Somehow, this discussion presumes that there are programs actively creating
viable alternatives to SpaceX.
SpaceX have already demonstrated that recovering and re-using Falcon 9
boosters is workable and practical.
NOBODY else has made significant progress towards accomplishing this at
scale.
Nobody has a program to mass produce a cheap expendable booster. Gosh, why
not?
SpaceX owns the launch market for nearly everything, in terms of cost to
orbit, tons to orbit, flight rates, etc.
One can ask: "Is re-use economically viable?" How much does it really cost
to rework before reflight?
SpaceX is a private, company, and these costs are not public knowledge, but
I am sure that the big lenders that are heavily invested in SpaceX ARE
informed of costs and profitability and they seem quite confident that it
is an excellent investment, since SpaceX seems to be able to get all the
cash it needs for expansion.
This includes massive investment in infrastructure and manufacturing
facilities approaching shipyard scale, with systems to build Starship and
SuperHeavy.
This is not just the "cargo Container" to get stuff up and down. it is the
freighter fleet and infrastructure to build, launch and recover the
freighters. and make the engines. and make the steel. Damn.
What about assembly in space? Does it make sense?
Until there is a freighter to get lots of mass up (and down), this is
moot. It will be sorted out when the freighter system is real. Action
will start with vehicles launched as complete systems, capable of missions
as self contained vehicles.h integral propellant transfer. Refueling and
service infrastructure will develop quickly, and soon the Starship payload
capacity will seem "normal", and for the first time, REALLY big orbital
structures will be practical, and not just mental exercise, and it will
make sense to build infrastructure for construction in orbit. Then
the fun really starts!
Who is building launch capability anywhere close to SpaceX? And how is
that going? Who is contemplating it?