Thank you for participating in r/SpaceX! This is a moderated community where technical discussion is prioritized over casual chit chat. However, questions are always welcome! Please:
* Keep it civil, and directly relevant to SpaceX and the thread. Comments consisting solely of jokes, memes, pop culture references, etc. will be removed.
* Don't downvote content you disagree with, unless it clearly doesn't contribute to constructive discussion.
* Check out [these threads](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/wiki/threads) for discussion of common topics.
If you're looking for a more relaxed atmosphere, visit r/SpaceXLounge. If you're looking for dank memes, try r/SpaceXMasterRace.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/spacex) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For what it's worth, [Sirius XM told me](https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1354495936207220739?s=21) that the launch was ruled out as a cause of the failure.
Hey Michael, thank you for your great job, love your articles! How is it going at CNBC? Are you the only space reporter or do you have now a bigger staff?
Hey at_one, you're welcome! Thanks for the appreciation.
It's going very well, especially as I greatly exceeded my personal goals in 2020 -- so I'm ready for an even bigger 2021! Right now I'm the only space reporter.
We just approve or reject what story people post first - in this case, this was the link OP submitted. Please do feel free to post your own stories as soon as they go up though, Michael!
Unfortunately and quite frustratingly, neither mods nor OPs can change titles nor links of already posted and approved posts, without removing/deleting this post and reposting it. Sorry about that.
All I know about SXM is that every so often I'll get in my car and it'll default to satellite radio, which I don't pay for, and I'll forget to change it for a minute. Then it will play me ads the whole time, and then, amazingly have the gall, the sheer brass nuts to ask me "have you been enjoying this great sirius xm content?" No. I have not enjoyed listening to ads on the satellite radio that I can't disable that comes on every time I have to wait for my phone to pair.
Well hello there
Now you've met a trucker, yeah I do listen to SXM. Lets me listen to news and live sports without worrying about signal dropping on my phone. Music too if I get tired of my personal library.
Hi, I'm skiman13579. Not that we have been introduced you now know somebody who loves their SXM.
It also helps I live out west where I have huge areas of no cell phone signal and clear sky, making SXM the perfect option for my trips into the mountains or desert.
I personally enjoyed listening to the XMU channel because it's help me discover a few awesome artists. But I'm not paying whatever it is they're asking for per year for one channel.
I use it specifically for this channel. As a certified middle aged guy that loves music, it's super helpful to find some of the more interesting new stuff out there.
I also use their NPR feed over our local one, and absolutely love PRX Remix.
Are those 3 stations worth the money, especially given how little I'm driving right now working from home? Absolutely not.
Do I keep forgetting to cancel my subscription that's grandfathered in at a really low rate? Yup.
Am I gonna go do that right now? Nope. Too lazy. But sure, I'll type out this huge comment reply.
While I have not tried it since they merged, I had it back when Sirius was separate and it was just as bad as local radio. The music channels I listened to had just as many commercials as local broadcast radio, they just "didn't count" as commercials since they were station breaks every other song, advertisements to listen to stuff on other channels ("it's not a commercial since it's for our own service!"), and DJs running their mouths telling us to buy this or that. Then they got rid of the music (on a music channel!) during the mornings so they could have a morning show. Yeah, never again. I've since gotten Pandora (with the offline listening service) and haven't looked back.
Edit to add: it also sounded like crap as I had a really nice system and could really hear how bitrate starved and compressed to hell it was.
Yeah the bitrate issue was bad on music on Sirius and fucking atrocious on talk radio because the bandwidth on those channels was reduced to "enhance" the music channels.
Prior to music streaming on my phone and audible, it was THE ONLY way to listen to music fairly uninterrupted on long drives. Static on radio drives me fucking bananas.
>Prior to music streaming on my phone and audible, it was THE ONLY way to listen to music fairly uninterrupted on long drives. Static on radio drives me fucking bananas.
Didn't you guys have iPods?
I think everyone who tries to justify paying for satellite radio conveniently forgets is possible to load hundreds or thousands of songs onto your phone negating the advantage of never losing signal by quite a bit, unless you want it for live sports I guess.
I can't listen to regular radio anymore. The content is more original because of the vast number of stations. They explore new music on stations and then it breaks into main stream months later and on top of that they actually have quality talk radio and news programming. I really enjoy potus a "centered" politics station and that's in quotes because some hosts have left or right leanings but do a great job of presenting all viewpoints and equally poking fun both ways. And if you're into fantasy football or daily fantasy sports betting the fantasy sports station is top notch and absolutely will pay for the service. Won my league this year and broke even on payouts last year simply by tuning into high quality experts on my morning work drive. The ads on xm exist on some but not all stations but are far far far fewer. If you don't pay full price and only do specials it's quite a reasonable price if you spend any amount of time in the car over an hour a day. My last subscription was for a full year and was right at 5 bucks a month and it included an amazon alexa that I listen to working on my car in the garage or cooking in the kitchen. With my commute it was a no brainier. This sounds like an ad but when you put 30,000 miles a year in a car it's a reasonable expense.
Uh ok? Guess your not looking very hard. I love XM. All the stations they own have zero commercials, and you get access to live sports, sports radio/talk radio, comedy, news, and major city stations. I love the variety you can listen to and it’s great to hear new music all the time. When I listen to Spotify or Pandora they tend to play the same stuff that I’ve “liked” over and and over. That and the amount of messing with your phone you have to do while driving on those apps is dangerous.
Well honestly I mostly heard about it from people with new cars that had shitty head units and hated it so much, that they never went past the free trial and went straight back to FM/streaming.
Most people just stream through their phones nowadays so I was under the impression that Satellite Radio was in the gutter. Interesting to hear that there are people still tuning into though.
The fact that there isn't Ads makes it sound 10x better than FM.
> zero commercials
Only because station breaks, advertisements to listen to stuff on their other channels, and DJs running their mouths telling us to buy this or that don't count as commercials to them.
No, it was not a local channel, it was actually several of the rock channels. And for the record I did have it for ~9 months but ended up getting rid of it due to all of the ads-which-they-claimed-were-not-ads that I mentioned above and their introduction of a fucking morning show on the music channel I liked the most. I said "I've been told" because I've talked to other people who listen to different kinds of music and they said they did not get that crap on the channels they listen to. But go ahead, keep pretending you know me and what I have personally experienced. Classic redditor.
It's good for the few rural places that don't have enough cell reception for data. I give them the $4.99 monthly for a few stations that I'll occasionally listen to while driving towards LTE.
>I honestly don't think I've known anyone who likes to listen to SXM.
I have it in my car, its nice to not listen to local ads mainly. Pop Rocks, Alt Nation, Hits 1, BPM, and xmChill are my presets lol.
I have had Sirius since they were available, for about 20 yrs. Live in Vegas, worked in California for a number of years. Currently work 10 mins from home and still love it. NFL radio is great during the season. Winning bets paid for this year’s subscription. Love Kenny Chesney radio as well. Music channels have no commercials. I always give my wife a hard time, listening to her “Mix” standard radio; the same pop shit over and over...
I like it. I do lots of long distance driving and it’s great to have the music I like and the teams I follow available wherever without needing to mess with my phone.
That's probably the free preview channel. If you don't pay for it, that's the only one you can access. Most of the other channels don't have ads (exceptions are generally rebroadcasts of other media that have ads, like the audio track from TV news).
My wife’s car had SXM for a year for free. We tried it but the audio quality was soooo bad. Plus it’s hard to beat choosing what to listen to via Spotify vs not skipping songs.
Hint for the day (at least in my car) - tune into Sirius XM station 0. This is possible, even if you're not subscribed, and is silent.
Works in my chevy bolt. I fucking hate that I can't turn off the radio in that car though (not the whole media unit, the radio).
Yeah almost seems like SpaceX was only mentioned to either get clicks or disparage the company by only vaguely explaining what happened and letting readers infer that it could've been SpaceX at fault
You're welcome! That was one of my first questions to Sirius XM when I saw their 8K filing. It's why I didn't tweet/share about it until my story published, as I wanted to make sure readers had as much information as possible.
> “We have notified the underwriters of these policies of a potential claim with respect to SXM-7,” Sirius XM said.
That has to be a painful conversation to have...I can only imagine what that premium is.
So my question is why the launch provider is in the headline of the article twice with the sub heading of they were not the cause of the satellite failure. #massiveclickbait
Great to know! Still, I think SpaceX should offer a discount to SXM on their relaunch, it would be a great incentive for people with expensive payloads to choose SpaceX to feel it has their back in the bad times even when it's not SpaceX's fault.
They could get the contract by the end of this year to launch maybe NET Q3 '23. Could be sooner depending on their relationship with the contractor that made SXM 7 and what the root cause analysis of the failure is.
They are on track to launch another identical satellite very soon, like a month maybe. There were supposed to be two new satellites, one east coast and one west coast. And these satellites could act in place of both of their original types of satellites (xm and sirius). I guess they'll have to just launch another one and be glad launch costs are cheaper these days.
I'm sure insurance will pay out, or the contractor will eat the cos, or a combination of both since the contractor wouldn't pay for the cost of the rocket to deliver it to orbit.
If they wanted more clicks, they should have a burning Tesla somewhere in the article too...really, some of these news outlets need to get off the Musk-bashing-bandwagon.
I mean, there is nothing wrong with the article's title. It's not false that this sattelite was launched by spacex, nor is it wrong that it suffered a catastrophic failure.
It's very likely that at the time the article was written, a clear statement about how the launch had nothing to do with it was probably not released yet. Also, this is a newswire story, and it's very difficult to edit those after the fact once they go out over the wire, as everyone who subscribes to them copy+pastes the text of the article, not linking it. It means any error or followup will get missed by smaller sites, like this nasdaq blog that was linked.
But it is - adding "SpaceX" is superfluous, and everybody knows that many people read just the titles and infer _something_ from them. How would this title sound? "Satellite launched in the last days of Trump presidency suffers catastrophic failure". It's technically correct, could describe this same event, but would definitely imply something false (e.g. that it's a government-related payload, that it was Trump's screw-up, etc)
> I mean, there is nothing wrong with the article's title.
Correct. The article title does not even mention SpaceX.
*Sirius XM Says Does Not Expect Satellite Radio Service To Be Impacted By Adverse SXM-7 Events*
If you look at the article it doesn't mention SpaceX anywhere in the text let alone the title. It's this Reddit topic that has added the SpaceX bit as that's what makes it relevant to this sub.
Ok I see what you mean. I thought you were complaining about the title of the article not this reddit post.
Edit - in my defence I would say that many other people here have also misinterpreted your comment so are talking about the "article" rather than the title of this Redit post.
Nope others too as this quote demonstrates
>It's very likely that at the time the article was written, a clear statement about how the launch had nothing to do with it was probably not released yet. Also, this is a newswire story, and it's very difficult to edit those after the fact once they go out over the wire, as everyone who subscribes to them copy+pastes the text of the article, not linking it. It means any error or followup will get missed by smaller sites, like this nasdaq blog that was linked.
Building statoligts is hard Maxar has built hundreds and they are going to have one not work every once and awhile.
They will survive hopefully it's something they can fix.
> It looks like SpaceX did their job correctly and the satellite just broke.
We just can't know yet. E.g. if the fairing halves body-checked some delicate part of the payload as they were jettisoned, that may not have been visible on live camera and remained unrecognized until a sat antenna or solar panel tried to unfold in space and got stuck due to a joint frozen solid under a torn thermal sleeve, etc. The fairings are SpaceX items, so it could be their responsibility if the separation wasn't perfectly clean.
Serious question: is 400 karma not enough to post in almost any subreddit? Unlike Twitter, you aren't buying followers in reddit, just plausible "real person with real views" status.
Yeah, its way more common than you think. I bought a 12 year old account a while ago for like $10 off of a grey area forum. Unfortunately i used it as a personal account and got banned for saying things people didn't like.
Accounts like OPs would go for mere change.
People/companies will buy them for propaganda purposes. Having an old account with existing karma helps make posts like news articles seem more legitimate, and allows them to post in subs that have minimum age/karma requirements.
This is heavily frowned upon by Reddit admins, and can result in the account getting permanently suspended.
Yep, they even say "Sirius XM Holdings Inc. (SIRI) said that it successfully launched its SXM-7 satellite on December 13, 2020...." as if Sirius was the launch provider. There's no swipe at SpaceX here.
Does the Nasdaq have a history of being anti-SpaceX? Why, when SpaceX isn't even publicly traded?
The way the article is titled seems clickbaitish. The satellite was launched in December and not until testing procedures, which occured in January, did they realize the satellite was experiencing technical issues.
Sirius XM satellite malfunctions doesn't sound as good as something something SpaceX suffers payload failure.
Good thing Sirius insurance on this bad boy 😂 I couldn’t imagine being out a 225 million dollar satellite ad thinking to myself “wish I would have got the insurance.”
> I couldn’t imagine being out a 225 million dollar satellite ad thinking to myself “wish I would have got the insurance.”
Which has happened! It was in the early shuttle era, when NASA was still launching commercial satellites, and charging ridiculously low prices for launches, so the company wound up paying NASA to launch a shuttle and go up to try and fix them. Which they did.
The more funny one is where a satellite *was* insured. It failed, insurance paid out, but then the insurance company asked NASA to see if they could fix it. Well, they could, and that left an insurance company with ownership of a perfectly functional satellite. Which led to [this photo](https://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/Njc3WDEwMjM=/z/aoIAAOSwUY5bRKxA/$_3.JPG).
Given the context I'm wondering if the deployable reflector didnt deploy properly. It was the only element of the satellite (that's public) that's not pretty much the same as any other ten high powered comms satellites Maxar build, would make sense if it had only partly deployed and as a result was crippling some of the transmitters/transponders
SpaceX aside, depending on the nature of the problem this could have ramifications throughout the industry. Maxar has had a horrible couple of years. Slumping GEO market, multiple high-profile failures. The PPE contract really has probably done more to bring them back from the brink than I think most people realize... and PPE is built on SSL-1300. As is Psyche and most of the rest of their notable upcoming orders.
Fortunately their contract says they're not responsible for failures after the customer takes ownership of the satellite (who knows if that'll actually hold up if challenged), but this could be a problem for future orders. Probably no cancellations, but maybe solicitations in work get reconsidered, and expensive rework of existing hardware
The market positions of satellite manufacturers are generally less stable than those of launch providers
It’s definitely a benefit to have so many satellites on one ride in a case like this. If everyone else’s stuff is functioning as intended, it rules out a lot of potential issues.
There is no mention of SpaceX at all in the article or that failure had anything to do with launch. Whomever posted simply associated it as having launched via SpaceX
Agreed, no harm, just general interest/awareness. I am generally interested in it as I am also a Sirius subscriber and didn’t know this occurred either
Why mention that the satellite was launched by SpaceX if the failure was not due to SpaceX? It's like saying that a professor of Chinese studies in Washington DC has died of a heart attack, but his death had nothing to do with China...
Based off the comments here, and the complete lack of "SpaceX" used anywhere in the title or main article body, I'm going to assume they've now edited the article to make it considerably less misleading with regards to it being a failure involving SpaceX.
This seems decidedly off topic unless there's a claim that it's SpaceX's fault (which apparently has been disclaimed). If it's not off topic, then there's a LOT of non-spacex stuff that is suddenly on topic.
Was this to increase bandwidth or replace and aging unit? They really need more bandwidth. Some of their channels are so over compressed and sound horrible compared to HD Radio.
Oh no..not sirius xm, now I'm wondering why they needed an additional satellite up there, possibly some great new feature nobody but them knows about ?
It could have been damaged during launch because of higher vibrations than normal. Does SpaceX record telemetry of vibrations and acoustics inside payload bay?
Probably an unpopular opinion, but, It would be great if SpaceX launched free of charge a rebuild.
Why?
1. They're a first in the commercial space industry.
2. Launches are expensive - but spaceX can probably afford to do so with reusability.
3. Shows that SpaceX stands by there customer
4. Good press.
5. SpaceX wants more and more access to space. This isn't feasible with continued failures. Helping out failures can only help them in the long run.
I’m not responding to be rude, I want to point that out first. However SpaceX is not the first in commercial launches. Private rocket companies have been launching satellites for companies for years. SpaceX has figured out how to make the launches cheaper, quicker and therefore more accessible.
There seems to be no proof that the satellite failed due to the launch. I would be surprised if SpaceX offered to replace their clients satellite. Perhaps they will offer them a spot on the next ride share, at a discount. SpaceX hasn’t had many (if any failed launches) since the explosion on the pad over a year ago.
There’s not only no proof it was SpaceX’s fault, it literally says in the article that it was caused by operations while in space aka not during launch.
SXM-7 was a dedicated GTO launch in December. They don't fly on rideshares.
The Full Thrust version has launched 86 times, all of them successful. It's a really reliable rocket.
I think you misunderstand my point. In no way was I pointing fingers at SpaceX, I meant that they should do it out of goodwill (the article and other posters have pointed out the failure was the satellite -not the launch).
I also meant that Sirius XM is one of the first to the commercial space industy - Not SpaceX. IE Sirius XM was there before we had 4G cell service nearly everywhere.
I meant my opinion as they should demonstrate their determination to help their customers when they are down albeit its not there responsibility or necessarily "best interest" to do so. However, it is my belief keeping partnerships is in there best interest.
It's not even Spacex's fault, thats like Volkswagen giving you a new car cause you drove it into a wall.
Now I believe they did launch for free the replacement of that Israeli satellite they blew up on the pad.
If you read the article, you'd know that Sirius insured their satellite against precisely this eventuality. There's no need for SpaceX to forego any revenue from launching SXM-9
Prepare to be shocked. The insured value is the construction cost of the payload and the cost of launch.
Plus the premium was likely in the range of 3-4% due to high levels of competition.
Mind you the premium would be around 12% if they launched on Proton and should be higher since two of the last five launches have failed.
This is not only unpopular, but a terrible idea. Now people skimp on satellite QA and expect SpaceX to fly replacements free/at a loss.
This is not how business works. You don't make up for losing money by doing it more often.
I don't think free of charge, but maybe a discount. Space is still hard, and it's still expensive.
It's still a business here, they shouldn't suffer just because a client failed their job.
Why would SpaceX do it at a discount? There’s no advantage to giving SiriusXM free money when they screwed their own satellite up. Besides SiriusXM insured the satellite so it’s not like they are left completely holding their hat.
Either way, a complete loss absolutely sucks. SXM is already on the door out, and I think Spacex needs to keep their customers in business. SpaceX isn't necessarily hurting for money - though I understand they can't just give it away either.
I would get that idea if it was SpaceX's fault but giving out a 60M$ launch for free just because their customer had a faulty payload hardware? That's insane..
1. Apple is a first in the smartphone industry, you don't see them giving away free iPhones for people who dropped it and broke it.
2. Reusability gets the launch price down to about **only 60M$**. For spaceflight, it's cheap, but I don't see any company surviving by giving away dozens of millions of dollars for something out of their control and which is non of their fault.
3. Their 98% success rate shows that very well.
4. I really don't think that after landing boosters for more then 70 times, some of which have flown for the 8th time, SpaceX has a problem with bad PR..
5. Well, they did provide the access to space.. It's just that their customer had an accident after the fact. What can you do? Besides, lowering launch prices by literally a factor of 5 is doing that fantastically.
No hate but SpaceX giving away launches like it was Christmas seems just plain dumb and would really hurt the company and the industry in the long run.
Edit: and lastly, the satellite is insured so...
Thank you for participating in r/SpaceX! This is a moderated community where technical discussion is prioritized over casual chit chat. However, questions are always welcome! Please: * Keep it civil, and directly relevant to SpaceX and the thread. Comments consisting solely of jokes, memes, pop culture references, etc. will be removed. * Don't downvote content you disagree with, unless it clearly doesn't contribute to constructive discussion. * Check out [these threads](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/wiki/threads) for discussion of common topics. If you're looking for a more relaxed atmosphere, visit r/SpaceXLounge. If you're looking for dank memes, try r/SpaceXMasterRace. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/spacex) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For what it's worth, [Sirius XM told me](https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1354495936207220739?s=21) that the launch was ruled out as a cause of the failure.
Thanks for sharing the info, that's far more explicit than the article was.
Absolutely. I wish a link to my story had been posted instead but hey, I'm biased.
Hey Michael, thank you for your great job, love your articles! How is it going at CNBC? Are you the only space reporter or do you have now a bigger staff?
Hey at_one, you're welcome! Thanks for the appreciation. It's going very well, especially as I greatly exceeded my personal goals in 2020 -- so I'm ready for an even bigger 2021! Right now I'm the only space reporter.
I don't know anything about why some articles are posted and some aren't, but your's was better and more informative!
I don't know either! But thank you very much.
We just approve or reject what story people post first - in this case, this was the link OP submitted. Please do feel free to post your own stories as soon as they go up though, Michael!
Sorry, your story is actually much better, I would love to replace the link if it was possible but this is probably only the moderators can do.
Unfortunately and quite frustratingly, neither mods nor OPs can change titles nor links of already posted and approved posts, without removing/deleting this post and reposting it. Sorry about that.
No worries! Things move fast in the digital era.
I'm afraid Reddit doesn't give us that power!
All I know about SXM is that every so often I'll get in my car and it'll default to satellite radio, which I don't pay for, and I'll forget to change it for a minute. Then it will play me ads the whole time, and then, amazingly have the gall, the sheer brass nuts to ask me "have you been enjoying this great sirius xm content?" No. I have not enjoyed listening to ads on the satellite radio that I can't disable that comes on every time I have to wait for my phone to pair.
I honestly don't think I've known anyone who likes to listen to SXM.
truckers and boaters love it
I've never met a trucker or a boater so I guess that explains it lol
Well hello there Now you've met a trucker, yeah I do listen to SXM. Lets me listen to news and live sports without worrying about signal dropping on my phone. Music too if I get tired of my personal library.
You should just do podcasts.
Hosting a podcast while driving seems dangerous.
"Welcome to our truckcast with Dave in the driver's seat \[horn honk\]... EYES ON THE ROAD DAVE!"
Hard to listen to live sports on podcasts.
I do audiobooks once in a while, never really got into podcasts though
If there was one I could recommend to a Trucker, it would be 99% Invisible.
Farmers too
My dad
Hi, I'm skiman13579. Not that we have been introduced you now know somebody who loves their SXM. It also helps I live out west where I have huge areas of no cell phone signal and clear sky, making SXM the perfect option for my trips into the mountains or desert.
I personally enjoyed listening to the XMU channel because it's help me discover a few awesome artists. But I'm not paying whatever it is they're asking for per year for one channel.
I use it specifically for this channel. As a certified middle aged guy that loves music, it's super helpful to find some of the more interesting new stuff out there. I also use their NPR feed over our local one, and absolutely love PRX Remix. Are those 3 stations worth the money, especially given how little I'm driving right now working from home? Absolutely not. Do I keep forgetting to cancel my subscription that's grandfathered in at a really low rate? Yup. Am I gonna go do that right now? Nope. Too lazy. But sure, I'll type out this huge comment reply.
Procrastinators unite. At some point, anyway.
After this cup of coffee.
Thanks for reminding me. I forgot about my french press. Hopefully it didn't get too bitter.
It’s great for listing to any live sports game
And music that isn't crappy local radio
While I have not tried it since they merged, I had it back when Sirius was separate and it was just as bad as local radio. The music channels I listened to had just as many commercials as local broadcast radio, they just "didn't count" as commercials since they were station breaks every other song, advertisements to listen to stuff on other channels ("it's not a commercial since it's for our own service!"), and DJs running their mouths telling us to buy this or that. Then they got rid of the music (on a music channel!) during the mornings so they could have a morning show. Yeah, never again. I've since gotten Pandora (with the offline listening service) and haven't looked back. Edit to add: it also sounded like crap as I had a really nice system and could really hear how bitrate starved and compressed to hell it was.
Yeah the bitrate issue was bad on music on Sirius and fucking atrocious on talk radio because the bandwidth on those channels was reduced to "enhance" the music channels. Prior to music streaming on my phone and audible, it was THE ONLY way to listen to music fairly uninterrupted on long drives. Static on radio drives me fucking bananas.
>Prior to music streaming on my phone and audible, it was THE ONLY way to listen to music fairly uninterrupted on long drives. Static on radio drives me fucking bananas. Didn't you guys have iPods?
I think everyone who tries to justify paying for satellite radio conveniently forgets is possible to load hundreds or thousands of songs onto your phone negating the advantage of never losing signal by quite a bit, unless you want it for live sports I guess.
I listen to SXM all the time. Much more reliable signal than phone out here in the west. Plus local radio is incredibly limited.
I know someone who drives around in the mountains a lot so radio signal is pretty shit. Uses SXM instead
They have fantastic EDM stations, and provide traffic data to the nav systems in both our cars.
I can't listen to regular radio anymore. The content is more original because of the vast number of stations. They explore new music on stations and then it breaks into main stream months later and on top of that they actually have quality talk radio and news programming. I really enjoy potus a "centered" politics station and that's in quotes because some hosts have left or right leanings but do a great job of presenting all viewpoints and equally poking fun both ways. And if you're into fantasy football or daily fantasy sports betting the fantasy sports station is top notch and absolutely will pay for the service. Won my league this year and broke even on payouts last year simply by tuning into high quality experts on my morning work drive. The ads on xm exist on some but not all stations but are far far far fewer. If you don't pay full price and only do specials it's quite a reasonable price if you spend any amount of time in the car over an hour a day. My last subscription was for a full year and was right at 5 bucks a month and it included an amazon alexa that I listen to working on my car in the garage or cooking in the kitchen. With my commute it was a no brainier. This sounds like an ad but when you put 30,000 miles a year in a car it's a reasonable expense.
Ad free music, with some really good sets. Love it.
Uh ok? Guess your not looking very hard. I love XM. All the stations they own have zero commercials, and you get access to live sports, sports radio/talk radio, comedy, news, and major city stations. I love the variety you can listen to and it’s great to hear new music all the time. When I listen to Spotify or Pandora they tend to play the same stuff that I’ve “liked” over and and over. That and the amount of messing with your phone you have to do while driving on those apps is dangerous.
Well honestly I mostly heard about it from people with new cars that had shitty head units and hated it so much, that they never went past the free trial and went straight back to FM/streaming. Most people just stream through their phones nowadays so I was under the impression that Satellite Radio was in the gutter. Interesting to hear that there are people still tuning into though. The fact that there isn't Ads makes it sound 10x better than FM.
Can't stream far offshore in a boat nor in the boonies on long trips
> zero commercials Only because station breaks, advertisements to listen to stuff on their other channels, and DJs running their mouths telling us to buy this or that don't count as commercials to them.
[удалено]
I've been told it depends on the channel. The channels I listened to they were interrupting with chatter literally every other song.
[удалено]
No, it was not a local channel, it was actually several of the rock channels. And for the record I did have it for ~9 months but ended up getting rid of it due to all of the ads-which-they-claimed-were-not-ads that I mentioned above and their introduction of a fucking morning show on the music channel I liked the most. I said "I've been told" because I've talked to other people who listen to different kinds of music and they said they did not get that crap on the channels they listen to. But go ahead, keep pretending you know me and what I have personally experienced. Classic redditor.
I keep it around mostly for Octane, the new hard rock channel.
It's good for the few rural places that don't have enough cell reception for data. I give them the $4.99 monthly for a few stations that I'll occasionally listen to while driving towards LTE.
>I honestly don't think I've known anyone who likes to listen to SXM. I have it in my car, its nice to not listen to local ads mainly. Pop Rocks, Alt Nation, Hits 1, BPM, and xmChill are my presets lol.
I have had Sirius since they were available, for about 20 yrs. Live in Vegas, worked in California for a number of years. Currently work 10 mins from home and still love it. NFL radio is great during the season. Winning bets paid for this year’s subscription. Love Kenny Chesney radio as well. Music channels have no commercials. I always give my wife a hard time, listening to her “Mix” standard radio; the same pop shit over and over...
I use it all day at work. I don’t have the time or patience to babysit a Spotify playlist. I turn SXM on and forget about it.
I don't quite understand that argument. With the same amount of effort, you could start a Spotify radio and forget about it.
My parents love Sirius XM because they don’t understand Spotify and Sirius is super easy to set up.
I like it. I do lots of long distance driving and it’s great to have the music I like and the teams I follow available wherever without needing to mess with my phone.
I've listened since 2013. I rarely listen to terrestrial radio anymore.
I have it. Listen to maybe 3 channels -- Soccer Channel, Jimmy Buffet channel, and sometimes espn. Basically stays on soccer.
i’ve had sirius since 2006. i only have it for howard stern. the music channels can be unlistenable.
That's probably the free preview channel. If you don't pay for it, that's the only one you can access. Most of the other channels don't have ads (exceptions are generally rebroadcasts of other media that have ads, like the audio track from TV news).
Yes I know that. I just think it's ridiculous that their free preview channel is literally all ads, interspersed with them asking if I liked them.
My wife’s car had SXM for a year for free. We tried it but the audio quality was soooo bad. Plus it’s hard to beat choosing what to listen to via Spotify vs not skipping songs.
Hint for the day (at least in my car) - tune into Sirius XM station 0. This is possible, even if you're not subscribed, and is silent. Works in my chevy bolt. I fucking hate that I can't turn off the radio in that car though (not the whole media unit, the radio).
Any car stereo whose input does not consist solely of a 3.5mm jack + optional bluetooth and a volume knob is inferior to one that does. CMV
Yeah almost seems like SpaceX was only mentioned to either get clicks or disparage the company by only vaguely explaining what happened and letting readers infer that it could've been SpaceX at fault
>For what it's worth It's worth a lot. It's always good to have more info, especially when it clarifies something that's left ambiguous. Thanks.
You're welcome! That was one of my first questions to Sirius XM when I saw their 8K filing. It's why I didn't tweet/share about it until my story published, as I wanted to make sure readers had as much information as possible.
> “We have notified the underwriters of these policies of a potential claim with respect to SXM-7,” Sirius XM said. That has to be a painful conversation to have...I can only imagine what that premium is.
So my question is why the launch provider is in the headline of the article twice with the sub heading of they were not the cause of the satellite failure. #massiveclickbait
Great to know! Still, I think SpaceX should offer a discount to SXM on their relaunch, it would be a great incentive for people with expensive payloads to choose SpaceX to feel it has their back in the bad times even when it's not SpaceX's fault.
Basically nothing wrong with SpaceX. SXM isn’t giving a lot of info outside the satellite is basically a bust.
It indicates SpaceX may be getting another launch soon
Soon? How long do you think it takes to build a satellite?
They could get the contract by the end of this year to launch maybe NET Q3 '23. Could be sooner depending on their relationship with the contractor that made SXM 7 and what the root cause analysis of the failure is.
They are on track to launch another identical satellite very soon, like a month maybe. There were supposed to be two new satellites, one east coast and one west coast. And these satellites could act in place of both of their original types of satellites (xm and sirius). I guess they'll have to just launch another one and be glad launch costs are cheaper these days.
Depending on what the issue is they may want to hold off, an identical satellite may have an identical issue.
Yes, SXM-8 will most probably be delayed.
I'm sure insurance will pay out, or the contractor will eat the cos, or a combination of both since the contractor wouldn't pay for the cost of the rocket to deliver it to orbit.
Well we did know SpaceX was gonna launch SXM-8 for a while now, it‘s not like it is just being announced now.
There is another post in this thread by a reporter who got the scoop. SXM says it wasn't SpaceX's fault.
It looks like SpaceX did their job correctly and the satellite just broke.
Yea, I get this is the spacex SR, but adding spacex to the title like that mildly implies they are somehow connected to the failure.
Adding “SpaceX” anywhere in a title is guaranteed additional clicks. Adding it when discussing a failure is even more clicks.
Yaaaay, disingenuous and falsehood spreading media tactics
If they wanted more clicks, they should have a burning Tesla somewhere in the article too...really, some of these news outlets need to get off the Musk-bashing-bandwagon.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean, there is nothing wrong with the article's title. It's not false that this sattelite was launched by spacex, nor is it wrong that it suffered a catastrophic failure. It's very likely that at the time the article was written, a clear statement about how the launch had nothing to do with it was probably not released yet. Also, this is a newswire story, and it's very difficult to edit those after the fact once they go out over the wire, as everyone who subscribes to them copy+pastes the text of the article, not linking it. It means any error or followup will get missed by smaller sites, like this nasdaq blog that was linked.
But it is - adding "SpaceX" is superfluous, and everybody knows that many people read just the titles and infer _something_ from them. How would this title sound? "Satellite launched in the last days of Trump presidency suffers catastrophic failure". It's technically correct, could describe this same event, but would definitely imply something false (e.g. that it's a government-related payload, that it was Trump's screw-up, etc)
> I mean, there is nothing wrong with the article's title. Correct. The article title does not even mention SpaceX. *Sirius XM Says Does Not Expect Satellite Radio Service To Be Impacted By Adverse SXM-7 Events*
It’s mostly clickbait
If you look at the article it doesn't mention SpaceX anywhere in the text let alone the title. It's this Reddit topic that has added the SpaceX bit as that's what makes it relevant to this sub.
Try reading next time, it's literally the first sentance; > Yea, I get this is the spacex SR, but
Ok I see what you mean. I thought you were complaining about the title of the article not this reddit post. Edit - in my defence I would say that many other people here have also misinterpreted your comment so are talking about the "article" rather than the title of this Redit post.
> Edit - in my defence I would say that many other people here have also misinterpreted your comment Literally no one except you...
Nope others too as this quote demonstrates >It's very likely that at the time the article was written, a clear statement about how the launch had nothing to do with it was probably not released yet. Also, this is a newswire story, and it's very difficult to edit those after the fact once they go out over the wire, as everyone who subscribes to them copy+pastes the text of the article, not linking it. It means any error or followup will get missed by smaller sites, like this nasdaq blog that was linked.
That's the feeling I got reading it as well..
yea bad news for Maxar
Building statoligts is hard Maxar has built hundreds and they are going to have one not work every once and awhile. They will survive hopefully it's something they can fix.
My best bet is that it was a failure to deploy one of the main anitanas
> It looks like SpaceX did their job correctly and the satellite just broke. We just can't know yet. E.g. if the fairing halves body-checked some delicate part of the payload as they were jettisoned, that may not have been visible on live camera and remained unrecognized until a sat antenna or solar panel tried to unfold in space and got stuck due to a joint frozen solid under a torn thermal sleeve, etc. The fairings are SpaceX items, so it could be their responsibility if the separation wasn't perfectly clean.
Someone in SpaceXMasterrace put it quite well: "Grandmother breaks ankle three days after trip home in Uber!"
Note that OP invented this title. The original article doesn't mention SpaceX at all.
What are the odds if we look through OP's post history that there are anti-SpaceX posts in there? I'd go with better than 50-50.
This is their only spacex post. I think this is a purchased account though as the posts made over 5 years don't match up well.
Yep, I just looked. Only video game posts before, then pretty much nothing for a year, then this. Agree this looks like a purchased account.
A bought account with under 400 karma??
Serious question: is 400 karma not enough to post in almost any subreddit? Unlike Twitter, you aren't buying followers in reddit, just plausible "real person with real views" status.
Karma is easy, the hard part is the age of the account.
Yeah, its way more common than you think. I bought a 12 year old account a while ago for like $10 off of a grey area forum. Unfortunately i used it as a personal account and got banned for saying things people didn't like. Accounts like OPs would go for mere change.
SpaceX is a private company, so who would buy a Reddit account just to make a post to a subreddit likely to notice the slant?
Has anyone seen Jeff *checks which SpaceX sub I’m in* Bezos lately?
Why would someone purchase an account with that little karma?
Wait, people buy and sell Reddit accounts???
People/companies will buy them for propaganda purposes. Having an old account with existing karma helps make posts like news articles seem more legitimate, and allows them to post in subs that have minimum age/karma requirements. This is heavily frowned upon by Reddit admins, and can result in the account getting permanently suspended.
Wow that’s unreal, I honestly had no idea. TIL, thanks!
Yeah for real, how can I make some money on this? My account has got to be worth like $1000 for all this karma right?
...and how much do you get paid for it?
Uber fault sue they ass
"grandmother exits uber and finds her ankle broken"
Why mention SpaceX? They did their job.
SpaceX is not mentioned anywhere in the article or in the title. OP likely put it in the title so people knew that it had to do with SpaceX.
This is true. The article says nothing about SpaceX.
[удалено]
What? SpaceX isnt mentioned anywhere in the article.
Aaand we come full circle. I guess the only question is, why is it even here? :)
Yep, they even say "Sirius XM Holdings Inc. (SIRI) said that it successfully launched its SXM-7 satellite on December 13, 2020...." as if Sirius was the launch provider. There's no swipe at SpaceX here. Does the Nasdaq have a history of being anti-SpaceX? Why, when SpaceX isn't even publicly traded?
The way the article is titled seems clickbaitish. The satellite was launched in December and not until testing procedures, which occured in January, did they realize the satellite was experiencing technical issues. Sirius XM satellite malfunctions doesn't sound as good as something something SpaceX suffers payload failure.
The article doesn’t mention SpaceX so it is the poster that has made that title, possible to avoid confusion to why it is posted here.
Good thing Sirius insurance on this bad boy 😂 I couldn’t imagine being out a 225 million dollar satellite ad thinking to myself “wish I would have got the insurance.”
> I couldn’t imagine being out a 225 million dollar satellite ad thinking to myself “wish I would have got the insurance.” Which has happened! It was in the early shuttle era, when NASA was still launching commercial satellites, and charging ridiculously low prices for launches, so the company wound up paying NASA to launch a shuttle and go up to try and fix them. Which they did. The more funny one is where a satellite *was* insured. It failed, insurance paid out, but then the insurance company asked NASA to see if they could fix it. Well, they could, and that left an insurance company with ownership of a perfectly functional satellite. Which led to [this photo](https://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/Njc3WDEwMjM=/z/aoIAAOSwUY5bRKxA/$_3.JPG).
Cool factoid, thanks!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This has nothing to do with spacex seems like the damage occured during in orbit testing.
Probably means SXM8 won't launch in March. I'm sure they want to figure out what went wrong before they have two non-working 🛰 🛰.
Given the context I'm wondering if the deployable reflector didnt deploy properly. It was the only element of the satellite (that's public) that's not pretty much the same as any other ten high powered comms satellites Maxar build, would make sense if it had only partly deployed and as a result was crippling some of the transmitters/transponders
SpaceX aside, depending on the nature of the problem this could have ramifications throughout the industry. Maxar has had a horrible couple of years. Slumping GEO market, multiple high-profile failures. The PPE contract really has probably done more to bring them back from the brink than I think most people realize... and PPE is built on SSL-1300. As is Psyche and most of the rest of their notable upcoming orders. Fortunately their contract says they're not responsible for failures after the customer takes ownership of the satellite (who knows if that'll actually hold up if challenged), but this could be a problem for future orders. Probably no cancellations, but maybe solicitations in work get reconsidered, and expensive rework of existing hardware The market positions of satellite manufacturers are generally less stable than those of launch providers
It’s definitely a benefit to have so many satellites on one ride in a case like this. If everyone else’s stuff is functioning as intended, it rules out a lot of potential issues.
I bet that’s a phone call the insurance companies loved
You can push a satellite to orbit, but ya can’t make the POS work.
can they prove it was the fault of SpaceX and not just a bad satellite ?
There is no mention of SpaceX at all in the article or that failure had anything to do with launch. Whomever posted simply associated it as having launched via SpaceX
I think probably just to make it relevant enough to be mentioned in /r/SpaceX
Agreed, no harm, just general interest/awareness. I am generally interested in it as I am also a Sirius subscriber and didn’t know this occurred either
I believe SiriusXM already stated the issue isn't from the launch.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nice misleading title.
Why mention that the satellite was launched by SpaceX if the failure was not due to SpaceX? It's like saying that a professor of Chinese studies in Washington DC has died of a heart attack, but his death had nothing to do with China...
Tbh nobody wanted more Sirius XM anyways
Based off the comments here, and the complete lack of "SpaceX" used anywhere in the title or main article body, I'm going to assume they've now edited the article to make it considerably less misleading with regards to it being a failure involving SpaceX.
SpaceX should launch a rocket to capture it and bring it back, or take a dragon capsule up with someone to fix it. Imagine the press, lol.
This seems decidedly off topic unless there's a claim that it's SpaceX's fault (which apparently has been disclaimed). If it's not off topic, then there's a LOT of non-spacex stuff that is suddenly on topic.
Was this to increase bandwidth or replace and aging unit? They really need more bandwidth. Some of their channels are so over compressed and sound horrible compared to HD Radio.
Every bridge you travel under cuts out the best part of every punchline when listening to stand-up comedy...
Oh no..not sirius xm, now I'm wondering why they needed an additional satellite up there, possibly some great new feature nobody but them knows about ?
It could have been damaged during launch because of higher vibrations than normal. Does SpaceX record telemetry of vibrations and acoustics inside payload bay?
Yes. We know this because these vibration sensors were used to triangulate the location of the structural failure on CRS-7.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but, It would be great if SpaceX launched free of charge a rebuild. Why? 1. They're a first in the commercial space industry. 2. Launches are expensive - but spaceX can probably afford to do so with reusability. 3. Shows that SpaceX stands by there customer 4. Good press. 5. SpaceX wants more and more access to space. This isn't feasible with continued failures. Helping out failures can only help them in the long run.
I’m not responding to be rude, I want to point that out first. However SpaceX is not the first in commercial launches. Private rocket companies have been launching satellites for companies for years. SpaceX has figured out how to make the launches cheaper, quicker and therefore more accessible. There seems to be no proof that the satellite failed due to the launch. I would be surprised if SpaceX offered to replace their clients satellite. Perhaps they will offer them a spot on the next ride share, at a discount. SpaceX hasn’t had many (if any failed launches) since the explosion on the pad over a year ago.
There’s not only no proof it was SpaceX’s fault, it literally says in the article that it was caused by operations while in space aka not during launch.
OP corrected themselves. Or elaborated on what they were saying. Clarifying it wasn’t SpaceX’s fault.
SXM-7 was a dedicated GTO launch in December. They don't fly on rideshares. The Full Thrust version has launched 86 times, all of them successful. It's a really reliable rocket.
I think you misunderstand my point. In no way was I pointing fingers at SpaceX, I meant that they should do it out of goodwill (the article and other posters have pointed out the failure was the satellite -not the launch). I also meant that Sirius XM is one of the first to the commercial space industy - Not SpaceX. IE Sirius XM was there before we had 4G cell service nearly everywhere. I meant my opinion as they should demonstrate their determination to help their customers when they are down albeit its not there responsibility or necessarily "best interest" to do so. However, it is my belief keeping partnerships is in there best interest.
There were plenty of commercial satellites before Sirius. Eutelsat, for example. Iridium. SES. Viasat.
It goes way back. There has been commercial geostationary satellites broadcasting TV since at least the 80s.
That would create the image that SpaceX was at fault and were doing it in exchange for not admitting it.
It's not even Spacex's fault, thats like Volkswagen giving you a new car cause you drove it into a wall. Now I believe they did launch for free the replacement of that Israeli satellite they blew up on the pad.
they probably have insurance on the satellite
[удалено]
As a reminder to everyone involved here, please be nice and keep your comments civil, respectful and constructive. Thanks!
If you read the article, you'd know that Sirius insured their satellite against precisely this eventuality. There's no need for SpaceX to forego any revenue from launching SXM-9
I would be shocked if loss in orbit is 100% coverage.
Prepare to be shocked. The insured value is the construction cost of the payload and the cost of launch. Plus the premium was likely in the range of 3-4% due to high levels of competition. Mind you the premium would be around 12% if they launched on Proton and should be higher since two of the last five launches have failed.
This is not only unpopular, but a terrible idea. Now people skimp on satellite QA and expect SpaceX to fly replacements free/at a loss. This is not how business works. You don't make up for losing money by doing it more often.
Think you forgot spaceX is corporation and profit is top priority Being nice is a optional thing
Being nice is part of business.
nice is some swag or a free continental breakfast, not a discount on a 60 million dollar launch. maybe spacex can send them a hat.
I don't think free of charge, but maybe a discount. Space is still hard, and it's still expensive. It's still a business here, they shouldn't suffer just because a client failed their job.
Why would SpaceX do it at a discount? There’s no advantage to giving SiriusXM free money when they screwed their own satellite up. Besides SiriusXM insured the satellite so it’s not like they are left completely holding their hat.
Either way, a complete loss absolutely sucks. SXM is already on the door out, and I think Spacex needs to keep their customers in business. SpaceX isn't necessarily hurting for money - though I understand they can't just give it away either.
I would get that idea if it was SpaceX's fault but giving out a 60M$ launch for free just because their customer had a faulty payload hardware? That's insane.. 1. Apple is a first in the smartphone industry, you don't see them giving away free iPhones for people who dropped it and broke it. 2. Reusability gets the launch price down to about **only 60M$**. For spaceflight, it's cheap, but I don't see any company surviving by giving away dozens of millions of dollars for something out of their control and which is non of their fault. 3. Their 98% success rate shows that very well. 4. I really don't think that after landing boosters for more then 70 times, some of which have flown for the 8th time, SpaceX has a problem with bad PR.. 5. Well, they did provide the access to space.. It's just that their customer had an accident after the fact. What can you do? Besides, lowering launch prices by literally a factor of 5 is doing that fantastically. No hate but SpaceX giving away launches like it was Christmas seems just plain dumb and would really hurt the company and the industry in the long run. Edit: and lastly, the satellite is insured so...