global launch vehicle market assessment -...
TRANSCRIPT
1 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Global Launch Vehicle Market Assessment A study of launch services for nano/microsatellites in 2013
17 July 2014 | Atlanta, GA
Adam Snow Junior Engineer, Engineering Economics Group
[email protected] | +1.205.317.1663
Elizabeth Buchen Director, Engineering Economics Group
[email protected] | +1.770.379.8006
John R. Olds, Ph.D., P.E. Chief Executive Officer, SpaceWorks Enterprises, Inc.
[email protected] | +1.770.379.8002
2 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Launch Vehicle Market Assessment Overview
Every year SpaceWorks produces a Nano/Microsatellite Market Assessment to capture the
growing number of future nano/microsatellite (1 - 50 kg) missions requiring a launch
The assessment is based on publicly announced nano/microsatellite projects and programs as well as
quantitative and qualitative adjustments to account for the expected sustainment of current projects and
programs
The data source for this study is the SpaceWorks Satellite Launch Demand Database (LDDB), an
extensive database of all known historical (2000 – 2013) and future (2014+) satellite projects with masses
between 0 kg and 10,000+ kg
This study presents high-level launch vehicle performance characteristics for 2013 in order to
determine whether the current launch vehicle market can sufficiently meet growing demand in the
nano/microsatellite mass class
Data suggests that the total number of launches per year and the quantity of launches containing
nano/microsatellites have remained constant, despite rapid growth in the nano/microsatellite industry
In order to foster the dynamic growth observed in 2013, the launch vehicle market will need to
provide more launches and increase the portion of launches servicing nano/microsatellites
3 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Recent Historical Trends for Satellites and Launches
While the quantity of launches per year remains relatively constant,
more satellites are launching due to the popularity of nano/microsatellites
High level trends in the number of launches and the number of satellites provide context for the
2013 launch report
0
50
100
150
200
250
2010 2011 2012 2013
Nu
mb
er o
f L
aun
ches
, Sat
ellit
es
Year
Historical Launch and Satellite Counts (All Satellites)
Number of Launches Satellites Launched
0
20
40
60
80
100
2010 2011 2012 2013 N
um
ber
of
Lau
nch
es, S
atel
lites
Year
Historical Launch and Satellite Counts (Nano/Microsatellites Only)
Launches with Nano/Microsatellites Nano/Microsatellites Nano/Microsatellites Launched
76 satellites
56 nano/microsatellites
4 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Overview of 2013 Launch Performance
Launch vehicles in 2013 enjoyed a 95% success rate; over half of these launches
were destined to LEO, but GEO was also a popular destination with 30% of the total
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Nu
mb
er o
f L
aun
ches
Launch Success and Failure
Failure
Success
Proton, Zenit,
Safir, and
Chang Zheng
(1 failure each)
Total: 82 launches 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Nu
mb
er o
f L
aun
ches
Orbital Destinations
Earth Escape
MEO
GEO
LEO ISS
LEO
Total: 82 launches
5 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Top Satellite Developers and Launch Vehicles in 2013
Launch Vehicle Launches
Soyuz (Russia) 16
Long March (China) 13
Proton (Russia) 8
Atlas (USA) 8
Ariane (Europe) 4
Rokot (Russia) 4
Falcon (USA) 3
Delta (USA) 3
PSLV (India) 3
Antares (USA) 2
Top 10 Countries for
Satellite Owners/Operators Top 10 Launch Vehicles
by Launch Family
Country No. of Satellites
USA 105
Russia 37
China (PR) 18
Japan 9
United Kingdom 7
ESA 7
Germany 6
India 6
Canada 5
Multinational 5
Russian launch vehicles were some of the most popular; however, the
United States produced the largest number of satellites by a large margin
6 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
45%
9%
10%
36%
Payload Size
Nano/Microsatellites (1-50 kg) Small Satellites (50-250 kg)
Medium Satellites (251-1000 kg) Large Satellites (>1000 kg)
Total Payloads Launched in 2013 : 215
2013 Payload Size and Launch Manifesting
Though nano/microsatellites lead the 2013 market in quantity,
71% of launches carried only a single payload
Total Launches in 2013: 82
71%
22%
4% 4%
Launch Manifesting
Primary Satellite Only Primary with 1-5 Secondary Satellites
Primary with 6-10 Secondary Satellites Primary with 11+ Secondary Satellites
7 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
53% 11% 36%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Frequency in Delayed Missions
Reasons for Delay
Launch Vehicle Satellite/Program Development Unknown Reason
2013 Launch Vehicle Delays
Of the 82 attempted launches in 2013, 40% experienced delays averaging
115 days; most delays were caused by the launch vehicle
Reason for Delay Average Delay (days)
Launch Vehicle 128
Satellite/Program Development 357
Unknown Reason 95
24%
43%
9%
12%
12%
Delayed Launches
<7 days 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 1 yr or more
Launches Delayed in 2013: 33
8 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
2013 Launch Vehicle Utilization by Payload Mass Capacity
One method of calculating a launch vehicle’s utilization involves:
• Comparing the actual payload mass launched with the vehicle’s maximum capacity to the mission-
specific orbital destination
• This method was employed to determine a baseline launch vehicle utilization estimate
Though many launches require the vehicle’s full capacity,
frequently vehicles launch with excess payload mass capacity
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Nu
mb
er o
f L
aun
ches
0
%
50% 100
%
25% 75%
Utilization Percentage
47 of 82 attempted launches had
excess payload mass capacity
9 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
2013 Launch Vehicle Utilization by Available Integration Slots
Launch vehicle utilization can also be determined
by investigating available integration slots within
the payload fairing
• Specific integration hardware is used based on the
requirements of the primary payload
• In cases where secondary payload(s) are launched
with the primary, secondary payload adapters are
added
Given the mission’s integration hardware, the
launch vehicle utilization can be estimated by
comparing the total number of payloads with the
total number of distinct integration slots
Launch vehicle utilization can more accurately be
described by the integration slot efficiency at launch
Primary payload
Secondary payload(s)
Integration portal
10 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
2013 Launch Vehicle Utilization by Available Integration Slots (LEO missions)
When estimating launch vehicle utilization by
available integration slots, we assume that no
additional integration hardware is added:
• Only non-human spaceflight missions to LEO
are considered, since most rideshare
opportunities for nano/microsatellites exist on
these missions
• “Cubesat Slots Available” refers to vacant
space within a P-POD or similar deployer;
“Microsat Slots Available” refers to a vacant
integration portal on a secondary payload
adapter
There was little excess capacity for nano/microsatellites (1-50 kg)
on 2013 launches given vehicle integration limitations
88%
6%
6%
Slots Available
No Space Available Cubesat Slots Available Microsat Slots Available
Launches to LEO Excluding Human Spaceflight: 46
11 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
2013 Launch Report Summary
The number of launches per year has remained relatively constant over the last four years (2010
– 2013) with an average of 80 attempts per year
Similarly, the quantity of launches servicing nano/microsatellites has remained constant with 11 launches
in 2013, one less than 2012
In contrast, the number of satellites launched in 2013 grew dramatically from previous years (215
in 2013 compared to 139 in 2012)
Nearly half of 2013 launches experienced significant delay (four months on average), an
unfortunate result for secondary payloads seeking rideshare opportunities
Though many launch vehicles have additional payload mass capacity, it can only be realized with
significant changes to integration hardware, a significant barrier for nano/microsatellites seeking
rideshare launches
Historical analysis suggests the current supply of launch vehicles will not sufficiently serve
future nano/microsatellite market demand
In order to foster the dynamic growth observed in 2013, the market will need to provide
more launches and increase the portion of launches servicing secondary payloads
12 SPACEWORKS COPYRIGHT– APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
SPACEWORKS ENTERPRISES, INC. (SEI) | www.sei.aero | [email protected]
1040 Crown Pointe Parkway, Suite 950 | Atlanta, GA 30338 USA | +1.770.379.8000