3 ms·
What was the % cost reduction in being able to land the boosters again? I read it somewhere a while back but can't find it. It was pretty significant if I recal
by elchief 12y ago
What was the % cost reduction in being able to land the boosters again? I read it somewhere a while back but can't find it. It was pretty significant if I recall. TIA.
- Florin_Andrei 12y agoAccording to Elon, reusable rockets will drive the spaceflight costs down 100x. The booster is $60 million, the fuel charge for it is $200k. Other costs are involved in the final price per kg of payload, obviously.
- imglorp 12y agoObviously the math checks out, but I wonder what fraction of the price involves carrying the booster's landing capability (bigger tanks, landing legs, thrusters, bigger booster, etc) to its apogee. I mean that, compared to a single use disposable booster that doesn't carry all that aloft.
- jaggederest 12y ago30% is the cited figure for a complete return, and is factored into the 100x number.
- mikeash 12y agoThe first stage accounts for about 75% of the total cost of the Falcon 9, so best case would be a 75% cost reduction. Any refurbishment needed before flying again would reduce that, as well as whatever fixed costs there are for a launch, like fuel, salaries for on-site workers, consumable launch pad equipment, or whatever. Refurbishment is the big wild card. If the rocket is ready to go again with no work then it could come close to that 75% reduction. If it requires extensive work before it can fly again then it could be a lot smaller.