Plus, reusable rockets are a lot cleaner than letting them sink to the seafloor, with propellant residue inside. Or letting them burn up in the atmosphere, where heavy metals degrade the ozone layer and have other negative effects.
Sure. That’s why I’m looking forward to Starship, and, in the distant future, a space elevator. But we need rapidly reusable rockets before we can build an elevator.
Starship is not feasible for anything but space tourism, maybe, if it doesn’t blow up or crash every other launch.
It currently barely has the energy to reach orbital speeds while completely empty. How is it going to achieve orbit with the supposed 100 tons of cargo on board, or even the more realistic 50 ton payload.
The Government Accountability Office, the pre-existing competitor to the Efficiency Office Musk wants to run, put out a report over a year ago that the main engines of the starship do not meet the energy requirements for the Artemis mission that SpaceX has already been payed for. Those engines are already run so over throttled that they routinely melt themselves, that’s the green fire you see whenever one of the boosters or Ship itself relights its engines for landing.
SpaceX does not have the technology to make starship work as designed, if they did, they could have retrofitted the Falcon rockets to have reusable second stages like was originally planned. Instead they went straight for the big scam of a reusable moon rocket, because why tell a small lie when you can tell big one and have someone fraudulently award you a 3 billion dollar contract to make it.
:quality(75)/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/9c7951496cbbc4585b251debcf7306d7/SpaceX%20Super%20Heavy%20REUTERS.jpg)
Plus, reusable rockets are a lot cleaner than letting them sink to the seafloor, with propellant residue inside. Or letting them burn up in the atmosphere, where heavy metals degrade the ozone layer and have other negative effects.
Half of the rocket still gets disposed and “burns up”. There’s nothing clean about injecting kerosene and methane into the upper atmosphere.
Sure. That’s why I’m looking forward to Starship, and, in the distant future, a space elevator. But we need rapidly reusable rockets before we can build an elevator.
Starship is not feasible for anything but space tourism, maybe, if it doesn’t blow up or crash every other launch.
It currently barely has the energy to reach orbital speeds while completely empty. How is it going to achieve orbit with the supposed 100 tons of cargo on board, or even the more realistic 50 ton payload.
The Government Accountability Office, the pre-existing competitor to the Efficiency Office Musk wants to run, put out a report over a year ago that the main engines of the starship do not meet the energy requirements for the Artemis mission that SpaceX has already been payed for. Those engines are already run so over throttled that they routinely melt themselves, that’s the green fire you see whenever one of the boosters or Ship itself relights its engines for landing.
SpaceX does not have the technology to make starship work as designed, if they did, they could have retrofitted the Falcon rockets to have reusable second stages like was originally planned. Instead they went straight for the big scam of a reusable moon rocket, because why tell a small lie when you can tell big one and have someone fraudulently award you a 3 billion dollar contract to make it.