Russian Roscosmos costs $35-48.5M per launch. [1]

Shuttle launches were about $450M per launch, with 7 people and 50,000lbs of cargo. Came to about $10,000 per kg, vs SpaceX Falcon 9 at $27,000 [edit] and the Dragon around $9,000.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz-2

In case you’re not very familiar, when dealing with launches to orbit: cost only makes sense in terms of “$ per kg per launch to <orbital destination>”, not “$ per launch to <orbital destination>”.

For the Roscosmos costs, mass to LEO seems to be $4270/kg [0].

Falcon 9 is at $1270/kg [1]. This link also has the comparison with the Space Shuttle.

[0] $35 MM / 8200kg [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210801024432/https://ntrs.nasa...

There's a difference between per-launch cost and program costs.

Max Payload to LEO 8,200kg. Max payload of falcon 9 is 22,800kg.

Looks to me like falcon 9 is considerably better value on those numbers even at twice the price.

The final seat to space purchased from Roscosmos cost $86M. [1] That's one seat, not the full vehicle.

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/the-us-hitches-its-final-ride-to...

I think there's a difference in methodology here. When those numbers of the shuttle are listed, they're including all the upfront R&D spread across the life-cycle of the program. I believe the Falcon costs disregard all those as a sunk cost and only list the actual "launch" costs

yep. $1.5billion in 2010 prices per flight including r&d. 1.2 without.

which is still 1.5 billion per flight in 2021 prices. So Elon needs to get the price down to $15mil to hit his target.

5% is still pretty good tho. And it may go lower.

I think this might miss the point. Is the $70MM/launch tag including the R&D? Does it include the R&D that is essentially given to SpaceX through their SpaceAct agreement?

Imagine if Tesla gave me all their R&D and manufacturing know-how and offered to help me out whenever I hit a snag, wouldn't I look great by showing everyone how much cheaper I can build an EV? That's why I think it's a bit of a faulty comparison. Still great, but some of these comparison border on the edge of hype

shuttle before columbia disaster was absorbing more than half ($8B) the NASA budget($16B) and doing 4-6 flights a year

I'm not going to argue that the shuttle wasn't a boondoggle. The same reasons it was are the same reasons it's not a great comparison. Very different mission scope/requirements, having to conform to multiple masters (DoD and NASA) regarding the design, etc. The shuttle was required to do things F9 is not.

Falcon9 1.0 R&D costs were $300M.

Again, I don't think that's an apt comparison. The NAFCOM numbers used in that calculation don't include things like program support costs, contingency costs, contractor fees, etc. Those are usually baked into the NASA figures sighted though. Add on top of that, NASA will sometimes independently fund R&D related directly to issues experiences. SpaceX can be the direct beneficiaries of that research without having any of the costs on their books.

I'm confident SpaceX would still be substantially lower than NASA if they had, but we need to be consistent in the methodology or it just becomes the equivalent of cherry picking data to underscore an already valid point.