3 ms·

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.

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.