5 ms·

I can accept that Starship will be able to deliver its cargo to anywhere in the world, but I can't see how it might then refuel, relaunch and return to a base.

I can accept that Starship will be able to deliver its cargo to anywhere in the world, but I can't see how it might then refuel, relaunch and return to a base. Or is it that a fully developed Starship would be able to land and relaunch without any specialised launch/landing pad and other infrastructure?

shkkmo 5y ago
I believe these and other similar logistic considerations are precisely what this funding is to study and try to solve.
- samizdis 5y ago
  Yes, you are absolutely right and I seem to be losing the ability to absorb information from perfectly clear Ars reporting: Accordingly, the Air Force science and technology investments will include "novel loadmaster designs to quickly load/unload a rocket, rapid launch capabilities from unusual sites, characterization of potential landing surfaces and approaches to rapidly improve those surfaces, adversary detectability, new novel trajectories, and an S&T investigation of the potential ability to air drop a payload after reentry," the document states. Thanks for that.
gpm 5y ago
I'm pretty sure they'll at least need to load cryogenic fuel wherever they're trying to relaunch. For military operations it might actually be a possibility to just not relaunch though. Explode the engines/anything sensitive and just leave it there. They're surprisingly cheap to build (compared to a lot of the expenses incurred during combat operations), at a (public and old) target of $5 million/ship.
- bserge 5y ago
  It's $200+ million, where's the $5 million coming from, Elon's dreams? Though the Falcon 9 is $55 million, now that's comparable to a modern fighter jet.
  - snewman 5y ago
    Where do you get the $200 million figure? Bear in mind that it is only the Starship (upper stage), not the Super Heavy booster, that would be landing at the destination and hence potentially subject to abandonment. Also note that Starship, unlike Falcon 9 (or at least to a much greater extent), is designed to be produced efficiently in quantity.
- jp42 5y ago
  IIRC $5M/ship is average cost calculated assuming multiple launches. Not sure how much starship will cost in expendable mode.
  - gpm 5y ago
    $5M is quoted as the construction cost, not cost amortized over launches. It's been given that way a few times, e.g. https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/inside-elon-musks-plan-to-build-one-starship-a-week-and-settle-mars/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/inside-elon-musks-pl... I think you're probably looking at a few more million in launch costs, but those aren't recovered by recovering the ship anyways.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- PeterisP 5y ago
  If their standard fuel load is enough for LEO, perhaps it's enough for two suborbital hops, especially if the return trip is without cargo?
ArkanExplorer 5y ago
Starship could theoretically launch, refuel in space, and then land (on Earth) and take back off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant_depot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant_depot It would have to deal with the extra weight of all the fuel on landing, but it would enable operations in completely remote areas. More realistically, if you have access to methane, you can just refuel the rocket. Theoretically if you had access to water for hydrogen and atmospheric carbon dioxide, you could manufacture artificial methane - needing just electricity. Musk has mentioned that before: https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/elon-musk-plans-to-use-texas-natural-gas-for-his-starships-101612016442939.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/elon-musk-plans-to...
- joshmarlow 5y ago
  This is starting to look a lot more like a RTS game.
jtchang 5y ago
Why does it need to relaunch? You now have a forward operating base that can secure the rocket. You can break the rocket apart and truck it back. Or put it on a ship. Lots of options here. The important part is probably getting there in 1 hour not necessarily getting back quickly.

shkkmo 5y ago

I believe these and other similar logistic considerations are precisely what this funding is to study and try to solve.

samizdis 5y ago
Yes, you are absolutely right and I seem to be losing the ability to absorb information from perfectly clear Ars reporting: Accordingly, the Air Force science and technology investments will include "novel loadmaster designs to quickly load/unload a rocket, rapid launch capabilities from unusual sites, characterization of potential landing surfaces and approaches to rapidly improve those surfaces, adversary detectability, new novel trajectories, and an S&T investigation of the potential ability to air drop a payload after reentry," the document states. Thanks for that.

gpm 5y ago

I'm pretty sure they'll at least need to load cryogenic fuel wherever they're trying to relaunch. For military operations it might actually be a possibility to just not relaunch though. Explode the engines/anything sensitive and just leave it there. They're surprisingly cheap to build (compared to a lot of the expenses incurred during combat operations), at a (public and old) target of $5 million/ship.

bserge 5y ago
It's $200+ million, where's the $5 million coming from, Elon's dreams? Though the Falcon 9 is $55 million, now that's comparable to a modern fighter jet.
- snewman 5y ago
  Where do you get the $200 million figure? Bear in mind that it is only the Starship (upper stage), not the Super Heavy booster, that would be landing at the destination and hence potentially subject to abandonment. Also note that Starship, unlike Falcon 9 (or at least to a much greater extent), is designed to be produced efficiently in quantity.
jp42 5y ago
IIRC $5M/ship is average cost calculated assuming multiple launches. Not sure how much starship will cost in expendable mode.
- gpm 5y ago
  $5M is quoted as the construction cost, not cost amortized over launches. It's been given that way a few times, e.g. https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/inside-elon-musks-plan-to-build-one-starship-a-week-and-settle-mars/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/inside-elon-musks-pl... I think you're probably looking at a few more million in launch costs, but those aren't recovered by recovering the ship anyways.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
PeterisP 5y ago
If their standard fuel load is enough for LEO, perhaps it's enough for two suborbital hops, especially if the return trip is without cargo?

ArkanExplorer 5y ago

Starship could theoretically launch, refuel in space, and then land (on Earth) and take back off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant_depot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant_depot It would have to deal with the extra weight of all the fuel on landing, but it would enable operations in completely remote areas. More realistically, if you have access to methane, you can just refuel the rocket. Theoretically if you had access to water for hydrogen and atmospheric carbon dioxide, you could manufacture artificial methane - needing just electricity. Musk has mentioned that before: https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/elon-musk-plans-to-use-texas-natural-gas-for-his-starships-101612016442939.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/elon-musk-plans-to...

joshmarlow 5y ago
This is starting to look a lot more like a RTS game.

jtchang 5y ago

Why does it need to relaunch? You now have a forward operating base that can secure the rocket. You can break the rocket apart and truck it back. Or put it on a ship. Lots of options here. The important part is probably getting there in 1 hour not necessarily getting back quickly.