# Cost to Launch Satellite **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 21, 2001, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309 "2001-08-21T06:24:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/1 "2001-08-21T06:24:23Z")
I read that a satellite developed as a result of an Al Gore suggestion is being mothballed due to Republican pressure. The $120M satellite is designed to sit in geosynchronous (or is it geostationary) orbit and send back pictures of the earth to be displayed on the internet. My question is: if I were to take up a collection to get this thing launched, what would it cost. 1s, 10s, or 100s of $M. I tried searching the web and even sent an inquiry to Boeing’s sea-based launch joint venture, but no luck so far. ---
**Author:** ![Doc\_Nickel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5fc32e/32.png) [@Doc\_Nickel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doc_Nickel)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/2 "2001-08-21T06:33:13Z")
As I understand it, there’s more than just mere cost to consider. As I recall, Gore’s Pie-Eye-In-The-Sky was designed to be launched from the Shuttle… but for various reasons the Shuttle schedule is currently pretty packed. Only two of the three Shuttles are in rotation (I think the third is being held as an “emergency backup” for the Space Station) and their schedules are fixed with ISS and other projects. The ISS requires a certain number of flights for maintenence and personel reasons, NASA is limited by funds to X number of flights per year, and thus there’s a finite amount of launches to accomodate a satellite. I do not know if Gore’s NetCamSat can be launched on a conventional rocket. I am told, however, it is costing some $1M a year just to store it. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/3 "2001-08-21T06:47:13Z")
Well, there’s a certain Cost-Per-Pound for launching a satellite (although I’ve forgotten the number by now, and I don’t want to go hunting through Google for an hour to find it). However, you’re forgetting that the majority of a high-tech satellite’s cost is in the design and construction. These things need to have VERY powerful electronics that run on relatively small amounts of energy. Then the solar panels, maneuvering systems, radiation shielding, etc. Ultimately, the actual LAUNCHING of the satellite is only a fraction of its preparation (unless you’re launching, like, rocks). ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/4 "2001-08-21T06:50:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE \* > \*\*Well, there’s a certain Cost-Per-Pound for launching a satellite (although I’ve forgotten the number by now, and I don’t want to go hunting through Google for an hour to find it). However, you’re forgetting that the majority of a high-tech satellite’s cost is in the design and construction. These things need to have VERY powerful electronics that run on relatively small amounts of energy. Then the solar panels, maneuvering systems, radiation shielding, etc. > > Ultimately, the actual LAUNCHING of the satellite is only a fraction of its preparation (unless you’re launching, like, rocks). \*\* Yes, but this one is built and ready to go. That’s why it seems a waste to have it sit in mothballs (actually frozen nitrogen). ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/5 "2001-08-21T07:38:23Z")
That is true. I’d imagine that it’s just a matter of the Space Shuttle being overbooked, not cost, that is keeping the satellite grounded. Aren’t most commercial satellites - telecommunications, weather, geosurveying, etc. - launched in an unmanned rocket? ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 7:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/6 "2001-08-21T07:58:17Z")
Once the satellite is designed for the Shuttle, I’d guess it takes a lot of work to adopt it to another launch vehicle. There’s also the operational cost of the satellite, which can be considerable. A satellite requires many engineers and operators working full-time to support it. You also need to build the ground support system (antennas and radio equipment), or pay other people (e.g. NASA) to use theirs. Sometimes satellites already launched and in operation are killed because they ran out of money to operate it. I seem to recall Magellan (the Venus mission) was one such example. ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/7 "2001-08-21T13:40:16Z")
Here’s some more info on the satellite, if you’re interested: [Triana Mission home page](http://triana.gsfc.nasa.gov/home/) This was never the most popular space project anyway, which is probably why it dropped to the bottom of NASA’s list. The original idea was to drop a spacecraft at the L1 point, aim it at the Earth, and take pictures. Then send the pictures back to Earth so they could be posted on a NASA web site. Deep, eh? They’ve added more science since then so the program wouldn’t be cut outright, but it’s still not overly popular. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/8 "2001-08-21T14:02:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SmackFu \* > \*\*Here’s some more info on the satellite, if you’re interested: [Triana Mission home page](http://triana.gsfc.nasa.gov/home/) > \*\* Great site. It gives the mass as 1200 pounds. After some more search on Google I found a site quoting $10,000 a pound to geosynchronous orbit (is launching to the L1 more?). I only need to raise $12M. ---
**Author:** ![Nuri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/41988e/32.png) [@Nuri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nuri)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/9 "2001-08-21T17:26:15Z")
The cost per pound is what takes a lot of money. What must be remembered is that they first have to figure out how much fuel to get into orbit. But what kills it is you have to have enough fuel to get the fuel into space, and then enough fuel to get that fuel…and so on and so forth. That’s a very big cost right there. ---
**Author:** ![Montfort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Montfort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Montfort)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/10 "2001-08-21T17:36:50Z")
Here are an [article](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38864-2001Aug6.html) and an [editorial](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33838-2001Aug19.html) from the _Washington Post_ in the past month about it. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/11 "2001-08-21T21:20:19Z")
Even if we could launch it for free, it still wouldn’t necessarily be worth it. There’s only one Earth-Sun L1 point, and there’s only so many satellites you can put there. Since it’s a prime location for several missions that would actually do something (such as studying the Sun), it doesn’t make much sense to clutter it up with something that just produces pretty pictures that we can already easily produce anyway, just so people who already know what our planet looks like can be reminded of it. Costs are definitely higher to get to L1 than they are to geosynch, although I don’t know by how much. It’s farther away than the Moon. ---
**Author:** ![bernse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@bernse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bernse)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/12 "2001-08-21T21:28:58Z")
So, how big is L1? How many satelites can be put there before they are too far from the “center” of it and start to move too much? ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2001, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/13 "2001-08-21T22:30:47Z")
Interestingly enough, there already is a spacecraft on L1, [SOHO](http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/), which studies the sun. It is in orbit around L1 (somehow), rather than trying to maintain a fixed position on it. This would presumably solve that limited space problem.[This page from NASA](http://orpheus.nascom.nasa.gov/~kucera/explore/faq/spacecraft.html#HOW_FAST) has a lot of interesting info on how this L1 stuff works from a practical perspective. On another point, whoever launches this just has to get the Triana spacecraft into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), not geosynchronous or L1. The lower stage of the spacecraft itself is basically a rocket that takes it the rest of the way. Take a look at the picture on [this page](http://triana.gsfc.nasa.gov/spacecraft/trspacecraft.htm). ---
**Author:** ![MrDeath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/22d042/32.png) [@MrDeath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDeath)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2001, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/14 "2001-08-22T03:46:10Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by DanBlather_ > **It gives the mass as 1200 pounds.** Although Triana’s mass _per se_ is only 1244 pounds, its _payload mass_, the mass you have to lift to get it where you want it to go, is [9347 pounds](http://triana.gsfc.nasa.gov/home/mass.htm). Suddenly that 12 million is looking more like a hundred million. Oops. ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2001, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/15 "2001-08-22T23:34:55Z")
So what’s the deal on the science content of this mission? Some people say “just to take pictures of the Earth and post them on the internet.” Others say there are worthwhile goals. I haven’t heard of the mission before this, but judging from the link SmackFu posted, I have to wonder if the Scripps Institution of Oceanography got $120 million just to do the former. What’s the Straight Dope on this? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2001, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cost-to-launch-satellite/77309/16 "2001-08-23T02:49:54Z")
L1 is an unstable point along the Sun-Earth axis, and semi-stable on the plane perpendicular to that axis. In other words, you can orbit it on that plane, but how far you can get from it Earthward or Sunward depends on how much fuel you’re willing to spend on station keeping. I’m not sure how far you can go in the stable directions before they become unstable; hopefully **Podkayne** or another of our astronomers can enlighten? As to the science goals of the mission, all I can say is that of all of the physicists and astronomers I have talked to concerning the mission, none have considered it worthwhile. There’s not really all that much you can do with it, either for science or PR, that you can’t already do with the arrays of geosynchronous weather satellites already in place. It’s not all that difficult to take a weather picture and deproject it to any point of view you want.