h (Rand Simberg) wrote in message ...
On 9 Dec 2003 17:08:32 -0800, in a place far, far away,
(Tom Merkle) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

I wonder how Elon Musk slipped this one under the radar. According to
this article:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/70/1

Elon Musk says the follow on to Falcon I will be a vehicle called
Falcon 5, which will essentially use 5 clustered Merlin engines
(Falcon I uses 1) in a Saturn-V like configuration, with an additional
Merlin on the upper stage. Musk claims this configuration will cost
approximately $12 mil to launch. That compared to the Falcon 1 at $6
mil. By my reckoning, that means Musk anticipates launching Falcon 5,
which has 6 Merlins on it, and presumably some other complex design
differences too, for only twice the price of Falcon I.

Does anybody see any way this makes any kind of sense?

Obviously, engines are not a major cost component.

Obviously not. So why does Falcon I have such a comparatively high
$/lb cost then? if the Falcon I is $6 mil per and Falcon V is $12 mil
per, that says to me the lower stage and staging technology is only
another $6 mil, which also says to me that actual individual engine
system cost must be much less than 1/5 the cost of the rest of the
vehicle, unless Musk plans to gush red until well into the Falcon V
operational phase.
(maybe he really does have enough money to launch the Falcon I as a
test platform for Falcon V, at way below actual cost until he can
finally start to break even with Falcon V. If so, he must have the
biggest balls around in financing.)

Tom Merkle