6 ms·

I hope it works because it'd be rad, but at $500K per 200-lb payload, they'll cost $2500/lb. That's only half as much as SpaceX Rideshare for the same size payl

I hope it works because it'd be rad, but at $500K per 200-lb payload, they'll cost $2500/lb. That's only half as much as SpaceX Rideshare for the same size payload, today. If Starship works out, then SpaceX costs will drop enormously. Fuel is a minor portion of launch cost. SpinLaunch is saving fuel but throwing away rockets; it's going to be hard to compete with someone who throws away more fuel but saves the rockets.

NikolaeVarius 6y ago
Wut? Their goal is to allow the rocket to ignite at 200k ft. Thats only a bit lower than the altitude SpaceX ignites its second stage, which is not reusable
- DennisP 6y ago
  "If Starship works out," I said. Starship reuses the second stage.
- Cogito 6y ago
  Putting aside starship, from the very limited information I've seen it's not clear that the operating costs of this system will be comparable to Falcon 9 for the booster phase of flight. It seems like this launch system will be more expensive per kg, and have far greater loads on the payload than Falcon 9. I hope it works out, and they find ways to make it commercially viable, but Falcon 9 really has set the bar for success quite high.
- mlindner 6y ago
  The problem isn't altitude, it's speed. Launching from the air has all the same problems of air launched rockets from planes. Except now they're trying to sling a massive rocket up to 200k feet along with all the sloshy liquids inside without anything breaking. It's complete and utter madness. The founders/investors are guaranteed to lose all their investments.
  - thombat 6y ago
    Well somebody is sure to lose their money, but if enough bigger fools can be lured aboard it needn't be the current crew. In other words, the Nikola truck but in space.
    - mlindner 6y ago
      The Nikola comparison is apt here, though I think this is even worse than Nikola. There's known examples of fuel cell powered large vehicles.
      - thombat 6y ago
        Absolutely - the only thing about Nikola that looks dodgy on purely physical grounds is the claim of super-efficient electrolysis. Whereas SpinLaunch seems quite uncoupled to reality. Meaning of course the reality is that they'll run giggling to the bank...
  - viraptor 6y ago
    I get the scepticism, but you're not really supporting your opinions here. The first rocket was madness, the shuttle was madness, landing rockets on sea platform was madness. Sometimes mad ideas work. You'll need more details to guarantee something.
blackrock 6y ago
How is Starship going? Are they still trying to “sweat” the fuel out of the skin, to give it an active cooling layer?
- TaylorAlexander 6y ago
  Starship development continues apace. They’re planning to launch the latest starship vehicle to 50km altitude next week and then perform their difficult landing maneuver 15km from the launch site. I believe the sweating skin idea has been dropped. See this one hour video for a detailed breakdown of the current state of the design: https://youtu.be/-8p2JDTd13k https://youtu.be/-8p2JDTd13k
  - d_theorist 6y ago
    Next launch is 15km (not 50).
  - _Microft 6y ago
    It's being launched up to 15km, that's pretty close to 50000 feet, so you might have mixed up the units.
    - TaylorAlexander 6y ago
      Oooh I see. The tweet I read said 15km/50k ft altitude and I misread that as 15km translation and 50km altitude. Thanks for the correction!
  - blackrock 6y ago
    The “sweating” feature was the best idea for the spacecraft. When I first heard of it, I was thinking, this must be a bad April Fool’s joke, or an incredibly great idea. Turns out, it was the former.
- 1958325146 6y ago
  The latest we have is that it will sweat only where the heat shield can't hold up on its own: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1107380559834046465 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1107380559834046465 .
howlgarnish 6y ago
They're claiming $500k per day and 5 launches per day, so the cost would be $500/lb. Obviously there's still an awful lot of work to be done to actually pull off that figure. If they do pull it off, the logical next step would be to use SpaceX-style reusable rockets as well, in which case you'd save both fuel and rocket costs.
- DennisP 6y ago
  The SyFy article said "up to five launches a day at the cost of around $500,000 per paying customer," which is a bit ambiguous, but it linked to Wired which says "A ride to space with SpinLaunch will cost under $500,000 per launch." Making the rocket reusable would be the next step, but that's a nontrivial task itself, since it's effectively the upper stage which is the hardest part of reusability. Maybe it's easier for such a small rocket, I don't know. But even then they're just shaving a little fuel off a very low launch cost, in exchange for a 200 lb max payload that has to be hardened to 10,000 gees. The launch cadence would be an advantage today but Starship is supposed to launch three times per day, if the customers are there for it.
mlindner 6y ago
No this won't work. The founders don't understand the physics involved and their estimates of the forces involved are wildly incorrect.

NikolaeVarius 6y ago

Wut? Their goal is to allow the rocket to ignite at 200k ft. Thats only a bit lower than the altitude SpaceX ignites its second stage, which is not reusable

DennisP 6y ago
"If Starship works out," I said. Starship reuses the second stage.
Cogito 6y ago
Putting aside starship, from the very limited information I've seen it's not clear that the operating costs of this system will be comparable to Falcon 9 for the booster phase of flight. It seems like this launch system will be more expensive per kg, and have far greater loads on the payload than Falcon 9. I hope it works out, and they find ways to make it commercially viable, but Falcon 9 really has set the bar for success quite high.
mlindner 6y ago
The problem isn't altitude, it's speed. Launching from the air has all the same problems of air launched rockets from planes. Except now they're trying to sling a massive rocket up to 200k feet along with all the sloshy liquids inside without anything breaking. It's complete and utter madness. The founders/investors are guaranteed to lose all their investments.
- thombat 6y ago
  Well somebody is sure to lose their money, but if enough bigger fools can be lured aboard it needn't be the current crew. In other words, the Nikola truck but in space.
  - mlindner 6y ago
    The Nikola comparison is apt here, though I think this is even worse than Nikola. There's known examples of fuel cell powered large vehicles.
    - thombat 6y ago
      Absolutely - the only thing about Nikola that looks dodgy on purely physical grounds is the claim of super-efficient electrolysis. Whereas SpinLaunch seems quite uncoupled to reality. Meaning of course the reality is that they'll run giggling to the bank...
- viraptor 6y ago
  I get the scepticism, but you're not really supporting your opinions here. The first rocket was madness, the shuttle was madness, landing rockets on sea platform was madness. Sometimes mad ideas work. You'll need more details to guarantee something.

blackrock 6y ago

How is Starship going? Are they still trying to “sweat” the fuel out of the skin, to give it an active cooling layer?

TaylorAlexander 6y ago
Starship development continues apace. They’re planning to launch the latest starship vehicle to 50km altitude next week and then perform their difficult landing maneuver 15km from the launch site. I believe the sweating skin idea has been dropped. See this one hour video for a detailed breakdown of the current state of the design: https://youtu.be/-8p2JDTd13k https://youtu.be/-8p2JDTd13k
- d_theorist 6y ago
  Next launch is 15km (not 50).
- _Microft 6y ago
  It's being launched up to 15km, that's pretty close to 50000 feet, so you might have mixed up the units.
  - TaylorAlexander 6y ago
    Oooh I see. The tweet I read said 15km/50k ft altitude and I misread that as 15km translation and 50km altitude. Thanks for the correction!
- blackrock 6y ago
  The “sweating” feature was the best idea for the spacecraft. When I first heard of it, I was thinking, this must be a bad April Fool’s joke, or an incredibly great idea. Turns out, it was the former.
1958325146 6y ago
The latest we have is that it will sweat only where the heat shield can't hold up on its own: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1107380559834046465 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1107380559834046465 .

howlgarnish 6y ago

They're claiming $500k per day and 5 launches per day, so the cost would be $500/lb. Obviously there's still an awful lot of work to be done to actually pull off that figure. If they do pull it off, the logical next step would be to use SpaceX-style reusable rockets as well, in which case you'd save both fuel and rocket costs.

DennisP 6y ago
The SyFy article said "up to five launches a day at the cost of around $500,000 per paying customer," which is a bit ambiguous, but it linked to Wired which says "A ride to space with SpinLaunch will cost under $500,000 per launch." Making the rocket reusable would be the next step, but that's a nontrivial task itself, since it's effectively the upper stage which is the hardest part of reusability. Maybe it's easier for such a small rocket, I don't know. But even then they're just shaving a little fuel off a very low launch cost, in exchange for a 200 lb max payload that has to be hardened to 10,000 gees. The launch cadence would be an advantage today but Starship is supposed to launch three times per day, if the customers are there for it.

mlindner 6y ago

No this won't work. The founders don't understand the physics involved and their estimates of the forces involved are wildly incorrect.