Hi,

I was exploring NASA site and discovered this page:

http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/bu2/ELV_INTL.html

There is another page for US Launches too.

Now, if I read that table right, the cheapest cost to LEO is on the
Russian Energia and runs about $1,363 per kilogram. Next up is the
Russian Soyuz, checking in at $2,571 per kilogram.

This is a far cry below the $10,000 per pound that I've seen being
batted around on this list (and others). In fact, at 2.2 lbs/kg, I'm
seeing a small fraction over 600 USD/lb to LEO.

What's going on? What am I missing or doing wrong here?

Chris.

First problem, this data is from 1994. Though it is already 7 years
out of date, is a fantastic site for general cost estimations.

>

> Now, if I read that table right, the cheapest cost to LEO is on the
> Russian Energia and runs about $1,363 per kilogram. Next up is the

Energia is not currently an active launcher. It would be wonderful
if it where, but it's not.

> Russian Soyuz, checking in at $2,571 per kilogram.
>
> This is a far cry below the $10,000 per pound that I've seen being

The number $10k/lb ($4.5k/kg) is just baseline. it's a nice, round
number for estimating launch costs. Soyuz is just over half the
baseline cost at $5,669/lb ($2,571/kg), but Proton is almost baseline
with $9,020/lb($4,100/kg). On the other side of the spectrum,
TitanIIS-10GEM comes in at $22,120/lb ($10,054/kg), and Delta at
$26,164/lb ($11,892/kg). These being the most common US launches.
Another thing to consider, (well, untill Globalstar and Iridium)
most launches are to GEO, the lower inclination of Kennedy (compaired
to Balkanor [sp?]) makes launch to GEO easier (I don't have time at
the moment to calculate the price/weight comparason) meaning that US
launcers may be cheaper to GEO. Something else to think about, to
launch on a Russian bird, you have to move your payload to Russia.
With customs, freight, special packaging for vibration dampaning,
insurance, complexity, ect (not to mention any patriotic
considerations at the end of the cold war), US launch could still be
cheaper if not easier.
One other thing comes to mind. Untill the fall of the USSR, Russain
launchers where not as profit inclined compaired to US companies (one
benefit of USSR's socialist movement). This may have changed launch
costs with Russias' new economic restructuring.

king_rodent (putting the eek in geek)

Check your arithmetic. $2571/kg does not equate to $5669/lb.

king_rodent@...
10/04/01 02:51 PM

First problem, this data is from 1994. Though it is already 7 years
out of date, is a fantastic site for general cost estimations.

>

> Now, if I read that table right, the cheapest cost to LEO is on the
> Russian Energia and runs about $1,363 per kilogram. Next up is the

Energia is not currently an active launcher. It would be wonderful
if it where, but it's not.

> Russian Soyuz, checking in at $2,571 per kilogram.
>
> This is a far cry below the $10,000 per pound that I've seen being

The number $10k/lb ($4.5k/kg) is just baseline. it's a nice, round
number for estimating launch costs. Soyuz is just over half the
baseline cost at $5,669/lb ($2,571/kg), but Proton is almost baseline
with $9,020/lb($4,100/kg). On the other side of the spectrum,
TitanIIS-10GEM comes in at $22,120/lb ($10,054/kg), and Delta at
$26,164/lb ($11,892/kg). These being the most common US launches.
Another thing to consider, (well, untill Globalstar and Iridium)
most launches are to GEO, the lower inclination of Kennedy (compaired
to Balkanor [sp?]) makes launch to GEO easier (I don't have time at
the moment to calculate the price/weight comparason) meaning that US
launcers may be cheaper to GEO. Something else to think about, to
launch on a Russian bird, you have to move your payload to Russia.
With customs, freight, special packaging for vibration dampaning,
insurance, complexity, ect (not to mention any patriotic
considerations at the end of the cold war), US launch could still be
cheaper if not easier.
One other thing comes to mind. Untill the fall of the USSR, Russain
launchers where not as profit inclined compaired to US companies (one
benefit of USSR's socialist movement). This may have changed launch
costs with Russias' new economic restructuring.

king_rodent (putting the eek in geek)

> Check your arithmetic. $2571/kg does not equate to $5669/lb.

Woops, was using a metric converter that goes out to 16 decim
places. 1kg = 2.2046lb
$18,000,000 / 7000lb = $2571.428571 * 2.2046 = $5668.971425422

I rounded to $5,669

king_rodent (putting the eek in geek)

>
> > Check your arithmetic. $2571/kg does not equate to $5669/lb.
>
> Woops, was using a metric converter that goes out to 16 decim
> places. 1kg = 2.2046lb
> $18,000,000 / 7000lb = $2571.428571 * 2.2046 = $5668.971425422
>
> I rounded to $5,669

Um, nope, you multiplied the wrong way. You need to divide the dollar
figure by 2.2046, not multiply. Since 1 kg is 2.2 pounds, you're sending
more than double the weight (of 1 pound) for just $2571. The number for
Soyuz should actually be about $1166. per pound.

Arthur

I believe the table gives payload weight in kgs. So, thats 18M
USD/7000kg or about 2571 USD/kg. Then, to get the units right, I
think you have to divide by 2.2 lbs/kg. This gives 1169 USD/lb.

Have I done this wrong?

Chris.

Sounds about right. Last time I checked Proton was cheapest at
around $2600/kg to LEO; but the price varies over time of course.

The $10,000 figure was current around 1990.

My SWAG (Scientific Wild-Ass Guess) is that the price to orbit will
halve every 5 years for the forseeable future; unless something
disturbs the marketplace; it's my version of Moore's law for space
I guess.

The force pushing it down is increased launch rates, increased
payload sizes, reinvestment and competition. The costs of access to
space are extremely high, but mostly independent of launch rate,
and the costs amortise. As the costs come down, both more and
heavier things can get launched, and as more mass gets launched,
the costs come down.

However, if more money gets pumped into space, the price may tumble
more quickly... this isn't a rule of physics; it's mostly to do
with economic dynamo effects. But then I think that is the real
force behind Moore's law in fact.

> >
> > > Check your arithmetic. $2571/kg does not equate to $5669/lb.
> >
> > Woops, was using a metric converter that goes out to 16 decim
> > places. 1kg = 2.2046lb
> > $18,000,000 / 7000lb = $2571.428571 * 2.2046 = $5668.971425422
> >
> > I rounded to $5,669
>
> Um, nope, you multiplied the wrong way. You need to divide the
dollar
> figure by 2.2046, not multiply. Since 1 kg is 2.2 pounds, you're
sending
> more than double the weight (of 1 pound) for just $2571. The number
for
> Soyuz should actually be about $1166. per pound.

Actually, I screwed up twice, it should be $18M / 7000*kg* not lb
(as listed on the website we were referring to). This makes the
equasion correct.
Also, I rounded $2571.428571 (.428571 repeats endlessly) to the 6th
didgit even though I stated that my converter goes to the 16th place.
Not a huge error, but one none the less.

Sorry, my bad. You win the no-prize.

king_rodent (putting the eek in geek)

Doh, I'm an idiot. yes, it is divide not multiply.
1kg = 2571
1kg = 2.2lb

2571 = 2.2lb
2571/2.2 = 2.2/2.2lb
1168.63(repeating) = 1lb

I had to work out the equasion to prove it to myself.

king_rodent (putting the eek in geek)
"don't let him near the heavy machinery!!!"

> > >
> > > > Check your arithmetic. $2571/kg does not equate to $5669/lb.
> > >
> > > Woops, was using a metric converter that goes out to 16 decim
> > > places. 1kg = 2.2046lb
> > > $18,000,000 / 7000lb = $2571.428571 * 2.2046 = $5668.971425422
> > >
> > > I rounded to $5,669
> >
> > Um, nope, you multiplied the wrong way. You need to divide the
> dollar
> > figure by 2.2046, not multiply. Since 1 kg is 2.2 pounds, you're
> sending
> > more than double the weight (of 1 pound) for just $2571. The
number
> for
> > Soyuz should actually be about $1166. per pound.
>
> Actually, I screwed up twice, it should be $18M / 7000*kg* not lb
> (as listed on the website we were referring to). This makes the
> equasion correct.
> Also, I rounded $2571.428571 (.428571 repeats endlessly) to the
6th
> didgit even though I stated that my converter goes to the 16th
place.

Sirch Namdig cjgidman@... writes:
>I was exploring NASA site and discovered this page:
>http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/bu2/ELV_INTL.html
>There is another page for US Launches too.

A couple of comments on that page (the launch vehicle data). The prices
quoted are a bit out of date. Some of the vehicles cost about 2x as much
per launch as shown on that list , and some are somewhat cheaper than shown.
Don't take the prices for anywhere near current market prices. (For
example, Soyuz are shown as $18 M/flt. I've been quoted a current price
closer to $30 M/flt.)

A better source might be the quarterly launch and market reports from the
Office of Commercial Space Transportation at the FAA. That's
http://ast.faa.gov/launch_info/. The quarterly launch reports have some
current pricing information.