AMC -14 Info (1 Viewer)

k1wy-bill

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Family
May 4, 2007
79
0
W.Hartford CT
From NASA Space Warn Bulletin 01APR08:

AMC 14 was to be an American geostationary communications craft. It was launched by a Proton-M rocket from Baikonur on 14 March 2008, but the Breeze-M final stage failed to deliver the craft to geostationary orbit. With an altitude deficit of 8000 km, it would require the use of all the fuel to raise the orbit, severely curtailing its life span. As of 31 March 08, its period remained 576 min, inclination at 49°, perigee at 773 km, and apogee at 35,576 km, indicating that no attempt to make it geostationary might have been made.
 

rglore

Pub Member / Supporter
Pub Member / Supporter
Mar 12, 2006
1,653
94
Louisville
Since the final Breeze-M delivery destination was to be inclination 19.7°, perigee 6257 km, and apogee 35,786 km, it's not that far off. I expect any day now to see the sat moving toward it's geo-stationary (inclination 0°, perigee and apogee 35,786 km) destination.
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
51,559
16,467
Northern VA
Sure sounds bad. Maybe that Russian announcement was correct after all. :(
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
51,559
16,467
Northern VA
I'm sure that decision will be heavily influenced by their insurance companies decision.
 

k1wy-bill

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Family
May 4, 2007
79
0
W.Hartford CT
I agree with Navychop, SES's decision depends on the insurance companies. If they will call it a complete failure, then SES will de-orbit it, if they will pay for a shortened life span then SES will move it to 61.5 w.
 

Primus

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 10, 2007
234
0
St. Louis, MO
I'm confused. Even if the insurance company says it's a complete failure, which I think they already have, they can still try to put it in a usable orbit.
 

Ronald_Jeremy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 2, 2005
3,429
0
Rock Ridge!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm confused. Even if the insurance company says it's a complete failure, which I think they already have, they can still try to put it in a usable orbit.
If the insurance company calls it a complete failure, they become the owner of the satellite when payment is made. It will have to be purchased back in order to move it to proper orbit.
 

k1wy-bill

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Family
May 4, 2007
79
0
W.Hartford CT
I think the insurance policy written on these things have tons of what ifs, not sure they can get paid in full for the satellite if they can use it and get revenue from it. I am sure they can get some money from the policy if they move it and use it. I would guess SES has to figure how much they expected to earn and what they can get now.
 

rocatman

SatelliteGuys Pro
Nov 28, 2003
1,049
6
There is the possibility that Dish could buy the satellite at a bargain basement price from the insurance company. AMC-14 might be more valueable to Dish from a strategetic point of view than to SES Americom from a financial point of view.

In addition, I believe it took three months after launch that the AsiaSat satellite that suffered a similar fate as AMC-14 for the insurance situation to be cleared up before the satellite was manuevered around the moon and put into a useful orbit. I believe it only took about 45 - 60 days to get the satellite operational after the lunar manuever was initiated.
 

Dah-Henny

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 12, 2007
3,666
346
Boone, North Carolina
How about one more fly in the ointment...Even though E* does not own the sat, I read on one of their statements (I don't have the link to Dish's statement), Dish paid a lot of upfront costs on this bird as well, which Charlie said was insured. So the bottom line is that Dish has a stake in this too, at least from a insurance/financial standpoint.
 

vicw

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 17, 2004
196
1
Southern Pines, NC
I know it's just pure speculation on my part, but it seems to me that the current status of AMC-14 is one of several possible and predictable outcomes of the launch, and that provisions would have (or should have) been written into the contracts to handle each possible contingiency.

I would think that the worst time to start negotiating is while the satellite is in a useless orbit.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top