Decline continues in 2018 in geosynchronous satellite industry
Capitalism in space: According to this article from Space News, 2018 saw a continuing decline in orders for the construction of new large geosynchronous communications satellites.
Last year’s poor harvest of five commercial orders for large geostationary communications satellites proved even worse than 2017’s surprise low of just seven orders. Manufacturers continue to vie for fewer such contracts as satellite operators hold off buying new spacecraft while they wait for breakthrough advances in high-throughput technology and assess the potential of small-satellite constellations. [emphasis mine]
The highlighted text provides the explanation. The decline isn’t because the use of space for communications is going away, but because the technology is shifting from a handful of large geosynchronous satellites to many tiny low orbit constellations. What this means for the launch industry is that the smallsat rocket companies (Rocket Lab, Virgin Orbit, Vector) are in the driver’s seat, while the big rocket companies (SpaceX, Arianespace, ULA, etc) might be left holding the bag. These big rockets won’t go away either, but will become much more dependent on government contracts, either for the military or for civilian manned space.
The article provides a very detailed overview of 2018 and is definitely worth a full read.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
Capitalism in space: According to this article from Space News, 2018 saw a continuing decline in orders for the construction of new large geosynchronous communications satellites.
Last year’s poor harvest of five commercial orders for large geostationary communications satellites proved even worse than 2017’s surprise low of just seven orders. Manufacturers continue to vie for fewer such contracts as satellite operators hold off buying new spacecraft while they wait for breakthrough advances in high-throughput technology and assess the potential of small-satellite constellations. [emphasis mine]
The highlighted text provides the explanation. The decline isn’t because the use of space for communications is going away, but because the technology is shifting from a handful of large geosynchronous satellites to many tiny low orbit constellations. What this means for the launch industry is that the smallsat rocket companies (Rocket Lab, Virgin Orbit, Vector) are in the driver’s seat, while the big rocket companies (SpaceX, Arianespace, ULA, etc) might be left holding the bag. These big rockets won’t go away either, but will become much more dependent on government contracts, either for the military or for civilian manned space.
The article provides a very detailed overview of 2018 and is definitely worth a full read.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
I don’t think that the larger rockets companies will have problems if the demand shifts from large GEO sats to LEO constellations. The large rockets can launch many of the smaller sats at once. I’m willing to bet that the per satellite cost for launch on the bigger rockets will be much less.
On the otherhand, if there isn’t enough business going on, it’s going to put the squeeze on everyone. Only lower overhead cost launcher providers can win at that game.
Robert, Pez don’t come packed individually and neither will these future constellations.
Michael Puckett: Of course there will still be mass launches of many smallsats on larger rockets. However, as the economies of scale allow the smallsat rockets (catering to one to eight smallsats at a time) to lower costs, combined with their ability to put these satellites in the precisely desired orbit while also providing the customer a primary payload position, I expect a large shift of most smallsats to the smallsat rockets.
Fortunately, the geostationary orbit is not the only useful orbit for large satellites. Unfortunately, Arianespace’s launch site is optimized for geostationary launches, so they may be especially worried.
Large satellites will continue to have their uses, and with the reduction in launch costs I think that we can expect an eventual increase in the number of large satellite launches. It is too bad that there hadn’t been a “squeeze on everyone” for the first half century of the space age, because there wasn’t much in the way of innovation and cost reduction until the commercial launchers got in on the action.
Although fred k is right that the large rockets can launch multiple smaller satellites simultaneously for a reasonable per-satellite cost, that is mostly advantageous for launching initial satellites into each orbital plane, as was done for the recent Iridium upgrade, whereas launching individual replacement satellites would likely be best performed by the smallsat launch companies.
However, because they are proving to be useful, I expect a tremendous increase in the use of small satellites even outside the domain of large communication constellations, often being launched individually on the smaller launch vehicles.
Edward wrote, “I expect a tremendous increase in the use of small satellites even outside the domain of large communication constellations, often being launched individually on the smaller launch vehicles.”
I immediately think of the success of the MarCO cubesats sent to Mars. Imagine you want to launch a low cost planetary mission. We now know the cubesat technology can do it, and the low cost small rockets exist to launch it. The MarCOs cost $18.5 million. You can buy a Rocket Lab Electron launch for $6 million. This is pennies compared the cost in the past.
It seems to me if the volume of payloads are there, the economy of scale favors the larger rockets. There are some operations and positions that are irreducible.
I can see small launchers. Making sense if the volume is low but with high volume, you are into the tractor trailer vs Prius economics. At a certain volume, the tractor-trailer wins and we are talking potentially tens of thousand payloads.
How many people and ground crew does it take for a Cessna vs a 777 in a ground/aircrew per pound per mile? I bet the 777 wins in a walk as long as you can keep it flying substantially full.
And could not a multi-payload constellation launch deliver payloads to the same inclination and populate that almost as easily as an individual launch?
I think just as we have small and large trucks and planes, so shall we see page and small launchers.
The only thing holding back the launch of large stats is the cost of construction.
The cost of launch is pretty low and going lower.
We need a new company to come in and undercut everyone in the manufacturing area.
pzatchok wrote: “We need a new company to come in and undercut everyone in the manufacturing area.”
Almost a quarter century ago, when I was getting into the commercial communication satellite manufacturing industry (previously I designed, built, and tested instruments for science satellites), I interviewed the director of the division (although I’m sure he thought he was interviewing me), and he thought that communication satellites were a commodity. He wanted us to reduce costs as well as the time from contract to launch. I had hoped that there was a technological advantage, but it was overall cost to the customer that mattered. (I helped to shave a couple of days and around 100 man-hours from the thermal vacuum test schedule.)
Little did he know that ITAR restrictions were going to virtually kill the industry in the U.S. and move much of it to other countries.
The point is that undercutting everyone else has been the goal for at least a quarter of a century. The initial Iridium satellites were built in a large production run, and after the first five were thoroughly tested, thermal vacuum and shake testing were eliminated from the schedules of the rest in order to save time and cost. I’m sure that they have similar as well as other cost savings for today’s constellations, too. For instance, Musk reamed his satellite managers for wanting too much design testing before mass production begins.
https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/shake-up-in-spacexs-starlink-satellite-division/