SpaceX successfully launches three satellites
Capitalism in space: SpaceX tonight used its Falcon 9 rocket, including a first stage that had already flown twice before, to launch an Indonesian communications satellite, an Air Force smallsat, and most importantly, the Israeli-built Beresheet lunar lander, the first planetary mission entirely funded from private sources.
You can get some details about Beresheet here. If all goes as planned, it will land on the Moon on April 11 and operate for two Earth days on the surface.
SpaceX was also able to successfully land that first stage, which I think is the first time they have successfully used and recovered a first stage three times. Look for this first stage to fly a fourth time.
The 2019 launch race:
2 China
2 SpaceX
1 ULA
1 Japan
1 India
1 Europe
1 Russia
The U.S. now leads China in the national rankings, 3-2.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows 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. 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. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally 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.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four 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 or subscription:
4. 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.
Capitalism in space: SpaceX tonight used its Falcon 9 rocket, including a first stage that had already flown twice before, to launch an Indonesian communications satellite, an Air Force smallsat, and most importantly, the Israeli-built Beresheet lunar lander, the first planetary mission entirely funded from private sources.
You can get some details about Beresheet here. If all goes as planned, it will land on the Moon on April 11 and operate for two Earth days on the surface.
SpaceX was also able to successfully land that first stage, which I think is the first time they have successfully used and recovered a first stage three times. Look for this first stage to fly a fourth time.
The 2019 launch race:
2 China
2 SpaceX
1 ULA
1 Japan
1 India
1 Europe
1 Russia
The U.S. now leads China in the national rankings, 3-2.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows 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. 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. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally 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.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four 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 or subscription:
4. 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.
Second stage to do a third flight. B1046 flew three times. This is B1048 I think.
Can’t wait to see what happens when a stage flies its tenth time!
Bob, Shouldn’t the launch of three separate vehicles bring the launch count to three? My logic is that it’s the payloads that matter, not the rocket.
Col Beausabre: No. I am tracking the launch industry, not the satellite industry. This was a single launch, performed by SpaceX, just as a previous Indian launch was a single launch, even though it put 104 smallsats into orbit.
The goal is to see who is accomplishing what in terms of rockets. It has been argued that mass-to-orbit would be a worthwhile metric to also track, but I think that unnecessarily complicates matters. The number of launches reveals very quickly who is getting somewhere, and who is not.
I am one of those who suggested that mass-to-orbit might be another worthwhile metric to track. It is at least related to launch capabilities; a nation that launches a lot of smallsats (e.g. New Zealand’s Electron, which Robert includes as American, because the company is American) probably lifts less mass than a country that launches several large satellites two at a time (e.g. Europe’s Ariane 5).
The number of satellites, missions, or constellations may make for another metric for the use of space, but it is not such a good metric for launch capability.
Number of annual launches to orbit is a traditional metric that goes back to 1957, the opening of the space age.
In the coming decade, space is likely to become far more useful than it has been in the past, increasing the types of activities that we do there. The Internet of Things is likely to depend heavily on com-sat constellations to help track/communicate with things that are not near internet WiFi connectivity (e.g. deserts or mid ocean). At least three companies are planning commercial space stations to supplement then replace the ISS, allowing for far more space experimentation than even with the ISS. Other companies expect to commercially or privately explore the lunar surface. And SpaceX has a goal of creating profitable colonies on Mars. Eventually there will be space tugs and other spacecraft that perform multiple missions without returning to Earth, thus not needing a launch to perform a mission.
It would be interesting to have a metric, other than a “Gross Space Product,” to measure the increase in such explorations and experimentation. I don’t expect Robert to be enthusiastic enough about such a metric to follow it through; I’m not, either.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXHQn82TLKQ (2 minutes, ULA’s Vision for a Self-Sustaining Space Economy)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxftPmpt7aA (7 minutes, ULA’s CisLunar-1000, 30 years to 1,000 people working and living in space)
Edward: More than any other metric, the one that really counts the most is profit. And the winning number there is not even necessarily the highest. If Rocket Lab can sustain a regular and lush income stream from many smallsat launches, while also gaining great experience as a launch provider, they will set themselves up to do far greater things down the road.
This more than any is why I favor the launch count as the metric. It tells me who is accomplishing the most.
Agreed. With all due respect to the Col., if N. Korea or Iran decide to launch a 55 gal. drum full of B-B’s into orbit I’m not going to count each B-B as a satellite, never mind as a launch.
I see there is a hard-freeze warning in effect for Tucson and Nogales as well.
whoops– wrong thread.
Robert,
You wrote: “More than any other metric, the one that really counts the most is profit.”
Profit is the reward for becoming more efficient than the competition. Using a metric for efficiency of a useful product or service makes much sense.
“This more than any is why I favor the launch count as the metric. It tells me who is accomplishing the most.”
This may be why it is the major metric used by virtually everyone.
You found the word that I was looking for. Measuring the accomplishments that we achieve in space is what I think is more important than mere “Gross Space Product.”
Landing science instruments and man on the Moon are major accomplishments, but accomplishing Gerard K. O’Neill’s vision — or even ULA’s vision — would have made them even more relevant. Ignoring the Moon for decades failed to accomplish anything.