In sci.space.tech message 7cc88da8-a2c0-451f-b4a9-6528b15e6484@i9g2000y
qe.googlegroups.com, Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:17:56, byblow
posted:

I would love to hear opinions about Elon Musk's announcement a
fully reusable, two-stage launcher. In this SpaceX animated video --
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p176UpWQOs4 -- the launcher reminds me
of the Falcon 9; it looks like the first stage has nine engines.

I would think SpaceX would need a much more capable launcher, perhaps
something more like the Falcon X or Falcon XX (sans its NERVA-based
NTR, for political reasons) to get a decent payload and have enough
fuel for a tail-first, soft landing.

The current Falcon 9 will do about 10 tonnes to LEO, 5 tonnes to GTO,
and the LEO price is of the order of $30M. Wikipedia figures.

If they get just 10 flights per F9, but 1/2 the payload, the cost per go
should be well under $10M (allowing for fuel, servicing, staff costs,
etc.). That looks a price worth designing payloads for. Figures are
pure guesses.

BTW, the Video did not, as far as I recall, say that the second stage
would flu back; the obvious route is once around Earth. And I think EM
said that the video was not faithful to all planned detail.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.