SpaceX last month launched the largest rocket ever created For the 12th test flight. It was the debut of the Starship V3, a larger, more powerful version of the company’s super heavy duty truck. While companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin are looking to expand their rockets, a recent report suggests that these giant vehicles could be a colossal flop.
The Aerospace Center for Space Policy and Strategy announced report stated that although super-heavy lift rockets offer maximum payload capacity, they may face a major disadvantage compared to smaller, more agile launch vehicles. The report argues that increasing rocket capacity requires more cost, time and operational complexity and therefore may face challenges in the commercial launch sector.
Is bigger always better?
The report defines a super heavy lifting vehicle as a vehicle capable of lifting more than 50 metric tons (50,000 kilograms). Some of the examples listed are SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket, NASA’s Space Launch Vehicle, and Blue Origin’s upgraded New Glenn 9×4.
The Falcon Heavy rocket debuted in 2018, ushering in a renaissance of super-heavy lift vehicles. Since then, the rocket has flown just 12 times, a stark comparison to SpaceX’s medium-lift Falcon 9 rocket, which has been launched nearly 700 times since its 2010 debut.
“This begs the question, does the relatively low use of the Falcon Heavy indicate low market demand for future SHL rockets with greater lift capacity?” the report says. Falcon Heavy is the same size as Falcon 9, so it can’t carry larger or more satellites into orbit, just heavier ones.
The report claims that while the Falcon Heavy may not succeed because it is not a “market disruptor,” it could still serve as a transition rocket for other super-heavy-lift launch vehicles.
Boom or bust?
The Aerospace Center calls SpaceX’s Starship and Blue Origin’s New Glenn as two examples of upcoming super heavy lift rockets. SpaceX recently launched the largest version of its Starship rocket, while Blue Origin is also working on scaling up its New Glenn rocket.
“These SHL providers all strive to achieve lower launch costs per payload (ie, cost per kilogram) through increased lift capacity, large payload fairs, and full or partial launch vehicle (LV) reuse,” he said. According to the report, increased launch vehicle mass and volume may create new market opportunities, but their economic success is not guaranteed.
Drawing examples from other transportation industries, the Aerospace Center names Airbus’ A380 jumbo jet. The aircraft’s enormous size was not a commercial success due to high costs and operational limitations, eventually giving way to smaller but more fuel-guzzling aircraft.
“Those other sectors show that bigger is not always better, as excessive scale sometimes leads to complexity, reduced agility and often reduced load utilisation,” the report said.
The report suggests that super heavy lift jet carriers could serve the broadband constellation market. Other markets, such as launching orbital data centers, do not yet exist, and it is too early to tell when they will emerge and start generating enough demand to cover the costs of super-heavy lift rockets.
“For now, the market’s maturation path is likely to serve mega constellations with a regular release cadence,” the report said. “Such an ordinary effort will define SHL not just as an engineering marvel, but as the necessary foundation to unlock and build proven commercial success and extraordinary.”
