• Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    55 minutes ago

    but it also requires a much larger space economy.

    In this world, starship is a waste of time and money.

    Well I don’t think I agree with these statements at all. The thing is, if/when they get starship to work, not only will it be able to lift significantly more mass to orbit than the falcon 9, it will likely be cheaper per launch. Not cheaper per kg to orbit, but cheaper overall than launching a falcon 9 (remember, they need to build a new falcon second stage for each launch). That is such a significant improvement that I’d argue that its development is totally worthwhile even if the demand for launches were to stay stagnant.

    And honestly, we definitely need some heavy lift rocket. The Saturn V doesn’t exist anymore and the SLS is… economically unrealistic.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      29 minutes ago

      Yes but remember there is not currently much that needs that large of a rocket, and you get diminishing returns on rideshare. Major satellites are still likely to need private launches and there’s no point in buying a bigger launching you need.

      Large rockets are currently needed

      • for space stations - a handful of times total
      • manned missions to moon/mars, a few times
      • a constellation like Starlink can take more advantage of rideshare

      Current space economy has a use for maybe half a dozen launches per year. All that money developing re-use, building multiple launches per sites, a lot of the basic technology, is a waste, if that’s all we need.

      Making back that excessive development cost, achieving that low launch price, entirely depends on there being sufficient market to launch many times per year. It’ll be revolutionary for sure, but only if

      They’ve designed and built for scale, which will be amazing when it happens, but only if we scale dramatically.