3 ms·
No, there are so many wrong statements in your comment that I don’t even know from where to start. The current cost for 60 satellites on falcon 9 is around 10M$
by tigershark 5y ago
No, there are so many wrong statements in your comment that I don’t even know from where to start.
The current cost for 60 satellites on falcon 9 is around 10M$ if I remember correctly.
From next year they will likely be able to send 400 satellites for the same price with starship and the aspirational goal is to have a cost of 2M$ per launch.
It implies a cost of ~55M$ to send 11000 satellites.
Even if they will never reach that aspirational goal it would probably cost them ~300M$ for 11k satellites and ~1B$ for 42k satellites at 10M$ per launch.
It’s perfectly feasible, you just can’t understand how starship is such a game changer.
- tsimionescu 5y ago> The current cost for 60 satellites on falcon 9 is around 10M$ if I remember correctly. Apparently Musk is claiming 15M$. The public numbers for a launch are 3.3 times that, so even if that is pure profit, it's awfully good profit compared to what Starlink is bringing in. > From next year they will likely be able to send 400 satellites for the same price with starship and the aspirational goal is to have a cost of 2M$ per launch. This is based on Musk time - the likelihood of that happening in this time-line is not particularly good, given the track record of his promises. Time will tell. The claimed 2M$ price is laughably 'aspirational'. Until I see it, I don't believe a word of it. > It’s perfectly feasible, you just can’t understand how starship is such a game changer. Let's wait for it to actually fly to space and back until we declare it such a game changer, ok? Musk's promises have a habit of never happening, or happening much later than claimed.