sh1pman

Source? If single rooster recovery cuts the price by 30M, then partially recoverable FH should cost 120M. And Musk said it’s 95M. edit: yeah, this discussion should probably be moved to SX thread

I’m talking about the price tag. If I’m a customer, I’d choose the cheapest option available. FH launch is going to cost me 90M for the fully reusable configuration. F9 is 62M for a launch with booster recovery, and there is no official price for F9 expendable launch. I don’t think it’s higher than 90M.

Doubt it. F9 expendable might be cheaper than FH reusable.

I don't think its own engines are powerful enough for the insertion burn.

Some sort of live video feed will do the job then. ...well, unless they can fake the stream in real time.

Can’t he just, uhh, attach a GoPro to his rocket and recover the footage after it lands?

They need a Claw!

"Breaking: the airplane that was supposed to deliver a satellite to launch facility has suffered a skyfall..."

Why didn’t they just go straight to Block 2, without wasting time on Block 1?

I had huge, multi-segmented mobile mining and refueling bases on most stock planets, tankers, orbital depots and transport ships flying around the Kerbol system before I installed the first mod. The game is definitely playable without delta-v and TWR readouts, given enough time and dedication. Sure, the rockets were far from optimal, but, ironically, that’s the very reason why I had to build this whole network of mining and refueling infrastructure, while also developing rendezvous and pinpoint landing skills in the process. What I’m trying to say is that if I had all the numbers from the start, I’d probably just build a couple of perfect rockets that can easily fly where I send them, land and take off on the first try, and return home safely. And that would probably be the game finished for me. Trying to overcome constraints like those we have in stock can make you learn and adapt, coming up with things that you’d miss otherwise. Now, for the record, I’m in the camp “add the readouts to stock, but make them toggleable”. It’ll suit everyone’s taste, I guess.

Eve SSTO was done before.

That’s a good niche for ULA. While the billionaires of new space are trying to build gargantuan rockets for their dream colonies, ULA is quietly moving towards the industrialization of Earth-Moon system.

Well, if so, they’ll have to bring a booster along as well. Still cheaper than launching F9.

You sure about that? It doesn’t need much fuel for landing, 400 m/s of dv or so. I somehow thought it could fly as a SSTO with 10t payload and land.

Why not? It doesn’t need a booster to get sub-10t payload to orbit. It can have a small capsule with crew on top of it, with a LES.

Don’t worry, if all goes well, Dragon 2 won’t see much use. *cough* SSTO BFS *cough*

No hold.

Where have I ever said GCNRs will never be built again? Someone here said there were rough estimations of when GCNRs and thermonuclear engines appear. Half a century-old soviet project is not a valid estimation, because no work is being done on it.

But maintenance should only take machinery from containers with enabled warehouse module. You don't even need additional machinery containers, having just one at the manufacturing base is enough.

Yeah, refueling is a great way to cheat the rocket equation. If Bezo is serious about his Moon colony plans, he needs to figure out the automated refueling.

BFR gonna be like: do you even refuel, bro?

I’d love to see NA fly one day. BFR needs to have a competition.

I know about RD-600. As far as I know, the project is long dead, and nobody is working on it. So it doesn’t answer my question.

Are there estimates for gas-core reactors? There's scientific value for going to the Moon. It's a good place to study and develop the means for short term (and subsequently, long term) habitation on other planetary bodies.

It's like never buying a horse while having no clue when the cars appear, if ever.