The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

Re:The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter... by imtringued on Thursday February 25, 2021 @06:43AM (#26261890)

> The thing that's different between Boring/Hyperloop and SpaceX is that SpaceX's entire business case is built on the cost benefit of landing and reusing a rocket, an idea for which the napkin math was obvious and in the end turned out to be extremely feasible but which legacy providers had been unwilling to even try.

The cost of reusing a rocket has not been proven to be cheaper than building a new rocket. Consider factors like the inability to reuse the entire rocket, the reduced payload. At best you can break even. Unless you somehow reuse the entire rocket and do 100 flights with the same rocket the savings are meager.

This isn't something new. The space shuttle suffered from the same issues. Building new shuttles was almost the same cost and less risky.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter... by mikepurvis on Thursday February 25, 2021 @07:37AM (#26262156)

I think it's pretty obvious that the current gen F9s are way more reusable and with way less refurbishment than the Shuttle ever was, even with the disposable second stage. But yeah, there are limitations, which is part of why FH is effectively cancelled in favour of just flying those payloads on a disposable booster.

But now that the basic principle has been proven, really leaning into it is part of the point of Starship— a new clean sheet design that is built for full reusability from the get go.

[ Parent | on HN ]