4 ms·
38 tons for RTLS is 76,000 pounds, so the figure isn't really all that exaggerated for the worst case. In any case, the fuel is cheap relative to everything el
by TrevorJ 11y ago
38 tons for RTLS is 76,000 pounds, so the figure isn't really all that exaggerated for the worst case.
In any case, the fuel is cheap relative to everything else so as long as they can put the payload on orbit expending almost any amount of fuel to recover the rocket is perfectly reasonable. Not sure why the ULA guy thought spending 100,000 of fuel to recover a 15 million dollar core would be a bad thing.
- mikeash 11y agoHe was specifically referring to SES-9, which was the absolute minimum fuel usage. Probably a bit beyond minimum, given that it cratered. And yeah, even if it was 100,000 pounds, what's the point?