USA & NASA Afraid of India & ISRO as the later rewrites “Space Economics”

[C130]

It's cheaper to use PSLV than any other rocket, actually PSLV is much cheaper, I think in 0-1500 kg satellites to GTO, PSLV is much better than any other rocket. SO in this segment it easily threatens NASA economics & now ISRO also planning to privatise PSLV operations then we may see a big market for PSLV.

That will affect our economy, also pollution before global warming.

PSLV isgood for it's performance, but it's a niche market. ULA and SpaceX aren't interested in this segment of the market of 1,500KG to 3,000KG GTO


ULA isn't going to use it's Delta or Atlas rockets to launch a bunch of small satellites, and SpaceX was going to develop a rocket with around the same performance as the PSLV in the Falcon 5, but went straight to the more powerful Falcon 9 so they can't compete with the PSLV


only rockets I can think of that would compete against the PSLV is the Long March 2D and Vega.


http://spacenews.com/indias-governm...-million-in-commercial-launch-fees-2013-2015/

$101 million feed in two years that's pretty tiny compared what ULA and SpaceX are making launching bigger satellites

 

[aakash_2410]

NASA isn't really in the launch business anymore.

In previous decades, when space launch systems were brand-new, NASA developed launchers by awarding cost-plus contracts to commercial companies; the economics and risks were unclear so NASA assumed responsibility for performance - and owned the finished product.

Nowadays, launchers and even their technology development are considered mature enough for private industry to handle the risk itself. NASA contracts out for launches - with subsidies in some cases - and the companies own the intellectual property and vehicles themselves. NASA-owned facilities are still being used for most launches, but private ones are in development as well.

At current rates, Space-X offers GTO for less per-kg than ISRO does. Only the Russian Proton-M is cheaper. But if Space-X can re-use its first stages regularly it can cut prices further.

Yes, that's what I meant.

Also, Elon Musk will definitely take a slice of the 'satellite launch pie' but all the other space agencies will survive just fine. Especially as ESA, Arianespace and ISRO (who currently have 2/3rd of the market share between them) have plans to launch their own reusable launchers like Space-X. After this their prices will be about the same as Space-X's if not less.

 

[Solomon2]

...Elon Musk will definitely take a slice of the 'satellite launch pie' but all the other space agencies will survive just fine...

Bzzzt! Space-X is not an "agency" but a business. Here is where the issues come to fore, as the agencies don't have to make a profit but a business does. Though undoubtedly Space-X benefits from pre-existing gov't infrastructure, since agencies can charge whatever they want through gov't subsidy, there's a strong argument not to let American businesses employ them if they engage in a price war meant to reduce the vitality of America's launch companies.

 

[zebra7]

PSLV isgood for it's performance, but it's a niche market. ULA and SpaceX aren't interested in this segment of the market of 1,500KG to 3,000KG GTO


ULA isn't going to use it's Delta or Atlas rockets to launch a bunch of small satellites, and SpaceX was going to develop a rocket with around the same performance as the PSLV in the Falcon 5, but went straight to the more powerful Falcon 9 so they can't compete with the PSLV


only rockets I can think of that would compete against the PSLV is the Long March 2D and Vega.


http://spacenews.com/indias-governm...-million-in-commercial-launch-fees-2013-2015/

$101 million feed in two years that's pretty tiny compared what ULA and SpaceX are making launching bigger satellites

Yes PSLV don't have the heavy wt launch capability, and India lack the heavy wt. launch capability, but question is YET, buts its not the end. GSLV might emerge competitive, and when we talk about the economics, the customer would attactive toward the cheaper and reliable solutions.

This same organisation of the POOR country ISRO with nimble budget as compare to the NASA, some how was able to successfully reached MARS in its first attempt. May be the western world would still make the fun of ISRO with the Cartoons, but its worth to watch this two picture.

vs

 

[Anazvara]

Read more about this and my hypothesis was totally wrong!

It is correct that this ban is due to price concerns, because Indian launchers are government owned, and so they have incentive to 'dump' their rockets to crush the competition without worrying about profit.


That said, India does the same thing, literally the same thing, of banning non Indian launchers from getting Indian satellite contracts, so calling the US out is pretty hypocritical.

Because ISRO is govt. owned, they have NO incentive to do any dumping. You have got that in reverse.

You can be certain ISRO will work purely for profit and many times turn down profit making ventures only to follow govt. dictates.

secondly, do you have any proof that India bans non Indian launchers from getting Indian satellite contracts ?

last I heard, Ariane has been launching Indian satellites for MANY MANY years now.