SpaceX reveals Starship Marine Recovery Plans | Ariane-6 Vs SpaceX - How the Rockets Stack Up?

SpaceX reveals Starship Marine Recovery Plans | Ariane-6 Vs SpaceX - How the Rockets Stack Up?

HUGE THANKS TO:

--::INSPIRED BY::--

AUDIO:

To be resolved, thank you.

[SPATL]

When you're listing off a bunch of big numbers, it would be very helpful (to me anyway) if you'd show a graphic in the video with the numbers on them. Especially when you're comparing different rockets or one set of three numbers with another set of three numbers, for example. The Falcon vs Falcon Heavy graphic was good--something similar for the numbers comparing SpaceX vs Ariane would have been great too.

[rowland]

Sea recovery helps them dodge FAA regulations. Smart move by Space X.

[ProperLogicalDebate]

How about launching new light Starships and Boosters from Boca Chica with just a few engines to a rig where they are mated, prepared, and launched with all engines going to LEO? The Booster can return to another rig downrange and then either be launched to the uprange rig or to Boca Chica as needed.

[digitt]

I've completed all the testing I'm ready to drink from a fire hose.

[gort]

Hello. Another great video and incidentally, I love the intro music. It's easy going, short and sweet.

[arthurbister]

Thanks for converting kg to lb, I live in the woods and hunt my supper with an ax

[edki]

In terms of cost per payload to orbit, Ariane 64 is in the same range as a reusable Falcon 9. For LEO launches, Ariane 64 is a couple of percent more expensive, while for GTO launches, it is about 10% cheaper. I'm going with the 62m$ for a Falcon 9 launch, as it's the offocial price given on SpaceX' website. Afaik, the 30m$ price tag is the marginal cost to just refurbish a recovered F9 first stage, so you still need to add the cost for the upper stage and and the launch campaign. So in essence, Ariane 6 is a really competitive option as of today, and with future reusability upgrades, as they are planned today, will make the rocket mcu more affordable compared to Falcon 9

[skyhiker]

“Ariane-6 is D.O.A.” Dead on Arrival.

[bigjohn]

were they not looking at recovering the engines in a later version?

[mpfiveO]

The boost back burn doesn’t cancel out the Booster velocity. It instead maintains that velocity, while using the burn to redirect and loop the booster back around to the Landing Site

[tekish]

Actually I think this is in relation to the "anywhere" on Earth transportation project just awarded.

[utkuerkan]

Hi public/ET; nice educational video, despite Ariana 5-6 are excellent rocket's, they should in my opinion be comparable to NASA & SpaceX rocket's and product's & services. Additionally; reusability is an excellent notion, the future is "reusability", "renewable", "recyclable" present and future corporations/institutions shall adapt also implement such notions/technologies. :-))

[stuartschaffner]

A resident of Texas 30 miles away from the Raptor 2 engine test site reported that, when a single rocket engine is being tested, his area experiences a prolonged low rumble seeming to come from all directions. The windows in his house rattle from the vibrations. Compare this with several rockets/day, each with over 30 such engines. How many places in the US will tolerate such daily noise?

[kenr]

should prove handy in f35 recovery efforts.

[vwasson]

The economies of reusability will force all competitors to adopt the same eventually, once their governments are tired of paying those high prices.

Recovering Starship and Booster will dramatically reduce the risks of landing in FL or TX. Definitely needed until their landings are proven as safe as Falcon.

I foresee that the Falcon will be shelved once the Starship is fully operational. At that time the Falcon launch facility will probably be rebuilt as a starship launch facility. That would give them 2 Starship launch pads in FL.

[MPADAD]

"Baffle them with BS" episode.

[theeternallyvigilant]

Haven't you ever seen "diamonds are forever". Musk needs a oil rig base to control his network of death satellite's :).

[MyKharli]

haha elon has come nowhere close to a 24 hr turnaround 6mill launch ..its 27 days minimum and 60m .

[toddabbott]

But Elon already explained most of the stuff around the oil rigs. They will not move. The off shore launches is to get around a lot of the EPA and such restriction of land based launches. The passengers and/or cargo will be faired out to them on a different boat. They current facility in Texas will be mostly for launching new craft, but they will eventually not be landing back at this facility as others are finished. From the sounds of it Elon could potentially build 1 Starship and Heavy Booster every 2-3 months and he hopes to get this down to around 1 month. And he hopes to launch each craft 1000 times or more. I think this is VERY ambitious... mostly because he is looking at transporting people, not to space, but to other destinations on Earth.

I think this is a horrible idea do to the lack of any form of backup recovery system other than redundancy. Maybe after several hundred flights and if he can find a better re-entry method than the suicide belly flop maneuver. I also worry about the environmental impact of these launches as he is talking something like a 100 fold increase in launches. I think he should make a fleet on say a dozen, plus maybe another dozen in tankers and Moon or Mars landers. That would be enough to wipe out all competition and completely dominate the space industry. This would not be enough to drop prices to what he wants at $2 million a launch, but likely close at around $5 million.

[cornbreadcuban]

I don’t see how we can state SpaceX has an advantage in cost. We still don’t know how much it takes to refurbish the Rockets or what the actual price is to launch a falcon. Elon musk is Notorious for taking shuffling money around from other companies, government funding and tax breaks and calling it profit. they have yet to meet their goal for a price per lunch with falcon or even their turnaround time for a launch. Although hopeful reusability really has not proven itself yet. It takes about 30 days to turn around and falcon nine. How fast are they really going to be with starship and over three times the engines?