Skip to main content

View Diary: What NASA Could Be (320 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Vlad, you know that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vladislaw

    at least in theory, Falcon 9 is entirely reusable.  

    That said, I seem to remember someone (maybe it was you) saying that they aren't factoring reusability in their cost calculations, and that their current numbers wouldn't make sense, if they weren't.  

    •  yes.... (0+ / 0-)

      early on Musk touted the reusablity of the core. It would drop into the ocean via parachute then get picked up and reconditioned.

      I have not seen on the the website where they are building the recovery infrastructure to do it.

      It does not say, where I have noticed anyway, if the costs posted are the throwaway costs or the costs with recovery and reconditioning systems inplace.

      •  The reusability of any stacked system is going to (0+ / 0-)

        be limited by impact dynamics.  Even with the lightest impacts, engine cores will suffer a certain amount of damage.  A resuable engine core will still require a good deal of maintenance to restore and repair it to usable conditions. I have a feeling that the reusability of the Falcon is one of the "overpromising" that Space X is known for.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (124)
  • Community (62)
  • Bernie Sanders (44)
  • Elections (33)
  • Hillary Clinton (27)
  • 2016 (27)
  • Climate Change (26)
  • Culture (26)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Environment (22)
  • Science (21)
  • Spam (17)
  • Labor (17)
  • Law (17)
  • Media (17)
  • Republicans (17)
  • Barack Obama (16)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (15)
  • White House (14)
  • International (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site