backtop


Print 16 comment(s) - last by Brian H.. on Oct 20 at 8:04 AM


  (Source: space.skyrocket.de)
Orbcomm said it will be filing an insurance claim of $10 million to cover the prototype satellite as well as the cost of the launch and insurance policy

Orbcomm's prototype second-generation satellite, OG2, has fallen out of orbit after SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket failed to launch it into the correct trajectory.

Orbcomm, a satellite messaging service provider, had sent its OG2 prototype into space aboard SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket during the Oct. 7 launch to the International Space Station (ISS). The main mission was to send the Dragon capsule to the ISS for supplies, but NASA and SpaceX agreed to let Orbcomm send a satellite high into orbit on the Falcon 9 as a secondary part of the mission. 

However, a small mishap occurred during the Oct. 7 flight: one of the nine Merlin first-stage engines on Falcon 9 shut down. 

The Falcon 9 was still able to lift the Dragon to the ISS successfully on Oct. 10, but it was unable to launch the OG2 prototype far enough into orbit to collect an optimal amount of data. It wandered for four days before falling out of orbit. 

However, Orbcomm said that wandering satellite gathered enough data in the nearly four-day period to proceed with the full constellation launch next year. The constellation launch consists of sending 18 second-generation satellites into orbit aboard two Falcon 9 rockets. 

Orbcomm said it will be filing an insurance claim of $10 million to cover the prototype satellite as well as the cost of the launch and insurance policy. If the insurance underwriters accept this, Orbcomm will not need to launch another prototype. Rather, it would be able to launch all 18 satellites starting next year thanks to the amount of data collected during the recent launch. 

SpaceX added that Orbcomm knew that there was a chance that OG2 wouldn't make it into the correct orbit beforehand. 

"It is important to appreciate that Orbcomm understoof from the beginning that the orbit-raising maneuver was tentative," said Katherine Nelson, SpaceX spokeswoman. "They accepted that there was a high risk of their satellite remaining at the Dragon insertion orbit. SpaceX would not have agreed to fly their satellite otherwise, since this was not part of the core mission and there was a known, material risk of no altitude raise."

SpaceX's Dragon is currently at the ISS unloading 882 pounds of cargo, and will bring twice that amount of cargo back to Earth near the end of October. 


Source: MSNBC



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Insurance policy
By foolsgambit11 on 10/15/2012 7:48:51 PM , Rating: 2
It's doubtful even a boutique insurer would make a business model out of covering the cost of the insurance policy in the insurance - it actually puts an incentive on this insured party to cash in on their policy. Look at this scenario, for example:
Say Orbcomm had that $10mil policy with the $1mil premium. Should the launch go perfectly to plan, the insurance policy is just a $1mil loss. If the launch is a complete failure, there are no losses (except maybe time to relaunch a new prototype). And if the launch is a semi-failure like this, they get the data they wanted, and have no losses. So the worst-case scenario for Orbcomm was a successful launch, and no insurer is going to survive long giving out policies like that; the incentives are backwards.


RE: Insurance policy
By Rukkian on 10/16/2012 9:38:27 AM , Rating: 2
Unless they offer the option, and charge 3Mil. It all depends on how the insurance is written. This is not a standard off the shelf insurance from progressive.


RE: Insurance policy
By drlumen on 10/16/2012 2:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
It would not be much different to want insurance for $10M for all losses or $9M for the satellite and $1M for the policy.

It would kinda be like the car windshield companies able to skirt around the insurance deductible. They just charge more for the replacement and forgive the deductible amount.


RE: Insurance policy
By Brian H on 10/20/2012 7:57:17 AM , Rating: 2
Worst case only in terms of expenditure. They got what they paid for, which is the best case scenario.

Your analyses seem obsessed with minimizing outlay. It's the return on outlay which is the point of the venture. Your observations and caviling are bootless.


"Can anyone tell me what MobileMe is supposed to do?... So why the f*** doesn't it do that?" -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki