Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You don't actually believe that a rocket that is thrown away every launch could possibly be cost competitive with one that can be reused 20 times, do you?


A rocket that's thrown away was cheaper per flight than the shuttles, which were only partly discarded. It all depends on how much does it cost to build vs refurbish. Falcon 9 was designed to be easily refurbished and Ariane 6 was designed to be cheap to build. Also, launch campaign costs are not neglectable - moving the parts around, fueling, testing, and so on, are expensive.

Their next-gen ones should be reusable, and share a lot of design with the Falcon 9 family. Methalox might next, as it's very promising, but the RP1 supply chain is well established.


> A rocket that's thrown away was cheaper per flight than the shuttles, which were only partly discarded. It all depends on how much does it cost to build vs refurbish. Falcon 9 was designed to be easily refurbished and Ariane 6 was designed to be cheap to build.

It's not just that the Shuttle was expensive to refurbish. It was also very expensive to build.

Whereas Falcon 9 is much less expensive to build new than Ariane 6.

Ariane 6 was designed to be cheaper to build (cheaper than Ariane 5, that is).


>Whereas Falcon 9 is much less expensive to build new than Ariane 6.

For context, my understanding is that SpaceX builds one new Falcon 9 upper stage (not reused) every day. I doubt there is another entity on earth building a new rocket every month.

SpaceX has a large fleet of Falcon 9 reusable boosters, but still needs to build one every now and then.


> For context, my understanding is that SpaceX builds one new Falcon 9 upper stage (not reused) every day.

Probably not quite that often. They're aiming to launch ~150 this year (although with the recent RUD, that'll be pretty tough). But yeah - 1 every other day is still very impressive.


It depends what you do with the rocket. Reuse isn't free, it has costs. Notably you need to carry more fuel with you in order to land, and that negatively affects overall performance. You also need to fly frequently to get the cost advantages. That's one reason SpaceX has turned to Starlink, since the demand from the market isn't enough to really get the benefits from reusable rockets.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: