Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

binary_spaniard t1_jdk1uek wrote

Reply to comment by pm_me_ur_ephemerides in Rocket Lab targets $50 million launch price for Neutron rocket to challenge SpaceX’s Falcon 9 by cnbc_official

> If Neutron is priced at $50M for a 15 tonne LEO payload, that's $3.3/kg.

It is $50M for the 13 tonne configuration.

> SpaceX has largely recouped their development costs so they can afford to compete with Rocketlab on price.

SpaceX has invested at least 10 billions in Starship, including Raptor, getting funding is getting harder and it is likely that its commercial operations don't start this year.

SpaceX is not lowering prices until they don't have other option.

16

Testimones t1_jdljoiw wrote

Am I completely wrong when I calculate 15000*$3.3 and get $49500? Is $3.3 meant to mean $3300?

9

livinginspace t1_jdmic0p wrote

Yes, you're right. $3.3/kg would mean you can get a ticket to space for $250

6

Testimones t1_jdmmfsv wrote

You are assuming quite a lot about my (lack) of weight there mate 🥲

6

Reddit-runner t1_jdm6f10 wrote

>SpaceX has invested at least 10 billions in Starship, including Raptor,

This was about Falcon9, tho.

And combined with the ISS contracts I would be VERY surprised if SpaceX hasn't recouped their development cost yet.

6

Anthony_Pelchat t1_jdvi5i1 wrote

>SpaceX is not lowering prices until they don't have other option.

We won't see SpaceX lower Starship prices until they are pushing for a very high flight cadence and are ready to replace Falcon 9. At that point, I would expect Starship to drop to $50M with F9 raising to $60M minimum and possibly much more. Falcon Heavy is going to be pushed back immediately after Starship starts flying as well.

1

binary_spaniard t1_jdw445o wrote

Falcon Heavy does direct GEO insertions that Starship won't do until orbital refueling is available and even then, it will be more expensive than most people expect.

1

Anthony_Pelchat t1_jdw9wo7 wrote

Starship is likely to do something different with GEO and further missions. Payload to LEO is just so huge and cheap compared to anything else that it will likely do a kickstage or just larger satellite thrusters. Falcon Heavy can only send 26.7t to GTO fully expended and doesn't have the volume to handle too large of a payload. Starship is 100t and likely more to LEO while fully reused with a massive volume as well. Elon himself doesn't care about Falcon Heavy, so I expect SpaceX to find ways to push everything away from FH as soon as possible.

Also keep in mind that once Starship is able to fly and be recovered reliably, it becomes more beneficial for SpaceX to fly Starship more often. A fully reusable Starship should be nearly 1/5th to 1/10th the cost to fly as a Falcon 9, and well past 1/10th to cost of Falcon Heavy.

2

Anthony_Pelchat t1_jdxdb7k wrote

Btw, I was under the impression that Starship couldn't do GTO missions while being reused and would need a refueling mission or kick stage. Apparently that is not the case. According to SpaceX's Starship User Guide, they can put 21t into GTO while still recovering the booster and upper stage at the launch site.

By comparison, Falcon Heavy can only put 26.7t into GTO while being fully expended. And the heaviest payload to GTO so far (by SpaceX) is only 7t, according to SpaceXStats webpage. And it appears that the heaviest payload ever by SpaceX is only 17.4t back in January, according to SpaceFlightNow.

1