On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 12:54 PM Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2019, Craig Fink wrote:
Landing Propellant mass fraction used for delta-V should be significantly
less for this prototype than for the Falcon 9 first stage.
Which is basically irrelevant, since they're different classes of vehicle
and the pre-descent demands on this one are rather greater than those on a
Falcon 9 first stage.
Vehicle at any time without effecting, affecting the English Weird
...Like an aircraft flying across Pacific, one would not expect the
aircraft to carry enough fuel for the return trip. For a Launch Vehicle,
the Destination is LEO, a place to let passengers and cargo off, take on
new passenger and cargo and Refuel for the return trip.
Remember that a sensible RLV, especially one that carries passengers,
needs the ability to *abort* a flight without losing vehicle or payload.
Reaching a LEO station can't be an essential preliminary to making a safe
descent, because you might not be able to get that far. Airliners *are*
expected, indeed required, to carry enough fuel to execute their abort
procedures when needed.
I think you miss the point. Passengers R on their own. They can leave the
