Peppycito comments on [Eric Berger] Analysts find looming launch crisis is "more severe" than anticipated

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Odd that the status quo of a few years ago is a current crisis. Before spacex there was a waiting list of several years to get to space. Spacex's whole business model was Falcon 9 was going to make space so cheap a cottage industry of satellite manufacturing was going to spring up. That appears to have started happening and then spacex suddenly cancels Falcon. Has Falcon been a loss leader for spacex? If it was such a cheap system due to reusability why are they scrapping it? With such a "work horse" as SS why wouldn't they make it accomodate the widest maker possible?

permalink

fedilink

source

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child)

Falcon 9 was going to make space so cheap

Falcon 9 was only ever going to make space as cheap as its next-cheapest competitor. It's been ten years since the first booster landings, and no other reusable rocket has achieved a cadence anywhere close that of Falcon 9.

Has Falcon been a loss leader for spacex?

I highly doubt it. With minimal downward pressure on launch price from the rest of the market, they should have been able to make significant profit with every launch. I suspect this has been pivotal in bankrolling Starship development.

If it was such a cheap system due to reusability why are they scrapping it?

Because Starship has the potential to be even cheaper. Falcon 9 still throws away an upper stage with every launch.

With such a “work horse” as SS why wouldn’t they make it accomodate the widest maker possible?

I think Starlink revenue has now surpassed (or is projected to surpass) all other revenue streams, so Starlink has become. SpaceX have essentially become their own "widest market".

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 days ago

no other reusable rocket has achieved a cadence anywhere close that of Falcon 9.

But the whole point of the cadence was that it was necessary for all the startups that were going to start needing launch services. Without demand a non reusable rocket that doesn't require a weekly launch, landing barge operation and booster refurbish is perhaps cheaper and makes better business sense. I don't have sources, do you?

I highly doubt it. ^we're ^both ^guessing With minimal downward pressure on launch price from the rest of the market, they should have been able to make significant profit with every launch. I suspect this has been pivotal in bankrolling Starship development.

SpaceX have essentially become their own "widest market".

That sounds like a bazillion dollar business to me, when you're your own best customer.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent