Why SpaceX's New Contract to Launch 3 Satellites Might Be A Very Big Deal

I saw a headline in my morning scanning that SpaceX had signed a contract to launch three satellites for a little company called Launcher Space and didn't think much of it.  When I first found out that the launches are to be on their dedicated rideshare launches like the Transporter 1 through 3 missions, I started to think of it as more of a "that's nice, but NBD" (No Big Deal).   When I started looking a little farther I began to see that this could really be a game changer for orbital access.  It'll take a few paragraphs to explain.

Let's start here: the single biggest impediment to doing anything or going anywhere in space is the cost to orbit.  That's where Starship and SuperHeavy are supposed to be the big game changers; unfortunately, they have yet to go to orbit and the Fed.gov in the embodiment of the FAA seems to be slow-rolling approval to launch.  Given that, and the fact that it will a few years before Starship is fully developed, let's look at the current world and the prices to orbit in the current fleets.  

Most importantly, thanks to the unprecedented affordability of its Falcon 9 rocket, SpaceX has allowed rideshare customers to reap a great deal of the benefits by charging just $1M per 200-kilogram (440 lb) ‘slot’ and a flat $5,000 for each additional kilogram. [NOTE: $1M for 200 kg is exactly $5,000/kg - SiG]  To anyone unfamiliar with the cost of spaceflight, that might seem obscene, but it’s extraordinarily affordable and far cheaper than every advertised alternative. Astra Space, the cheapest dedicated smallsat launch provider, sells a Rocket 3 vehicle capable of launching about 50 kilograms (110 lb) to a similar orbit for ~$3.5M – equivalent to $70,000 per kilogram. Rocket 3 has only completed one successful launch, however. Rocket Lab’s more accessible Electron rocket costs at least $7.5M for ~200 kilograms to sun-synchronous orbit (SSO) – a price of $37,500/kg.

Editor's note:  Astra Space's last two attempts to launch Rocket 3 ended in aborts, both Saturday and Monday.  I would consider the $70,000/kg number to be "aspirational" because I think we don't know exactly what their final configuration will be.  My guess would be that number might not go up much but it almost certainly won't go down.  Electron is at clear disadvantage at over 7x the price per pound as a Falcon 9, so Astra's 14x the price has got to be a real handicap. (I have seen no numbers on how Rocket Lab's new Neutron booster may affect costs.)

Before I leave that topic, the cost to orbit for Starship and SuperHeavy has been calculated to be $35 per kilogram.  That's 0.7% of the best cost we have here on the page of $5,000/kg.  Game changer? 

This being essentially nothing but physics, there's bound to be a "gotcha" and in this case it's that all rideshare missions go to essentially the same orbit but not all customers will want their satellite to go to that same orbit.  There's a couple of solutions to that, the easiest being if customers can be grouped by the orbit they want to go to, they can be grouped into one mission and the costs should stay in that $5,000/kg area.  But let's assume that there will always be satellites that want to go somewhere else.  

The answer would be a small, efficient little power pack that could go into the rideshare launch and modify the satellites orbit with its own thrusters.  It turns out that is exactly the business that Launcher Space, the company that signed to contract to fly three satellites on the Falcon 9 rideshare launches, is in. 

Rendering of the Launcher Orbiter releasing a pair of Cubesats.  From Launcher Space. 

Meet Launcher Space's product Orbiter.  Orbiter will use pressure-fed, 3D-printed, thrusters fed by ethane and nitrous oxide stored in 3D-printed tanks. The company has already begun printing and hot-fire testing multiple thrusters, photos here and video here.  They've received the first set of avionics, solar panels, and seem to be making solid progress.  I can see a synergistic relationship here, with SpaceX providing a lift into a preliminary orbit and Launcher Space providing the lift into the desired final orbit.  The next couple of Transporter missions are full already, and it appears the first Launcher ride will be No Earlier Than October, the first of the three they've signed for.  

Again, because it's physics and there ain't no such thing as a free lunch (TANSTAAFL) the people who want to use the combination will pay more than just the cost of launching their satellites because they have to pay the per-kilogram price for the Launcher Orbiter, too.  Eric Ralph at Teslarati dove into this a bit. 

Additionally, Launcher is actually publicizing pricing for the stage. Bought outright, each Orbiter will cost about $400,000. Using its full 400 kg (880 lb) payload margin, a Falcon 9 launch with Orbiter – enabling precise orbital targeting – would cost a prospective customer about $3.5M – less than $9,000/kg. For a 200 kg (440 lb) payload, a Falcon 9 + Orbiter launch might cost less than $7,000/kg (~$2.5M). For Orbiter rideshare missions, Launcher will charge between $8,000 and $25,000 per kilogram – multiple times cheaper than alternatives at the low end and still competitive at the high end.

I don't see whether it's possible to rideshare on the Orbiter as well as on the Falcon 9.  In the event two satellite owners want to go to the same orbit, it seems a natural.  Oh, by the way.  Launcher Space's webpage shows they're headquartered in Hawthorne, California, which just happens to be where SpaceX is headquartered.  Just like the other hi-tech startups north of them in the Silicon Valley all over again.