3 ms·

Note that each of the 138 SpaceX launches required producing a second stage, something your numbers aren't really accounting for. And that it seems like SpaceX

Note that each of the 138 SpaceX launches required producing a second stage, something your numbers aren't really accounting for. And that it seems like SpaceX is close (within a year or so) to full reusability, while rivals are still trying to work out how to reuse the first stage.

maxglute 1y ago
2nd stage 1/6 weight with simple merlin engine. Early F9 used 9 merlin = ~15 more rockets. ~60% of PRC though we don't know full industrial capacity of either, i.e. SpaceX could be boeing tier and do 600+ frames per year, or PRC can brrt their reusable like shipbuilding at 200x whatever US is per year. I think Starship is big caveate, it could work or it could not. It's much more complicated / not conservative project vs F9 and has borderline Vanguard / Atlas tier failure rate granted one could argue that's move fast break things by design. But push comes to shove, comes to hammering industry to fill strategic need, I wouldn't be confident SpaceX can maintain lead for long enough to matter. Especially if space weaponization on the horizon.