4 ms·
Blue Origin have a (significantly less capable) reusable suborbital rocket, and Rocket Lab have reflown an engine. It's worth noting that the Falcon 9 only reu
by proaralyst 3y ago
Blue Origin have a (significantly less capable) reusable suborbital rocket, and Rocket Lab have reflown an engine.
It's worth noting that the Falcon 9 only reuses the first stage and payload fairings, with the second stage expended. I believe SpaceX's Starship is the only fully reusable rocket in realistic development
- dylan604 3y agowhat good is a suborbital rocket? is the expectation that the payload will then have its own booster functionality to finish the boost to orbital altitudes?
- proaralyst 3y agoI think the idea was that they could demonstrate and develop vertical landing technology while selling the vehicle (tourism and some freefall science experiments). I think they've done two or three tourist flights using it, and maybe a couple more science flights. They lost the booster a year or so ago and have been making sure they fix the problems since. In practice, SpaceX's approach of starting with an orbital rocket and adding reuse worked a lot better, given they started later.
- dylan604 3y ago>In practice, SpaceX's approach of starting with an orbital rocket and adding reuse worked a lot better, given they started later. This is something I forget about. Blue Origin in 2000, SpaceX in 2002 (according to WikiP). It really makes me think less of BO's "accomplishments".
- idontwantthis 3y agoIt’s confusing to even talk about Blue Origin and SpaceX at the same time. New Glenn is so silly that no one else wanted to make one with so little capability and so much cost. It’s a toy, basically.