Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
1–10 of 77 posts
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#2Is this intentional? Is it just happening for newly launched satellites?
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#3Lost $250M using the advertised launch price of $67M for Falcon 9, which of course is way higher than what it actually costs SpaceX.
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#4Is this intentional? Is it just happening for newly launched satellites?
If you read the article you can answer both of your questions. The Sun has no intentions, and solar flares don't choose cohorts of satellites.
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#5I think they're prepared to lose satellites, that's the nature of large swarms.
Some losses might be intentional for safety after damage or low propellant. They really can't afford to put any debris on their orbits.
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#6Lost 200 but launched 345, almost all of which are the latest upgraded version. The satellites are designed to last 5 years (the lifetime is limited by propellant because of atmospheric drag at their low altitude) and the first batches were launched 4 years ago now. As the constellation matures they will be de-orbiting satellites about as fast as they launch them.
Seems to me like the long term viability of Starlink (if it's not already profitable) will be assured if Starship meets its goals. They'll be able to launch way more satellites at once, for less per launch, and with faster turnaround.
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#7Lost $250M using the advertised launch price of $67M for Falcon 9 , which of course is way higher than what it actually costs SpaceX.
The fuel costs about half a million.
Beyond that it's mostly people's times and materials they have stockpiled for economies of scale.
I would guess the lost satellites cost a bit more to manufacture that to launch in a reused Falcon 9.
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#8Lost $250M using the advertised launch price of $67M for Falcon 9 , which of course is way higher than what it actually costs SpaceX.
does it? why can they then sell it for not much more and run a profit?
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#9Is this intentional? Is it just happening for newly launched satellites?
If you read the article you can answer both of your questions. The Sun has no intentions, and solar flares don't choose cohorts of satellites.
How do solar flares burn satellites? I thought they just mess up the ionosphere and inhibit communication.
Re: Starlink quietly lost over $250M in burned satellites this summer
#10I think they're prepared to lose satellites, that's the nature of large swarms. Some losses might be intentional for safety after damage or low propellant. They really can't afford to put any debris on their orbits.
IIRC debris is not a major concern in the orbits Starlink is using. There is a non-trivial amount of atmospheric drag. This will slow down anything without active propulsion, causing them to drop from orbit, and eventually burn up.