Argentina Launches First Satellite

[Gringoboy]

That's fascinating about [background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]Argentina's Condor II, Camberiu.[/background]
[background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]I had no idea.[/background]

 

[nkotb]

Great - "satellite sovereignty" will obviously solve all of the country's problems.

 

[camberiu]

Great - "satellite sovereignty" will obviously solve all of the country's problems.

This mindset is unfortunately ingrained in both Argentine and Brazilians societies. Part of it comes from the experiences during World War I and World War II, where the ability in both countries to acquired essential (and not so essential) industrial goods from Europe and the US was severely disrupted. This generated a drive in both countries to achieve some type of industrial/technological "independence". This might have made sense when the US and a few industrial European countries where the only sources of industrial goods. But in a fully globalized world where industrial goods might come from places like China, Indonesia, India, Mexico, Vietnam or Turkey, the mindset has become somewhat anachronistic, but still very prevalent, which is often capitalized by politicians.

 

[ArielFabian]

Great - "satellite sovereignty" will obviously solve all of the country's problems.

Not all, but might solve many problems we have with communications. Let's see what happens.

 

[ghost]

http://newspapersmagazine.com/7508/%E2%97%A6Argentina%20Star%20Newspaper%20Online/

 

[Crema Americana]

I don't know how to feel about this. On one hand, I guess it's good that Argentina has a (another?) satellite... but what do the Argentine people get out of this? If it's just so that the government can stop renting and run it themselves (and we know how Argentines run things) then I'm not sure it's that great. If they do run it well and save money, well that's a benefit all around.. as long as it's used for something constructive.


Personally I would have preferred better ground communications (faster fiber optics, etc.) For TV I have DirecTV.

 

[thorsten]

I don't know how to feel about this. On one hand, I guess it's good that Argentina has a (another?) satellite... but what do the Argentine people get out of this? If it's just so that the government can stop renting and run it themselves (and we know how Argentines run things) then I'm not sure it's that great. If they do run it well and save money, well that's a benefit all around.. as long as it's used for something constructive.

Well, the development and construction of ARSAT-1 did cost 270M$. For comparison: Iridium builds a new network comprised of 81 satellites (Iridium Next) and paid 2.9B$ to Thales - for all satellites including development, manufacture and launch - thats less than 36M per satellite... So I guess at least some "Argentine people" get a lot out of it...

 

[Roxana]

I am proud that a woman is in charge of the project, she is Ana Caumo and has 1200 people working in the project. She is the woman with the highest grade at Balseiro Institute in Bariloche, in the whole story of Balseiro. She is native from provincia of La Pampa, lived and studied abroad, and came back to Argentina for this project.

 

[camberiu]

Well, the development and construction of ARSAT-1 did cost 270M$. For comparison: Iridium builds a new network comprised of 81 satellites (Iridium Next) and paid 2.9B$ to Thales - for all satellites including development, manufacture and launch - thats less than 36M per satellite... So I guess at least some "Argentine people" get a lot out of it...

I think you are absolutely correct on the assertion that the ARSAT-1 is probably significantly over priced. However, I think you are not making an apples to apples comparison when looking at the costs of the ARSAT-1 vs Iridium Next. The economics of both are simply not the same. First we have economies of scale. When building 81 identical satellites, it is highly expected that the unit costs of reach will be significantly reduced, since the R&D costs are shared by every unit manufactured. That is not the case with the ARSAT-1, which is a single unit. The second issue is complexity. The ARSAT-1 is a 3 TON satellite designed to re-transmit a huge amount voice, TV and data communications. The Iridium next satellites are about 600 Kg each, and each satellite can only support 1100 concurrent phone calls. Since the Iridium Next satellites are much simpler, the lower price tag is also to be expected. Finally, the Iridium Next will stay in low orbit, at about 700 Km for Earth's surface. The ARSAT-1 is at geosync orbit, which is about 35 thousand Km for the Earth;'s surface, so the launch costs for the ARSAT-1 were also dramatically higher.
But again, I am not doubting that the Argentina tax payer has been ripped off on this, I just don;t think the Iridium Next is the best cost benchmark comparison for the ARSAT-1.

 

[thorsten]

Yes, you are right, one cannot compare the costs directly 1:1. However, my main point is that the project itself is economically stupid. Obviously there are economics of scale - that's why other countries buy their satellites instead of producing them on their own. And the launch cost are cheaper for iridium, but they are not even included in the price for ARSAT, so this comes on top of the development cost. I'm not sure how much exactly one would need to pay to buy a satellite of the capabilities of ARSAT, but I'd bet its significantly less than what was spend on the project.
What I'm really interested in is, however, how the satellite will be used now, i.e., who can use its services and what is charged...