3 ms·
> but for near-term needs like deploying bigger Starlink satellites and their moon lander contract they could probably power through without reentry survival S
by ncallaway 3y ago
> but for near-term needs like deploying bigger Starlink satellites and their moon lander contract they could probably power through without reentry survival
Starlink sat deployment, probably. I’m not convinced on the moon lander contract though. Each mission requires the moon lander itself, plus a number of tanker launches to refuel the moon lander. I think it’s something like 8-15 tanker launches.
If each of those tanker launches is an expendable vehicle that’s… probably economically survivable, but definitely not sustainable.
- imtringued 3y agoIf you can't reuse the boosters, then a series of Starship launches to the moon will cost as much as one SLS. The complex launch architecture demands reusability. It's a deal-breaker without it.
- generalizations 3y agoThough, if the tankers are expendable they won't have to reserve fuel for the landing, and the number needed to refuel would probably be at the lower end of that estimate - maybe even 6-10?