What Is the Cost of a Long March Launch?
Globally competitive prices but restricted.
Low-cost launch solutions are becoming increasingly important in China as the country seeks to deploy over fifty thousand satellites for six mega-constellations. Commercial rockets are being introduced to drive down prices, but state-owned Long March rockets still dominate, and rather affordably compared to international options.
In its latest issue, the magazine Aerospace China (中国航天) published a piece titled “Research and Analysis on Launch Prices of Launch Vehicles”, which looks into the prices of two legacy Long March launch vehicles compared to the West’s leading rocket, Falcon 9. The analysis within the piece, by Wu Xingyu (吴星宇) of LandSpace, utilizes publicly disclosed contract data to better evaluate costs.
To begin with low Earth orbit, contracts for a Changguang Satellite Technology Co Ltd bought a launch of the prolific Long March 2 rockets1 for 112.9 million Yuan (around 15.76 million United States Dollars). The rockets can carry around 4,000 kilograms to low Earth orbit, according to the analysis, for a cost per kilogram of 282,000 Yuan (39,360 United States Dollars). The Long March 2 rockets is China's most commonly used launch solution for reaching low Earth orbit, serving both commercial and government customers.
Beyond low Earth orbit, the analysis is focused on a handful of Long March 3B/E launches, which are now occurring more regularly as China’s geostationary workhorse. Contract details from ChinaSat missions indicate that launches of the rocket cost between 260 and 290 million Yuan (36.29 to 40.48 million Dollars), along with an additional 115 million Yuan (16 million Dollars) for guidance, navigation, and control services post-separation from the launch vehicle. On average, the combined cost of a Long March 3B/E launch is 390 million Yuan (54.4 million Dollars). With the rockets’ 5,500 kilogram geostationary transfer orbit capacity, the contracts translate to a cost of 70,900 Yuan per kilogram (9,890 Dollars).
Then there is SpaceX’s Falcon 9 with its launch costs of around 69.75 million Dollars (499.67 million Yuan), a one-size-fits-all partially reusable commercial rocket for missions from low Earth orbit to geostationary space. For expendable missions, where the first-stage is not recovered, Falcon 9 can deliver 8,300 kilograms to geostationary transfer orbit and 22,000 kilograms to low Earth orbit. This translates to 60,500 Yuan (8,440 Dollars) per kilogram for geostationary missions and 22,800 Yuan (3,180 Dollars) per kilogram for low-orbit missions. But if the first-stage is recovered, the rocket delivers 5,500 kilograms to geostationary transfer orbit and 17,400 kilograms to low Earth orbit. Although SpaceX doesn't release solid figures for missions with recovered first-stages launch costs drop to around 21 million Dollars (150 million Yuan), according to the analysis, leading to a geostationary transfer cost per kilogram of 27,500 Yuan (3,830 Dollars) and 8,700 Yuan (1,210 Dollars) for low Earth orbit.
Do note: Launches in China typically are a whole package, with the launch, insurance, and commissioning (as well as the spacecraft itself if applicable) included in the total price. Cost per kilogram can be a misleading metric to measure the affordability of launch solutions.
Alongside the more recent analysis, a group from the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation published a piece in Aerospace China in September 2022 titled “Analysis and Outlook of Domestic and Foreign Launch Vehicle Launch Service Prices”, which compared state-owned Chinese launch vehicles to several Western counterparts.
Rockets compared were both legacy and modern Long March rockets, Falcon 9, Atlas V, Delta IV Heavy, Ariane 5, as well as Proton and Angara on price per kilogram based on maximum stated payload capacity, creating a somewhat level playing field for comparison. The end result was a tiered competitive structure for low Earth orbit and geostationary transfer missions, with costs rising by an average of 50% in each tier on average.
For low Earth orbit missions, the analysis grouped Long March 2 rockets, the Long March 5B, and the Long March 8 alongside Falcon 9 in the first tier, with both rockets significantly outperforming traditional expendable systems. The second tier included Delta IV, Proton, and Atlas V variants at around double the cost.
For geostationary transfer missions, Long March rockets were analysed as outperforming their Western counterparts, partly due to favorable propellant choice. In the first tier were the Long March 3B, Long March 5, while Falcon 9 is in the second tier with Ariane 5 and Angara, with Delta IV Heavy, Proton, and Atlas V down in the bottom tier.
Both reports similarly conclude that for continued launch cost reductions and long-term competition, reusable launch vehicles need to be developed and flown. Meanwhile, the 2022 report concluded that expendable rockets can undergo cost optimizations through a higher production and launch rate2. However, the 2025 report stressed the need for reusable rockets to deploy China’s mega-constellations, along with believing that the country’s reusable launch vehicles can reduce launch costs by up to 49%. Although in the U.S., despite the emergence of reusable rockets, launch costs have not meaningfully reduced, with cost savings becoming greater profits.
If U.S. launch providers with reusable rockets opt to have their cost savings become larger profits, expendable Long March rockets will remain competitive for years to come. But, should market pressures, with the introduction of additional reusable rockets in the West, drive down costs, Long March rockets will become increasingly expensive relative to new rockets.
Overall, China’s Long March rockets will probably remain cost-competitive with their Western counterparts for years to come, with the added benefit of decades of proven reliability and a stable flight rate compared to new launch systems being introduced abroad. The only limits on Long March launch competitiveness internationally are U.S. laws from the 1990s barring anything American-made from being put on a Chinese rocket, which is rather a lot for satellites in the West.
Consisting of the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology’s Long March 2C and Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology's Long March 2D (technically part of the Long March 4 series).
This is believed to be happening with the Long March 3A series (consisting of the Long March 3A, 3B/E, and 3C/E) currently.