| ▲ | acdha 2 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
Does it? My understanding was that it’s less helpful for anything which isn’t in low-earth orbit because the commercial launch engineers are optimizing for the lucrative satellite business, not larger and higher payloads. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> commercial launch engineers are optimizing for the lucrative satellite business, not larger and higher payloads Commercial satellites are getting bigger and heavier. Launch that can put big and heavy in LEO can put big and slightly less heavy higher up. Add to that things like in-orbit propellant transfer and there is a good chance astronomy sees a golden age in the coming decades (in countries with space access). I’m not dismissing the problem. Just this analysis as meriting any conclusions. It’s a start. But it’s only part of a full model of how these changes would affect astronomy. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Tuna-Fish 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Larger rockets are inherently more efficient, which is why all the commercial providers are moving towards them. And while yes, most of the providers are targeting primarily for LEO, if you have high payload capacity to LEO you can solve your issue of getting anywhere by packing in a kick stage. And cheap third-party kick stages are available and more are in development. | |||||||||||||||||