4 ms·
So in this figure, do you exclude Dragon weight for resupply missions? And even then, it's apples to oranges, because Space Shuttle was a manned spacecraft whic
by rplnt 8y ago
So in this figure, do you exclude Dragon weight for resupply missions? And even then, it's apples to oranges, because Space Shuttle was a manned spacecraft which brings millions other requirements into place. So the only fair comparison in this case would be to compare manned Dragon cost per kg of cargo to Space Shuttle's cargo.
There are much more efficient systems for only carrying stuff into space and dropping it there. The Space Shuttle example makes no sense if this is what you care about.
- SilasX 8y ago>So in this figure, do you exclude Dragon weight for resupply missions? I don't know about the Dragon, but, like before, if the Dragon's weight is the thing you really want out of the atmosphere, then yes, but if you only care about the supplies inside, then no. >And even then, it's apples to oranges, because Space Shuttle was a manned spacecraft which brings millions other requirements into place. What requirements? But yes, it's fair to break out "human" vs "inanimate" kg of payload. Do SpaceX products for carrying humans perform poorly when comparing to alternate ways of launching human payloads? Do SpaceX products for carrying inanimate matter perform poorly when compared to the same?
- rplnt 8y ago> Do SpaceX products for carrying inanimate matter perform poorly when compared to the same? Absolutely not. Which makes it ever weirder to bring up Space Shuttle.