[AR] Re: Falcon Heavy use cases
- From: Henry Vanderbilt <hvanderbilt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2018 22:13:06 -0700
On 2/7/2018 7:32 PM, John Schilling wrote:
The Falcon Heavy upper stage is not reusable, so you'd need a new one of
those every time - and they represent a larger fraction of the total
system cost than their relative size would suggest.
The most expensive single component of an F9 booster is likely the
Merlin engines. 28 in an F9H, 27 recovered, one expended in the upper
stage. So, 3.6% of the overall vehicle cost there.
Tankage and structure are cheap compared to engines, but yes, 2nd stage
tankage is likely more than 1/28th the total. And of course there's the
guidance system, attitude thrusters, etc.
I'd still be very surprised if the F9H upper stage is as much as 10% of
the overall vehicle manufacturing cost.
Which all begs the real question, as far as I'm concerned: F9H cries out
for a high-energy upper stage.
In the best of all worlds, an ACES stage scaled for the F9H would
provide very, very interesting capabilities.
Henry
Other related posts: