4 ms·
The STS was reusable in name only. They discarded the fuel tank, and the SRBs landing in the ocean required a dive team and significant refurbishment before th
by will_hughes 9y ago
The STS was reusable in name only.
They discarded the fuel tank, and the SRBs landing in the ocean required a dive team and significant refurbishment before they could be reused. Even the shuttle itself required significant refurbishment before it could be reused.
- LoSboccacc 9y agoTrue but the claim that Space X was the first company to ever think about reusable space vectors is laughable at best.
- imron 9y agoNo-one claimed that.
- babyrainbow 9y agoBut everyone is acting like that. I mean, isn't it the oldest trick in the pr/advertisement process. To create an impression without actually claiming anything. Interesting.
- SimbaOnSteroids 9y agoI mean yes it can be, but this isn't really an instance of that. What SpaceX has done is create a reusable booster which lands using retrograde rockets. This is a big deal because with retrograde rockets you can land the thing with precision and upright. Whereas with parachutes you'd end up having a high probability that the rocket would land in a precarious position because it's then at the mercy of the wind much more than the retrograde landing is. It's kinda like well no Henry Ford didn't invent the car, but he made the car affordable. Heck he didn't even invent the assembly line but he sure did use it in a different way. Elon is doing to the rocket industry what Ford did to the car industry. Making it more accessible.
- eduren 9y agoNot to mention that getting good at retrograde landings will be necessary for landing on other bodies in the solar system.