SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure

Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure by bzzzt on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @09:02AM (#41379021)

Launch costs for a Falcon 9 are about near 70 million dollars now which is also the estimated production price of the rocket including launch. So it seems they are not making a big loss even when the first stage explodes on the first landing attempt. It's already 'paid off' after one single use.

Price estimates of a first stage are in the 15-20m dollar range so every reused stage will net them about that (minus refurbishing costs) as a bonus.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure by nerdjon on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @10:10AM (#41379735)

Interesting, I figured that they were basically subsidizing the first launch in the hopes of making it back in later launches.

I could have sworn I remember there being an article about them doing something for the Government and they wanted a fresh rocket so it cost more. But maybe I am remembering wrong.

So roughly first rocket at cost and then if they are successful (which is for sure an incentive) the rest is profit above maintenance cost.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure by throwaway48540 on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @12:30PM (#41381296)

The flight cost more because they also wanted to fly much further

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure by asadotzler on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @01:47PM (#41382124)

NASA used to want a fresh rocket, now they prefer the second flight to the first because any "bugs" get shaken out during the maiden voyage.

They've always made money on the bulk of their first flights but the income is much better for later flights where the booster is already paid for.

[ Parent | on HN ]