SpaceX Reusable Starship Could Become Cheaper than Intercontinental Airplanes for Earth Cargo

by

Elon Musk has targeted an orbital launch cost of $10/kg for Starship, with propellant costs accounting for roughly one-third. Orbital launch cost would be about four times more than the cost of point to point on Earth rocket delivery. Point to point rocket delivery would only need the Starship upper stage. There are only six engines in the upper stage instead of 39 engines for the upper stage and the booster stage. The fuel usage would be four times less. This would mean point to point rocket delivery at $2.50 per kilogram.

Currently, Air cargo rates for international shipping typically range from $3.00 to $7.00 per kilogram. There are occasionally lower prices when the cargo delivery is trying to fill up an airplane load.

Nextbigfuture has covered how SpaceX can reach $10 per kilogram to orbit. The Raptor or LEET rocket engines can be brought to a $250,000 per engine cost. The rest of the rocket is at $5 per kilogram for the steel and other components can get to a total cost of $10-20 million. The major cost reduction would be more reuses of the rocket. Currently, the SpaceX Falcon 9 booster stages are reused about 20 times but could get reused for 50-100 times.

Citi has an analysis that the cost per kilogram to orbit for Starship would be $300 per kilogram for ten reuses and then $30 per kilogramn or less with a hundred reuses.

Bain Consulting estimates the reusable Starship could reduce cost per kilogram to low Earth orbit (LEO) by 50 to 80 times.

Details of Build Costs and Getting to $10 per Kilogram to Orbit

The first flight of SpaceX Starship would be for 100% of the cost. The initial reuse costs after a fully successful flights would be 10% of the costs. There would be more inspection, safety and maintenance checks. This would then head to about $300000 to $2 million for fuel and a 3 million or so for operations and long term maintenance. Certain fuel and operation costs would not reduce based upon the initial cost of the Starship. They would decline based upon improving efficiency with higher launch cadence. Fuel costs would reach a minimum until SpaceX started producing their own fuel using solar power and other systems.

A SpaceX Super Heavy Starship that cost $90 million to build in 2024 that is successfully flown five times over 2024-2025 would have about $50 million in costs over five flights. The average per flight costs would be $28 million per flight. The original build cost would be $18 million cost per five flights. This would be $90 per kilogram for 200 ton payloads.

A SpaceX Super Heavy Starship that cost $50 million to build in 2025 that is successfully flown ten times over 2025-2026 would have about $70 million in costs over ten flights. The average per flight costs would be about $12 million per flight. The original build cost would be $5 million cost per ten flights. This would be $25 per kilogram for 200 ton payloads.

SpaceX mass producing engines for $250,000 each would need about $10 million for 39 or 40 engines for the Booster and Starship. Mass production of a hundred to four hundred Starships per year and twenty to forty boosters could have the fixed production costs spread over 40 times the production volume.

A SpaceX Super Heavy Starship that cost $20 million to build in 2027 that is successfully flown 100 times over 2027-2028 would have about $200 million in costs over ten flights. The average per flight costs would be about $2.2 million per flight. The original build cost would be $0.2 million cost per one hundred flights. IF the reusable mode had 220 tons of capacity then the payload cost would be $10 per kilogram.

Ultra-Low Cost High Volume Rocket

SpaceX plans to make the Starship 20% longer and improve the engines. The payload capacity could increase to 200-250 tons in reusable mode. An expended Future Starship would have a payload of about 300 tons. The build cost of a future Starship would be about $2-5 million. If the Future Starship cost $2 million and the fuel and operations cost $2 million then the payload cost even in expended mode would be $15 per kilogram. A $5 Million Starship that can fly thousands of times would have costs that were the fuel costs for the flight and very little other overhead. Fuel costs could be reduced by having systems to synthesize the liquid oxygen on site. $500k per orbital flight for fuel and 250 tons of reusable payload would be about $2-4 per kilogram. $125k per transcontinental flight for fuel and 250 tons of reusable payload would be $0.5 to $1 per kilogram.

14 thoughts on “SpaceX Reusable Starship Could Become Cheaper than Intercontinental Airplanes for Earth Cargo”

  1. Yeah… we’re not quite there. I can dream of the day when going to space will cost the equivalent of an international flight, but the speculations in this article are *ahem* “extremely optimistic”. Literally everything has to go right for SpaceX (and it never does), and it ignores many added costs like spaceports and regulations. Elon Musk may be doing his best, but Starship will not be the rocket that brings the price of space travel down to earth.

  2. I still think point to point will be a VERY NICHE venture that will never be competitive (Several costs not being considered here). Maybe the Military will use point to point. As well as some other specific itens that need to be transported around the world in a very short time (and then again, what about the last mile?)

    But to me, the important here is orbital costs.

  3. I think the benefit would be speed. By going into suborbital space the rocket can deliver faster. This has two benefits. One for the customer is it gets there earlier which could be critical for some items. The other is for Spacex in that they can do more flights if you can turn it around quickly.

  4. It will never be licensed to launch near any significant population area, it’s just too loud. Chances of point-to-point utility are very doubtful imho.

  6. Nothing that carries its oxidiser will ever compete on price with something that doesn’t, unless the journey is so long that the drag on the atmospheric vehicle means it uses ~3x the fuel of the transatmospheric one (assuming the same cargo mass).

    • Not correct:
      1
      Liquid oxygen price is negligible, few cents per kg, and easy to get in situ.
      2. Methane is cheaper than aviation kerosine
      3. For long-distance flights atmospheric drag is a factor… Consider taying in orbit for a year va flying for a year… Will you break even at a month, day or half a circle is a good question.
      4. Starship is faster and does not require an air strip.

  7. Omits the cost of infrastructure building in all locations along with launch clearance requirements and ‘last mile’ costs.

    How much does a Starport cost including launch pads, towers, and fueling installation?
    How close can one be placed to your destination, if it’s London, New York or Paris? i.e. If I have to ship it from Brownsville TX to New York what does that cost?

    I suspect, at least transitionally, global rocket freight will more closely follow container shipping patterns than air freight patterns.

  8. “Orbital launch cost would be about four times more than the cost of point to point on Earth rocket delivery costs”

    The cost of the costs?

  9. I think I would wait until a Stardhip can actually land successfully (the only one that has landed was on fire gir an hour afterwards) before writing speculative articles like this.

  10. When I was a child, in the 1960’s, that time was called “The Space Age’. I thought then, no it wasn’t. The “real” space age will be apon us when going into space is such a daily event as flying across an ocean on a commercial airliner. We only hear news of “that” when something goes wrong. When it becomes so ordinary, that we just don’t notice, we’ll all know (quietly) we’re in the REAL space age.

Comments are closed.