/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7994788
This would be a golden post 5 years ago but drop all of your comparisons and deductions and just look at reality today.
>First stage landed safely
>Test fired again and worked fine
>Half a million dollars to inspect it compared to another ~40 million to build a new one.
How memeishly impossible is it to put another second stage and payload on top of your landed, tested booster and launch it again, saving at least half of the cost? You made a good point that it is harder than flight but hard =/= impossible based on what we are seeing right now and the cost benefits are enormous if you can do it.

>>7546572
Why do you say that?