8 thoughts on “The Big Bad Starship”

  2. “Honestly, I don’t think Starship will be a game-changer or a real competitor,” he said, concluding that Starship was oversized for the types of satellites that would fly on Ariane 6. “Starship will not eradicate Ariane 6 at all.”

    That’s an interesting way to look at it. Starship can lift too much and cost too little money, no threat at all.

  3. You know, if your job depends upon you saying it, you’ll say it.

    So pick your job carefully.

  4. They are talking about the “next three or four years”.

    Never mind that Ariane 6 will have taken over a decade by the time it actually launches with a real payload. Who knows how long it will take to pay back development costs, assuming it ever does.

    I can see Rocket Lab continuing. Falcon/Starship for small payloads is like taking a train or a bus. Sometimes you want to get somewhere they’re not stopping.

    1. It’s not impossible Starship will be cheaper than Electron on a per launch basis (not just per kg). At the start of all this, Musk suggested a one-way ride to Mars would cost $500K per passenger, with up to 100 passengers per ship. That would be $50M per Mars launch. As that would require about 5 tanker launches (6 launches total per flight), that suggests a LEO launch would be around $850K each. That’s cheaper than Electron.

      Times, technology, and money have changed since then, but it’s in the ballpark. Everyone is underestimating what Starship means, including it’s fanboys.

    2. Imagine a 747 freighter aircraft only carrying a single pallet of payload. If the cost per flight is low enough, it could still be less expensive than carrying the payload on a smaller but more expensive plane. We don’t know what the final per flight cost will be for Starship. It’s possible it might be less than most expendable rockets. If that happens, the market will follow.

Comments are closed.