/sci/ - Science & Math

I’m compiling some data on Space Shuttle component costs
The RS-25’s were $40 million in either 1980 or 2000 dollars
The Boosters were $25 million EACH in either 1980 or 2000 dollars
The External Tank was $75 million in 2000 dollars based on ET-94
The orbiter itself cost $2 billion

Now we don’t know if the shuttle cost $450 million (NASA’s per mission claim) or $1.5 billion (Overall Program/Launches) per launch. I think the “true” number is somewhere in between

Lastly, I am confident that something like proto-SLS or shuttle-C could fly for much less than the shuttle as long as the engines were recovered via SMART reuse like ULA plans

The SSME is a miracle of modern technology and it’s a shame that SLS throws them away. When Lockheed built a Full Flow Staged Combustion engine called the “Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator,” they were still only just able to match the isp of the SSME

Stretchy Shuttle-C (far right and to the top) is my favourite non-flown rocket. It’s surprisingly conservative; it doesn’t require a total redesign of the shuttle ET like SLS did. It also reused the exact same engine section as the shuttle. Even better, the engine section was designed to be reusable like ULA’s SMART plan, or it could even deorbit from LEO.
The plan did combine some dev work. The boosters were extended to 5 segments, and the external tank was stretched too. But at least it didn’t require a total redesign like SLS did.
People have stated that even pessimistic estimates show Shuttle-C flying 5 years MAX after a green light. Wish we had this.