4 ms·
> what we're now proposing to do with 10-15 Starship launches That's complete nonsense. 10-15 Starship launches would land a lander that can carry like 100tons
by panick21_ 1y ago
> what we're now proposing to do with 10-15 Starship launches
That's complete nonsense. 10-15 Starship launches would land a lander that can carry like 100tons of payload orbit.
Saturn V landed 15000kg on the moon, but most of that isn't payload.
But of course with Saturn V you are throwing away a rocket that cost 1 billion $ or more per launch.
You are comparing 'thing lands on moon' to 'things lands on moon' without any nuance.
But you are right Apollo was insane in how fast it was done.
- TheOtherHobbes 1y agoSpaceX is currently spending around $100m per launch for 'things that don't get into orbit', never mind land on the moon. So yes, I suppose that is more inefficient, in a way.
- panick21_ 1y agoFirst, you don't have any idea what those numbers actually are. Second, SpaceX has consistently shown lower development cost then anybody else. Starship is expensive its likely cheaper then New Glenn. Remember, Ariane 6, a marginal upgrade over Ariane 5 with only a new upper stage engine cost 6 billion $. And SpaceX is already at much higher launch rates and manufacturing rates for thing like engines. SpaceX is investing into mass production already.
- mcv 1y agoI don't think GP meant 10-15 Starships missions needed to carry the same payload, but 10-15 test launches necessary before it's ready for real. I think the Saturn V had only two test flights before it took people around the moon.
- Teever 1y agoNo, GP is referring to the refuelling missions that will be required to put Starship on the moon and bring it back. Which as the person you're replying to is point out isn't really a fair comparison because Starship and Saturn V deliver vastly different amounts of mass to and from the moon despite the mission being only to ferry some people there for a few days. If Starship ends up flying to the moon it effectively enables the landing of a lunar base that could be occupied for years at a time with sufficient resupply of food and the right equipment for extraction of water/oxygen from the moon. The Saturn V as amazing as it was could never have brought that much equipment to the moon in a cost effective manner.
- tonyhart7 1y agorefuelling makes a lot of sense in the long terms also military (space force)
- Polizeiposaune 1y agoSignificant parts of the Saturn V (including the S-IVB 3rd stage, and the instrument unit which controlled the entire stack) were previously flight tested in Saturn IB launches.
- xattt 1y ago> That's complete nonsense. 10-15 Starship launches would land a lander that can carry like 100tons of payload orbit. The burning question that I have now is whether a Starship explosion during lunar testing will be visible from Earth. I sure hope they would do it during a new moon too for maximum effect.