Rocket Reusability Debate

Re-using rockets isn't revolutionary?

Making rockets re-usable is a massive step forward and not about 'not regressing'.

Reusable first stages are not an achievement. Reusable rockets were invented 30 years before SpaceX. Using such rockets as first stages is a questionable decision by SpaceX, which may be a means to an end if it can save costs.

You're comparing a prototype against decades-old, non-reusable rockets.

SpaceX retrofitted used rockets. That’s a big distinction from building new aircraft from scratch.

The history of rocketry goes much further back than the space shuttle. The shuttle was supposed to be a step towards reusability but didn’t succeed or progress the way they thought it would. Starship is continuing that dream of full reusability and their approach is working. You can’t plan everything on paper when it comes to hardware especially when attempting things that have never been done before, you just don’t have the data in that case. You have to build prototypes and test them to destru

I think it comes down to how much refurbishment the rocket needs afterwards. The Shuttle reused a lot of expensive hardware, but needed so much work after each flight that it ended up not saving any money.I'd say the odds are good for SpaceX, as it's a much easier problem (no thermal protection system, the engines are a lot less fragile, nothing is being dunked in salt water), but we'll have to see how it really works out.As for why it hasn't been tried before, it seems

"Somewhat reusable"? One Falcon 9 has already flown a record 18 times!

Reusable rockets are a rehash of old tech that was considered - at the time - not economically feasible; Given how subject to interpretation spacex commercial numbers are, there is nothing indicating a clear cost or efficiency advantage compared with traditional launch systems so far. What we clearly know is that using software development methodologies to building critical hardware is as a bad idea as it sounds.

That exact design is a dead end but no breakthroughs are needed for orbital spaceflight. See what SpaceX is doing with reusable rockets, for instance. And Space Shuttle, although economically unsuccessful, showed that material and rocket science from 40 years ago made it physically possible.