Hacker News Reader

I'm pretty sure the plan is to put this one in a museum. Later variants are supposed to be easier and more reliable to re-fly.

View on HN

Something to think about: pretty soon there will be nothing strange about a rocket that has flown before. Contrast it with the feeling you have for a 737 that has done 2500 starts and landing prior to you going on board, it's a sign of confidence that it did that. Now it will be many many years before there will be boosters with numbers of take-offs and landings > 20 or so but at some point insurance premiums for unflown hardware will be higher than for hardware that has been flown before.

Huge game changer this, also in the frequency of launches.

"Flight tested" rockets is an interesting spin on this

As is, on the other end of the spectrum, "lithobraking" :)

>737 that has done 2500 starts and landing

You can probably add another zero there. 737 airframes don't even need a special inspection and maintenance program until they hit 60,000 takeoff/landing cycles. [1]

[1] http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com