Another SpaceX Fail

[rage2]

Poor Elon, what a shitty week he's having.


» Click image for larger version

https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/01/a-...ape-canaveral/

Rocket test fire prior to Saturday launch, blows up the payload which was Facebook's first satellite.

[schocker]

Big fireball, apparently debris many kilometers today from the radio

» Click image for larger version

[rage2]

So I guess this is pretty serious bad news for a lot of people. Not only for people in developing nations that would've benefitted from this internet.org satellite, but for some reason SpaceX changed their policy to have the payload installed for the test fire. Only problem is, launch insurance only covers launch. That lost satellite is uninsured.

Not sure who's pocket it's coming out of, and since SpaceX is private, it's sent Tesla and SolarCity stocks tumbling (that and Musk saying they need more cash again last night). Spacecom, the company building and operating the satellite, drops 9% today. Crazy shit.

[sabad66]

Originally posted by rage2
So I guess this is pretty serious bad news for a lot of people. Not only for people in developing nations that would've benefitted from this internet.org satellite, but for some reason SpaceX changed their policy to have the payload installed for the test fire. Only problem is, launch insurance only covers launch. That lost satellite is uninsured.

Not sure who's pocket it's coming out of, and since SpaceX is private, it's sent Tesla and SolarCity stocks tumbling (that and Musk saying they need more cash again last night). Spacecom, the company building and operating the satellite, drops 9% today. Crazy shit.

that's nuts... $100mm USD payload destroyed in a test launch? i would be very interested to know the rationale for that policy change...

what a waste

[finboy]

Originally posted by sabad66

that's nuts... $100mm USD payload destroyed in a test launch? i would be very interested to know the rationale for that policy change...

what a waste

Arrogance of leadership?

[rage2]

Mibz explained to me that payload during test fire is normal procedure, to ensure accurate results.

[sputnik]

Chances are pretty good that they also have 2-3 more satellites sitting in storage ready to go.

[sabad66]

Originally posted by rage2
Mibz explained to me that payload during test fire is normal procedure, to ensure accurate results.

You'd think they could build a replica with the same weight / materials instead of risking 100mm. Just can't wrap my head around it but obviously i'm missing something.

any rocket scientists on here wanna chime in? lol

[rage2]

Originally posted by sputnik
Chances are pretty good that they also have 2-3 more satellites sitting in storage ready to go.

Based on how few of these satellites have been manufactured, I seriously doubt they have spares sitting around. Unless they like to burn cash like Elon.

http://goo.gl/aJPO4G

The satellite cost $200m to build according to reports.

[AndyL]

Well NASA is 176 failures in 3024 launches... 5.8% fail rate

Russia is 5.8% for 2015 (86 launches holy sh*t!)

And spaceX is 2 in 29 launches - for 6.9% (actual launches - we shall leave out the testing trying to land vertically on a boat)

While spectacular for film - not exactly terrible performance.

And I'll bet a dollar it's insured cargo.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Gestalt]

What's Facebook's net worth ?

[spikerS]

Originally posted by AndyL


And I'll bet a dollar it's insured cargo.

Yeah, I am pretty sure Facebook is going to have it's own insurance for it's property, and not rely on the insurance of the owner of the rocket.

As for spares? I doubt there are any "spares" but I bet a replacement will be made or found within a matter of months.

[rage2]

Facebook loses nothing. The satellite was owned by Spacecom, operated by Eutelsat, and partially leased by Facebook. No satellite, no lease. Spacecom is the big loser here, while Eutelsat loses out on operational revenue. Poor people in Africa lose out on the free thin Internet that facebook was going to provide.

Typically, when a satellite is "lost", replacement time varies from 6 to 24 months depending on how specialized the satellite was.

SpaceX will probably take another 6 months for investigation before they're able to launch anything else again, so even if there is a replacement, chances are they're going to go to ULA or Russians, if they have capacity in their schedule.

edit - Israel says 3 years for a replacement satellite. Ouch.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...849386,00.html

This quote is interesting:

The Israeli company issued a statement to the Israeli stock exchange saying the "total loss" of the satellite "will have a significant impact on the company."

So if the satellite is insured, they wouldn't have to make that statement.

[sputnik]

$300M insurance policy for the satellite.

http://www.nola.com/business/index.s...on_who_pa.html

The satellite was backed by a policy worth almost $300 million, said the person, who requested anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. SpaceX declined to comment.

[rage2]

But you missed the 2nd paragraph:

The insurance policy for Space Communication may not have triggered because it would have required a true launch, rather than a pre-launch, said Peter Elson, chief operating officer for the aerospace team at insurance broker Jardine Lloyd Thompson Group.

Of course it's all speculative until they actually make a statement.

[AndyL]

Hmm... Wikipedia has an entry on satellite insurance and pre-launch is separate from launch insurance, which is separate from ground risk.

Spacecom was to be sold to Chinese conpany with successful launch. Possible reason for failure?

[ZenOps]

Boooom!

That's a hell of an explosion. Yeah, even with the backing of the entire US government 1 in 23 launches were catastrophic failures.

Realistically those are terrible odds for anyone surviving space tourism.

[rage2]

Well Spacecom started suing everyone.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/4/127...osion-facebook

$50m from SpaceX and $205m from IAI who built the satellite. Looking more and more like there wasn't adequate insurance coverage (still speculation).

[g-m]

How do you not have insurance on your $200 million high risk item?