tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post6141667163494583928..comments2024-03-27T00:26:31.343-07:00Comments on The Commercial Space Blog: 2009 Canadian Space Agency Report on Indigenous Canadian Launcher said "Yes!" But CSA Didn't Move ForwardChuck Blackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09506476753520146858noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-80614433694131916722016-04-29T08:26:30.109-07:002016-04-29T08:26:30.109-07:00Almost forgot, Randy.
My understanding is that R...Almost forgot, Randy. <br /><br />My understanding is that Russia , the US, France, Japan, China, the UK, India, Israel, the Ukraine, Iran and North Korea have launched satellites into orbit under their national banners as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_orbital_launches_by_country.<br /><br />And while the UK and France no longer launch satellites under their national banner, the statement that, except for the US, the EU, Russia and Japan, "other developed countries" don't have their own launchers available for use, is almost certainly an error on your part.Chuck Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09506476753520146858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-34019798377093824392016-04-29T08:09:46.124-07:002016-04-29T08:09:46.124-07:00No one is dismissing the business case, Randy. The...No one is dismissing the business case, Randy. The article merely mentions that there is one and its focused around the privately owned launch providers, not nations.<br /><br />The CSA could certainly contract a domestic launch provider for its launches, much as they do with foreign providers in the US, India and Russia now.<br /><br />And any domestic provider is certainly free to solicit further contracts on the international market and bring aboard additional funders much like the current foreign providers do. <br /><br />After all, why would any domestic launch provider be restricted to only launching Canadian satellites or accepting only Canadian money?<br /><br />As for your concerns about cost, the fact remains that no one I spoke to at the CSA, in government or in the military has questioned the conclusions of the Continuum report. They just said they had no additional money to pursue the project (off the record) and other priorities (such as RCM and ISS) were of higher political priority (on the record). <br /><br />As well, the estimated development costs are well within the same order of magnitude which SpaceX paid to develop the Falcon 1 and are far higher than Rocket Labs indicates it spent to develop the Electron rocket, which is designed to launch a similar sized payload.Chuck Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09506476753520146858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-26537412414996985922016-04-29T07:23:32.281-07:002016-04-29T07:23:32.281-07:00Dismissing the business case argument is wrong-min...Dismissing the business case argument is wrong-minded. We're talking about taxpayer money, since no Canadian company would undertake the development effort, based on projected Canadian launches of small satellites. And the cost to develop a reliable launcher, considering infrastructure and other life-cycle costs, would be much higher than $187M. "Other developed countries" don't have their own launchers for domestic purposes. The EU, USA and Japan do, but the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain, as stand-alone countries, do not. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14516488764020763890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-1854921502955993692016-04-26T09:51:30.027-07:002016-04-26T09:51:30.027-07:00>CSA opted not to pursue the development of ind...>CSA opted not to pursue the development of indigenous launcher systems.<br /><br />I'll be writing to my MLA. Again, "Slow, Canada" seems to be the order of the day.James Garryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08586673449449391080noreply@blogger.com