4 ms·
Though, for what it's worth, replacing the first stage of a traditional rocket would still represent a dramatic reduction in fuel weight and perhaps also total
by bunderbunder 2y ago
Though, for what it's worth, replacing the first stage of a traditional rocket would still represent a dramatic reduction in fuel weight and perhaps also total launch costs.
You're kindasorta doing the equivalent of replacing an entire Falcon 9 with a relatively lightweight sabot. Either way the initial boost puts the orbital vehicle on a suborbital trajectory, so it needs to carry its own engine for the orbital insertion burn.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- zamadatix 2y agoAgreed, with one nit: Initially you say first stage and later you say entire Falcon 9. Both approaches retain the 2nd stage rocket for orbital burn (separate from whatever propulsion the payload may have) so it's more equivalent to proposing replacement of just the first stage of the Falcon 9.