Why does Arabsat 6A need a Falcon Heavy to launchWhat missions could be done with Orion on Falcon Heavy?Falcon 9R as SSTOWhat would the challenges be in developing a Falcon Heavy with three or four strap-on boosters?Why is the first launch of Falcon Heavy sending a car instead of something useful?Was anything else about the Falcon Heavy test launch “off nominal” besides the center core return?What accounted for the total mass of the Tesla/Starman?How much payload can Falcon Heavy Reusable lift?Why doesn't SpaceX deploy some module to cover whole fairing like a rain coat just before sea landing?Does the downrange position of an ASDS vary, depending on payload mass?What is meant by “a high-energy geostationary orbit”? (SpaceX Arabsat 6A)

Assassin's bullet with mercury

Does a druid starting with a bow start with no arrows?

Where does SFDX store details about scratch orgs?

Why does the EU insist on the backstop when it is clear in a no deal scenario they still intend to keep an open border?

Today is the Center

Should I tell management that I intend to leave due to bad software development practices?

Did Shadowfax go to Valinor?

In Romance of the Three Kingdoms why do people still use bamboo sticks when papers are already invented?

Has there ever been an airliner design involving reducing generator load by installing solar panels?

How to draw the figure with four pentagons?

1960's book about a plague that kills all white people

Is it canonical bit space?

What to put in ESTA if staying in US for a few days before going on to Canada

If human space travel is limited by the G force vulnerability, is there a way to counter G forces?

Python: return float 1.0 as int 1 but float 1.5 as float 1.5

Took a trip to a parallel universe, need help deciphering

How to take photos in burst mode, without vibration?

Why does Kotter return in Welcome Back Kotter

What's the difference between 'rename' and 'mv'?

A reference to a well-known characterization of scattered compact spaces

Reserved de-dupe rules

How can I tell someone that I want to be his or her friend?

How do I write bicross product symbols in latex?

What's the point of deactivating Num Lock on login screens?



Why does Arabsat 6A need a Falcon Heavy to launch


What missions could be done with Orion on Falcon Heavy?Falcon 9R as SSTOWhat would the challenges be in developing a Falcon Heavy with three or four strap-on boosters?Why is the first launch of Falcon Heavy sending a car instead of something useful?Was anything else about the Falcon Heavy test launch “off nominal” besides the center core return?What accounted for the total mass of the Tesla/Starman?How much payload can Falcon Heavy Reusable lift?Why doesn't SpaceX deploy some module to cover whole fairing like a rain coat just before sea landing?Does the downrange position of an ASDS vary, depending on payload mass?What is meant by “a high-energy geostationary orbit”? (SpaceX Arabsat 6A)













4












$begingroup$


Is it just me or does a falcon heavy seem like a bit of an overkill to launch Arabsat 6A?



Falcon Heavy - GEO payload: 26,700 kilograms



Arabsat 6A - weight: ~6000 kilograms



Wouldn't some other launch options be more appropriate or is there something about the launch of Arabsat 6A that needs the additional power?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$
















    4












    $begingroup$


    Is it just me or does a falcon heavy seem like a bit of an overkill to launch Arabsat 6A?



    Falcon Heavy - GEO payload: 26,700 kilograms



    Arabsat 6A - weight: ~6000 kilograms



    Wouldn't some other launch options be more appropriate or is there something about the launch of Arabsat 6A that needs the additional power?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$














      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$


      Is it just me or does a falcon heavy seem like a bit of an overkill to launch Arabsat 6A?



      Falcon Heavy - GEO payload: 26,700 kilograms



      Arabsat 6A - weight: ~6000 kilograms



      Wouldn't some other launch options be more appropriate or is there something about the launch of Arabsat 6A that needs the additional power?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$




      Is it just me or does a falcon heavy seem like a bit of an overkill to launch Arabsat 6A?



      Falcon Heavy - GEO payload: 26,700 kilograms



      Arabsat 6A - weight: ~6000 kilograms



      Wouldn't some other launch options be more appropriate or is there something about the launch of Arabsat 6A that needs the additional power?







      spacex launch falcon-9 falcon-heavy






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 4 hours ago







      Jay Laughlin













      New contributor




      Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 4 hours ago









      Jay LaughlinJay Laughlin

      813




      813




      New contributor




      Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Jay Laughlin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6












          $begingroup$

          6000 Kg is actually pretty big. I am sure SpaceX offered some discounts to attract a customer for Falcon Heavy.



          So I will ignore the other options (Atlas 5 with side boosters, Ariane 5, or Proton) and focus on why not a Falcon 9.



          Falcon 9's numbers are lower to GTO, Wikipedia has it around 5500kg reusable. 8300kg expendable, and SpaceX's point is, if you are bigger than a Falcon 9 can handle and still land, better off moving to a Falcon Heavy.



          Also there are different GTO orbits, the higher the 'energy' the less work (aka burned up fuel) the satellite needs to do to get to a circular GEO orbit. SpaceX does aim for a lower of the set, usually to allow recovery.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$




















            0












            $begingroup$

            @geoffc's answer explains why Falcon Heavy over Falcon 9, but the reason for why not any of the other options is likely cost.



            It's difficult to say with certainty what the launch costs would be, since costs are negotiated per launch, and are affected by a large number of factors (target orbit, payload mass, fuel costs, ridesharing, etc). Estimates put Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy's main competitors Ariane 5 at around $178M, Atlas 5 at $109M-179M, and Proton-M at about $100M1. Expendable Falcon 9 and Fully Reusable Falcon Heavy both cost an estimated $90M, and as @geoffc pointed out, FH has greater GTO capacity than F9, so the launch could use some combination of more favorable orbit and extra ridesharing capacity to reduce the effective launch cost.



            Source



            1 this reflects the likely cost as of the time when Arabsat 6A's launch was being negotiated; Proton-M has since been price-cut to be competitive to Falcon-9





            share








            New contributor




            asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$













              Your Answer





              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              );
              );
              , "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "508"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader:
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              ,
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );






              Jay Laughlin is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35290%2fwhy-does-arabsat-6a-need-a-falcon-heavy-to-launch%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              6












              $begingroup$

              6000 Kg is actually pretty big. I am sure SpaceX offered some discounts to attract a customer for Falcon Heavy.



              So I will ignore the other options (Atlas 5 with side boosters, Ariane 5, or Proton) and focus on why not a Falcon 9.



              Falcon 9's numbers are lower to GTO, Wikipedia has it around 5500kg reusable. 8300kg expendable, and SpaceX's point is, if you are bigger than a Falcon 9 can handle and still land, better off moving to a Falcon Heavy.



              Also there are different GTO orbits, the higher the 'energy' the less work (aka burned up fuel) the satellite needs to do to get to a circular GEO orbit. SpaceX does aim for a lower of the set, usually to allow recovery.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                6












                $begingroup$

                6000 Kg is actually pretty big. I am sure SpaceX offered some discounts to attract a customer for Falcon Heavy.



                So I will ignore the other options (Atlas 5 with side boosters, Ariane 5, or Proton) and focus on why not a Falcon 9.



                Falcon 9's numbers are lower to GTO, Wikipedia has it around 5500kg reusable. 8300kg expendable, and SpaceX's point is, if you are bigger than a Falcon 9 can handle and still land, better off moving to a Falcon Heavy.



                Also there are different GTO orbits, the higher the 'energy' the less work (aka burned up fuel) the satellite needs to do to get to a circular GEO orbit. SpaceX does aim for a lower of the set, usually to allow recovery.






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  6












                  6








                  6





                  $begingroup$

                  6000 Kg is actually pretty big. I am sure SpaceX offered some discounts to attract a customer for Falcon Heavy.



                  So I will ignore the other options (Atlas 5 with side boosters, Ariane 5, or Proton) and focus on why not a Falcon 9.



                  Falcon 9's numbers are lower to GTO, Wikipedia has it around 5500kg reusable. 8300kg expendable, and SpaceX's point is, if you are bigger than a Falcon 9 can handle and still land, better off moving to a Falcon Heavy.



                  Also there are different GTO orbits, the higher the 'energy' the less work (aka burned up fuel) the satellite needs to do to get to a circular GEO orbit. SpaceX does aim for a lower of the set, usually to allow recovery.






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  6000 Kg is actually pretty big. I am sure SpaceX offered some discounts to attract a customer for Falcon Heavy.



                  So I will ignore the other options (Atlas 5 with side boosters, Ariane 5, or Proton) and focus on why not a Falcon 9.



                  Falcon 9's numbers are lower to GTO, Wikipedia has it around 5500kg reusable. 8300kg expendable, and SpaceX's point is, if you are bigger than a Falcon 9 can handle and still land, better off moving to a Falcon Heavy.



                  Also there are different GTO orbits, the higher the 'energy' the less work (aka burned up fuel) the satellite needs to do to get to a circular GEO orbit. SpaceX does aim for a lower of the set, usually to allow recovery.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 4 hours ago









                  geoffcgeoffc

                  56k10162310




                  56k10162310





















                      0












                      $begingroup$

                      @geoffc's answer explains why Falcon Heavy over Falcon 9, but the reason for why not any of the other options is likely cost.



                      It's difficult to say with certainty what the launch costs would be, since costs are negotiated per launch, and are affected by a large number of factors (target orbit, payload mass, fuel costs, ridesharing, etc). Estimates put Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy's main competitors Ariane 5 at around $178M, Atlas 5 at $109M-179M, and Proton-M at about $100M1. Expendable Falcon 9 and Fully Reusable Falcon Heavy both cost an estimated $90M, and as @geoffc pointed out, FH has greater GTO capacity than F9, so the launch could use some combination of more favorable orbit and extra ridesharing capacity to reduce the effective launch cost.



                      Source



                      1 this reflects the likely cost as of the time when Arabsat 6A's launch was being negotiated; Proton-M has since been price-cut to be competitive to Falcon-9





                      share








                      New contributor




                      asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      $endgroup$

















                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        @geoffc's answer explains why Falcon Heavy over Falcon 9, but the reason for why not any of the other options is likely cost.



                        It's difficult to say with certainty what the launch costs would be, since costs are negotiated per launch, and are affected by a large number of factors (target orbit, payload mass, fuel costs, ridesharing, etc). Estimates put Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy's main competitors Ariane 5 at around $178M, Atlas 5 at $109M-179M, and Proton-M at about $100M1. Expendable Falcon 9 and Fully Reusable Falcon Heavy both cost an estimated $90M, and as @geoffc pointed out, FH has greater GTO capacity than F9, so the launch could use some combination of more favorable orbit and extra ridesharing capacity to reduce the effective launch cost.



                        Source



                        1 this reflects the likely cost as of the time when Arabsat 6A's launch was being negotiated; Proton-M has since been price-cut to be competitive to Falcon-9





                        share








                        New contributor




                        asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        $endgroup$















                          0












                          0








                          0





                          $begingroup$

                          @geoffc's answer explains why Falcon Heavy over Falcon 9, but the reason for why not any of the other options is likely cost.



                          It's difficult to say with certainty what the launch costs would be, since costs are negotiated per launch, and are affected by a large number of factors (target orbit, payload mass, fuel costs, ridesharing, etc). Estimates put Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy's main competitors Ariane 5 at around $178M, Atlas 5 at $109M-179M, and Proton-M at about $100M1. Expendable Falcon 9 and Fully Reusable Falcon Heavy both cost an estimated $90M, and as @geoffc pointed out, FH has greater GTO capacity than F9, so the launch could use some combination of more favorable orbit and extra ridesharing capacity to reduce the effective launch cost.



                          Source



                          1 this reflects the likely cost as of the time when Arabsat 6A's launch was being negotiated; Proton-M has since been price-cut to be competitive to Falcon-9





                          share








                          New contributor




                          asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






                          $endgroup$



                          @geoffc's answer explains why Falcon Heavy over Falcon 9, but the reason for why not any of the other options is likely cost.



                          It's difficult to say with certainty what the launch costs would be, since costs are negotiated per launch, and are affected by a large number of factors (target orbit, payload mass, fuel costs, ridesharing, etc). Estimates put Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy's main competitors Ariane 5 at around $178M, Atlas 5 at $109M-179M, and Proton-M at about $100M1. Expendable Falcon 9 and Fully Reusable Falcon Heavy both cost an estimated $90M, and as @geoffc pointed out, FH has greater GTO capacity than F9, so the launch could use some combination of more favorable orbit and extra ridesharing capacity to reduce the effective launch cost.



                          Source



                          1 this reflects the likely cost as of the time when Arabsat 6A's launch was being negotiated; Proton-M has since been price-cut to be competitive to Falcon-9






                          share








                          New contributor




                          asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.








                          share


                          share






                          New contributor




                          asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.









                          answered 1 min ago









                          asgallantasgallant

                          1011




                          1011




                          New contributor




                          asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.





                          New contributor





                          asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






                          asgallant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.




















                              Jay Laughlin is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                              draft saved

                              draft discarded


















                              Jay Laughlin is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                              Jay Laughlin is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                              Jay Laughlin is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid


                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35290%2fwhy-does-arabsat-6a-need-a-falcon-heavy-to-launch%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              बाताम इन्हें भी देखें सन्दर्भ दिक्चालन सूची1°05′00″N 104°02′0″E / 1.08333°N 104.03333°E / 1.08333; 104.033331°05′00″N 104°02′0″E / 1.08333°N 104.03333°E / 1.08333; 104.03333

                              Why is the 'in' operator throwing an error with a string literal instead of logging false?Why can't I use switch statement on a String?Python join: why is it string.join(list) instead of list.join(string)?Multiline String Literal in C#Why does comparing strings using either '==' or 'is' sometimes produce a different result?How to initialize an array's length in javascript?How can I print literal curly-brace characters in python string and also use .format on it?Why does ++[[]][+[]]+[+[]] return the string “10”?Why is char[] preferred over String for passwords?Why does this code using random strings print “hello world”?jQuery.inArray(), how to use it right?

                              How can we generalize the fact of finite dimensional vector space to an infinte dimensional case?$k[x]$-module and cyclic module over a finite dimensional vector spaceSubspace of a finite dimensional space is finite dimensionalIf V is an infinite-dimensional vector space, and S is an infinite-dimensional subspace of V, must the dimension of V/S be finite? ExplainWhy is an infinite dimensional space so different than a finite dimensional one?base for finite dimensional vector space is not infinite dimensional vector space?Any finite-dimensional vector space is the dual space of anotherHaving Trouble Understanding Meaning Of A Finite-Dimensional Vector SpaceProve that “Every subspaces of a finite-dimensional vector space is finite-dimensional”Ring as a finite dimensional Vector space over a field KQuestion regarding basis and dimension