3 ms·
Single Stage To Orbit doesn't have to be an atmosphere breathing multi-engine lifting body craft, it can be a conventional rocket that just doesn't care about b
by datadrivenangel 3y ago
Single Stage To Orbit doesn't have to be an atmosphere breathing multi-engine lifting body craft, it can be a conventional rocket that just doesn't care about being efficient.
Burning up as you accelerate is also an engineering problem that is not 100% solved for hypersonics. Almost solved, but not risk free.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> Burning up as you accelerate is also an engineering problem that is not 100% solved for hypersonics. Almost solved, but not risk free. Totally agree it's a difficult engineering concern. But it's being thrown around like a physics limit when it simply is not.
- dotnet00 3y agoAs an example, Starship can theoretically SSTO on Earth, just with no payload and no means of returning. Totally inefficient and actually useless, but technically SSTO.
- rbanffy 3y agoIt’d still lift a lot of building materials.
- dotnet00 3y agoYeah, but this is Earth we're talking about, those building materials can be sent up in a much more usable state via the proper two-stage stack.
- rbanffy 3y agoOnly when that 2-stage stack is properly validated. TBH, Superheavy+Starship, right now, is probably cheaper than the fully expendable SLS. Also, if all the materials will be cannibalized in orbit (or never land on Earth again, like the Lunar Starship), it makes no sense to send the mass in a reusable vehicle.