Connect with us

SpaceX

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that BFR could cost less to build than Falcon 9

SpaceX continues to build the first Starship prototype in South Texas. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal - 01/27/19)

Published

on

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk believes that there may be a path for the company to ultimately build the massive Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy booster (formerly BFR) for less than Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy, a rocket 3-9 times smaller than BFR.

While it certainly ranks high on the list of wild and wacky things the CEO has said over the years, there may be a few ways – albeit with healthy qualifications – that Starship/Super Heavy production costs could ultimately compare favorably with SpaceX’s Falcon family of launch vehicles. Nevertheless, there are at least as many ways in which the next-gen rocket can (or should) never be able to beat the production cost of what is effectively a far simpler rocket.

Dirty boosters done dirt cheap

On the one hand, Musk might not necessarily be wrong, especially if one throws the CEO several bones in the interpretation of his brief tweet. BFR at its simplest is going to require a full 38 main rocket engines to achieve its nominal performance goals, 7 on Starship and 31 on Super Heavy. As a dramatically more advanced, larger, and far more complex engine, Raptor will (with very little doubt) cost far more per engine than the relatively simple Merlin 1D. BFR avionics (flight computers, electronics, wiring, harnesses) are likely to be more of a known quantity, meaning that costs will probably be comparable or even lower than Falcon 9’s when measured as a proportion of overall vehicle cost. Assuming that BFR can use the exact same cold gas thruster assemblies currently flying on Falcon 9, that cost should only grow proportionally with vehicle size. Finally, Starship will not require a deployable payload fairing (~10% of Falcon 9’s production cost).

Advertisement

All of those things mean that Starship/Super Heavy will probably be starting off with far better cost efficiency than Falcon 9 was able to, thanks to almost a decade of interim experience both building, flying, and refurbishing the rocket since its 2010 debut. Still, BFR will have to account for entirely new structures like six large tripod fins/wings and their actuators, wholly new thrust structures (akin to Falcon 9’s octaweb) for both stages, and more. Considering Starship on its own, the production of a human-rated spacecraft capable of safely housing dozens of people in space for weeks or months will almost without a doubt rival the cost of airliner production, where a 737 – with almost half a century of production and flight heritage – still holds a price tag of $100-130+ million.

 

Adding one more assumption, the most lenient interpretation of Musk’s tweet assumes that he is really only subjecting the overall structure (sans engines and any crew-relevant hardware) of BFR relative to Falcon 9. In other words, could a ~300-ton stainless steel rocket structure (BFR) cost the same amount or less to fabricate than a ~30-ton aluminum-lithium alloy rocket structure (Falcon 9/Heavy)? From the very roughest of numerical comparisons, Musk estimated the cost of the stainless steel alloys (300-series) to be used for BFR at around $3 per pound ($6.60/kg), while aluminum-lithium alloys used in aerospace (and on Falcon 9) are sold for around $20/lb ($44/kg)*. As such, simply buying the materials to build the basic structures of BFR and Falcon 9 would cost around and $7.5M and $5M, respectively.

Assuming that the process of assembling, welding, and integrating Starship and Super Heavy structures is somehow 5-10 times cheaper, easier, and less labor-intensive, it’s actually not inconceivable that the cost of building BFR’s structure could ultimately compete with Falcon 9 after production has stabilized after the new rocket’s prototyping phase is over and manufacturing processes are mature.

*Very rough estimate, difficult to find a public cost per unit mass from modern Al-Li suppliers

Advertisement
A rough visualization of the size of Starhopper, Starship, and Super Heavy. (Austin Barnard, Teslarati)

Costs vs. benefits

On the opposite hand, stainless steel rockets do not have a history of being uniquely cost-effective relative to vehicles using alternative materials. The only orbital-class launch vehicles to use stainless steel (and balloon) tanks are the Atlas booster and the Centaur upper stage, with Atlas dating back to the late 1950s and Centaur beginning launches in the early ’60s. Stainless steel Atlas launches ended in 2005 with the final Atlas III mission, while multiple forms of Centaur continue to fly regularly on ULA’s Atlas V and Delta IV.

Based on a 1966 contract between NASA and General Dynamics placed shortly after Centaur’s tortured development had largely been completed, Centaur upper stages were priced around $25M apiece (2018 USD). In 1980, the hardware for a dedicated Atlas-Centaur launch of a ~1500 kg Comstar I satellite to GTO cost the US the 2018 equivalent of a bit less than $40M ($71M including miscellaneous administrative costs) – $22.4M for Centaur and $17.6M for Atlas. For Atlas, the rocket’s airframe (tanks and general structure) was purchased for around $8.5M. That version of Atlas-Centaur (Atlas-SLV3D Centaur-D1A) was capable of lifting around 5100 kg (11,250 lb) into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and 1800 kg (~4000 lb) to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), while it stood around 40m (130 ft) tall, had a tank diameter of 3.05m (10 ft), and weighed ~150t (330,000 lb) fully fueled.

 

In a very loose sense, that particular stainless steel Atlas variant was about half as large and half as capable as the first flight-worthy version of Falcon 9 at roughly the same price at launch ($60-70M). What does this jaunt through the history books tell us about the prospects of a stainless steel Starship and Super Heavy? Well, not much. The problem with trying to understand and pick apart official claims about SpaceX’s next-generation launch architecture is quite simple: only one family of rockets in the history of the industry (Atlas) regularly flew with stainless steel propellant tanks, a half-century lineage that completed its final launch in 2005.

Generally speaking, an industrial sample size of more or less one makes it far from easy to come to any particular conclusions about a given technology or practice, and SpaceX – according to CEO Elon Musk – fully intends to push past the state of the art of stainless steel rocket tankage with BFR. Ultimately, American Marietta/Martin Marietta/Lockheed Martin was never able to produce launch vehicle variants of the stainless steel Atlas family at a cost more than marginally competitive with Falcon 9, despite the latter rocket’s use of a far more expensive metal alloy throughout its primary tanks and structure.

At some point, it’s even worth asking whether the per-unit cost of Starship and Super Heavy should be relevant at all to their design and construction, at least within reason. If the goal of BFR is to drastically lower the cost of launch by radically improving the ease of reuse, it would be truly bizarre (and utterly unintuitive) if those goals could somehow be achieved without dramatically raising the cost of initial hardware procurement. Perhaps the best close comparison to BFR’s goals, modern airliners are eyewateringly expensive ($100-500M apiece) as a consequence of the extraordinary reliability, performance, efficiency, and longevity customers and regulatory agencies demand from them, although those costs are admittedly not the absolute lowest they could be in a perfect manufacturing scenario.

At the end of the day, it appears that Musk is increasingly of the opinion that the pivot to stainless steel could ultimately make BFR simultaneously “better, faster, [&] cheaper”. However improbable that may be, if it does turn out to be the case, Starship and Super Heavy could be an unfathomable leap ahead for reliable and affordable access to space. It could also be another case of Musk’s excitement and optimism getting the better of him and hyping a given product well beyond what it ultimately is able to achieve. Time will tell!


Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

SpaceX is partnering with chipmakers to enable Starlink satellite-to-cell service

President Gwynne Shotwell outlined the effort during a space industry conference in Paris.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX/X

SpaceX is working with microchip manufacturers to integrate satellite-connectivity hardware into smartphones, advancing its plan for direct-to-device services through Starlink. 

The move follows the company’s $17 billion acquisition of wireless spectrum from EchoStar Corp., a deal that positions SpaceX to operate more independently of traditional telecom carriers. 

President Gwynne Shotwell outlined the effort during a space industry conference in Paris this week, as noted in a Bloomberg News report.

Starlink direct-to-device

Starlink currently serves millions of customers in over 100 countries, primarily through ground-based dishes. The company, however, is now expanding into satellite-to-cell service, which should enable unmodified phones to connect directly with orbiting satellites. While SpaceX has a partnership with T-Mobile US, the EchoStar spectrum purchase gives it more control to negotiate with global carriers on its own terms.

“We’re working with chip manufacturers to get the proper chips in phones,” the SpaceX President stated. “We will now be initiating discussions with telcos in a different way now. Now it’s our spectrum, but we want to work with them, almost providing capacity and wholesaling capacity to their customers.”

Advertisement

The company plans to launch satellites capable of supporting its direct-to-device business within two years, with early mobile phone testing expected by late 2026.

Starship program continues test flights

Shotwell also addressed SpaceX’s Starship program, which recently completed its 10th test flight in August. She said the mission met all objectives, providing a critical morale boost to teams after a challenging development year. 

“My Starship team needed that win,” Shotwell noted. “Development programs always are kind of a 24/7 operation, and I was really pleased for them.”

SpaceX is planning to fly one more iteration of the current Starship prototype, known as V2, before transitioning to the next-generation V3 vehicle. That version, expected to debut late this year or early 2026, is designed to be more capable and support eventual crewed missions to the Moon and Mars. 

“The V3, which we want to fly hopefully late this year, but maybe early next year, is really the vehicle that could take humans to the moon and Mars,” Shotwell stated.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

U.S. Judge dismisses lawsuit against SpaceX Starship Boca Chica launch site

The ruling found that the FAA had met its obligations in reviewing the potential environmental effects of Starship launches.

Published

on

(Credit: SpaceX)

A U.S. district court judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by conservation groups challenging the Federal Aviation Administration’s approval of SpaceX’s expanded rocket launch operations in Boca Chica, Texas. 

The ruling, issued Monday, found that the FAA had met its obligations in reviewing the potential environmental effects of Starship launches.

FAA review withstands legal challenge

The lawsuit centered on whether the FAA properly assessed the impact of SpaceX’s operations on endangered wildlife, including ocelots, jaguarundis, and Kemp’s Ridley sea turtles, as noted in a report from The Guardian. The plaintiffs argued that noise, light pollution, and construction activity degraded the surrounding habitat, which also serves as nesting grounds for threatened shorebirds.

The lawsuit cited SpaceX’s April 2023 Starship test, which destroyed its launchpad and scattered debris across a large area. The blast reportedly ignited a grassfire and damaged wildlife habitats, including a bobwhite quail nest.

Judge Carl Nichols, for his part, ruled that the FAA had satisfied its obligation“to take a hard look at the effects of light on nearby wildlife.” The decision effectively cleared a regulatory hurdle for SpaceX, which has been working to expand Starship launch activity at its Boca Chica facility.

Advertisement

A continued ramp

SpaceX continues to scale its operations nationwide. Beyond Starship, the company is also seeking approval to nearly double Falcon rocket launches from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, from 50 annually to 95. 

Former President Trump has also shared his intention to increase U.S. launch capacity, setting a target for substantial growth by 2030. Considering that SpaceX is by far the world’s dominant launch provider, Trump’s support for more launches will likely benefit the private space company.

For now, at least, the ruling should allow continued expansion at a time when Starship remains central to long-term goals such as Mars missions and NASA’s Artemis program.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX to expand Central Texas facility with $8M Bastrop project

Bastrop is already the site of several Elon Musk-led ventures.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX is set to expand its presence in Central Texas with an $8 million project to enlarge its Bastrop facility, as per state filings. 

The 80,000-square-foot addition, which is scheduled to begin construction on September 24 and wrap in early January 2026, was registered with the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation and initially reported by My San Antonio

New investment

Bastrop is already the site of several Elon Musk-led ventures. The upcoming expansion will extend SpaceX’s office at 858 FM 1209, near Starlink’s operations and The Boring Company’s facilities. Just down the road, X is housed in the Hyperloop Plaza at 865 FM 1209.

SpaceX’s expansion reflects a steady buildup of resources in Bastrop since the private space firm established its presence in the area. The addition was praised by Tesla Governor Greg Abbott, who wrote on X that the expansion will “bring more jobs, innovations and will strengthen Starlink’s impact worldwide.” 

State support

In March, Gov. Greg Abbott announced a $17.3 million state grant to SpaceX for an “expansion of their semiconductor research and development (R&D) and advanced packaging facility in Bastrop.” The project is expected to create more than 400 new jobs and generate over $280 million in capital investment.

Advertisement

Following the grant award, the Texas Governor also noted that SpaceX’s facility would be growing by 1 million square feet across three years to boost its Starlink program. SpaceX’s Starlink division is among the company’s fastest-growing segments, with the satellite internet system connecting over 6 million users and counting worldwide. 

Recent reports have also indicated that Starlink has struck a deal with EchoStar to acquire 50 MHz of exclusive S-band spectrum in the United States and global Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) licenses. This should pave the way for Starlink to provide 5G coverage worldwide, even in remote areas. 

Continue Reading

Trending