Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

That seems like an awful lot of dead weight to bring on a launch.


sort by: page size:

Wouldn’t most of that cost be baked into the launch rather than the payload though?

Launch prices basically are energy costs, plus a markup, so they are never going to make this work unless you could make the whole thing extremely light...

That would be a lot of extra launch weight just to return the first stage, not to mention the danger of having filled boosters on the rocket the whole launch.

100kg to space is a _lot_ of fuel, I think they'd notice. I'd be shocked if weight isn't checked on the launch pad.

What is the biggest cost of a launch then?

I am genuinely curious. I would've have thought that the amount of special-purpose propellant would be the biggest factor.


Every pound of weight you add to the rocket is a pound of payload that you can't put into space.

Not to mention the operational costs of a small navy to recover the rocket and transport it to a launch site.

Isn't the payload pretty inconsequential in comparison with the total weight of fuel at launch?

100kg seems like a barely usable amount of lift. It means you need an in-orbit assembly system for most things you want to launch and I'm pretty sure you're not going to be able to launch a person with life support gear.

Why’s that? Falcon Heavy is projected to be able to take up considerably more payload.

This is cool, but to put it in perspective, the Falcon Heavy (set to launch...tomorrow?) cost $90,000,000 with a 8,000 kg payload...this is about $5,000 / pound.

The Japanese one was $3,500,000 for 3 kg, or over $500,000 / pound.

My math kinda right? I'm ignoring that Elon's rocket is theoretically reusable 10+ times, so his number could be much lower.


Of lead? At $10,000/lb launch cost?

Oh, man. If you think you can get it done in a single billionaire's budget, all power to you. But developing a Falcon Heavy looks like a much smaller marginal project than a launch rail.

Forgive the laymans question but how much would it cost to ferry one extra rocket whose mission is to help it land by giving a larger margin of error when landing on the drone ship. I'm guessing carrying a few extra tonnes of deadweight engine for 99% of the mission is a big deal.

I hate to be the bearer of good news, but launch costs these days is more like $4k/lb.

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=301


Cost to get things into orbit is expensive - I don't have the numbers but the amount of extra fuel for every pound is, though roughly 90% of the weight of any launch vehicle is fuel. So if you can have something lighter do the same job, then costs etc really start to factor in hard.

They're only a few hundred pounds each. Falcon 9 can launch 50,000 lbs to LEO in expandable mode, so probably about 30,000 lbs when reusable, meaning they could launch close to 100 if they weighed 300lbs (there'd also be a deployment structure etc).

44 seems very doable, and they'd just burn up like any other satellite.


The article states the on-launch weight of it was 1,360kg, but what would have been interesting to know is the expected weight of debris that would reach the surface.

> launch 3800kg direct to Neptune

Wow, that is a damn sight more than an 825kg Voyager or 480 kg New Horizons.

next

Legal | privacy