROL-70 on
historic mission
Author : nabilhat
Score : 56 points
Date : 2024-03-27 16:04 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (floridamedianow.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (floridamedianow.com)
| shreezus wrote:
| This article sounds like it was written by ChatGPT. That said,
| it's wild we were still using expendable rockets like Delta IV
| Heavy when SpaceX offerings are objectively better & cheaper.
| What SpaceX has done for the industry is nothing short of
| incredible.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| I think that's a bit overly reductionist. This launch cost
| about $150m (granted, without competition from SpaceX it
| probably would've been much pricier). I think the going rate
| for a Falcon Heavy is around $120m. Not a huge difference, and
| it's very possible that changing the mission requirements to
| work with Falcon Heavy would cost more than $30m. In the past
| SpaceX had limitations like no vertical integration, narrower
| fairing, limitations with higher orbits, shorter time limits
| between engine burns, less accuracy in some orbits, etc. I
| haven't followed the launch industry as much lately so maybe
| thats not true anymore, but I think those things were still
| true when this launch was purchased ~5 years ago
| martythemaniak wrote:
| Wikipedia says NRO launches are $440m, so the price
| difference is really really big, which is the reason why this
| is the last launch - not even the US Government has that
| kinda cash for launches.
|
| The other reason is there's a lag of several years between
| when a capability is established (Falcon Heavy) and when
| large customers can take advantage of it. For example, we
| really shouldn't expect Starship to make a dent in way
| satellites and telescopes are designed and built until the
| 2030s.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| Does that Wikipedia figure include the satellite?
| subatomicspace wrote:
| The figure would be for just the launch itself (however
| accurate it may be). Satellite costs for these big
| missions would be in the "multi-hundreds of millions of
| dollars" range.
| icegreentea2 wrote:
| Delta IV is notoriously expensive, but USG has plenty of
| DoD cash for expendable launches in general. The next block
| (phase 2) NSSL launches are 60% ULA Vulcan. We'll see what
| phase 3 looks like. I suspect it'll be far more weighted
| towards SpaceX to try to give ULA a kick in the pants.
|
| DoD and USG learned through the 90s-now how screwy things
| get when you don't have enough competition or you can't
| spread your money evenly amongst vendors. They will spend
| the money now and indefinitely to assure they can get to
| space when they want to, how they want to.
|
| That doesn't mean they're happy about it though. I'm sure
| they'd love if everyone was as affordable as SpaceX.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| I think Wiki is wrong, IIRC this was part of a block buy of
| _three_ launches for $450 million
| lern_too_spel wrote:
| Yes, Wikipedia says $2.2 billion for 5 launches, but the
| reference says $1.18 billion for 5 launches, where
| NROL-70 was part of a three launch buy for $467.5
| million. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Delta_IV
| _Heavy_launc...
| zaphoyd wrote:
| the reference says $1.18 billion just for "launch
| operation costs" that doesn't include the hardware.
| Farther down the source cites the hardware + operations
| as $2.2B/5 launches
| perihelions wrote:
| The point of overpaying on the 2nd-best choice is that it
| maintains an independent backup if the 1st-best disappears
| suddenly. The client (DoD) is willing to pay for that
| insurance: they do not want a multi-year downtime interval
| they're unable to launch military hardware.
|
| (This isn't an anti-SpaceX thing, really: the dual-provider
| system (Atlas/Delta) long predates them).
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Space_Launch
|
| (And besides, these satellites are orders of magnitude more
| expensive than their launch vehicle! The NRO's budget alone is
| around $10 billion _per year_ ).
| wffurr wrote:
| Missing the most important piece of info about any NRO launch,
| the mission patch! Meow!
| https://www.nro.gov/portals/135/assets/img/L-70_Snow-Leopard...
| dylan604 wrote:
| Is it just me, but I feel like this being an NRO patch that the
| placement of the stars isn't just a designer's choice but
| potentially some cryptic meaning. If not, how boring!
| daniel_reetz wrote:
| Look up Trevor Paglen's book "I could tell you but then you
| would have to be destroyed by me". It's a collection of
| mission patches along with some interpretation as to the
| meaning and placement of symbols. Fascinating stuff.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| That isn't a real patch, more of a mission logo. The details
| are too small. The pink nose, if actually in patch form, would
| stand out as a pink dot in the middle of a blurry cat.
|
| Fyi, military patches look best when using lines with fixed-
| width. Anything pointy or jagged doesn't translate well into
| stitched thread. Avoid shadows too. Yes, there are some all-
| plastic patches that are carved into 3d shapes but those are
| evil. Real patches are thread over velcro.
| dang wrote:
| We changed the URL from
| https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/End_of_an_Era_Final_Delta...
| to an article that seems to have more background information.
|
| Is there a better article available? If so, we can change it
| again.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-27 23:01 UTC)