There are the following aspects:

(1) Possibility

Because there is a need for recovery, after the satellite is released, fuel is still needed in the rocket. Rocket recovery. So assuming that the rocket fuel consumed for launch and recovery is the same, the mass at the end will be half of the total weight of the rocket. We can bring it to the above formula for calculation. The conclusion is obvious. The rocket cannot enter orbit at all. Referring to the data in the ideal formula, the fuel mass is 50 times the load. Then half of the fuel must be retained now, so that half The fuel will become the load, which will lead to a fuel ratio of 50 times.

(2) Launch method

Then, assuming that the above method can really be launched (disregarding the scientific nature), then should he use a multi-stage rocket or a single-stage rocket? ? If it's a multi-stage rocket, what's the point of recycling it? If you take the end of the rocket back, you have to make a new multi-stage rocket. If it is a single-stage rocket, we will fall into the previous paradox again. If you launch a rocket, you still need to use half of the fuel as a payload, which is a pain in the ass. So, the result is obvious, this is the small booster rocket used to recover the bundled rocket. But this thing seems to be a one-time product, just like a 107 rocket without a warhead. Is it valuable? Is the fuel you wasted worth? And even if it's about to be recycled, it's no more troublesome than your "grasshopper" to fly a parachute after abandoning the NTMD.

(3) The main damage method of rocket discards

The first point is the burning of the tail flame of the next stage rocket.

The second point is the high temperature of the ionosphere

The third point is the air friction at high speed

(4) Mainstream recycling methods

Currently, there are many ways to recycle return spacecraft, such as space shuttles and return-type space capsules. In fact, if you really want to recycle these things, you just need to be careful not to destructively abandon them when abandoning them, and then add a parachute. A landing beacon can complete the recovery work.

(5) Expected air and space transportation methods.

The Grasshopper rocket is mainly an attempt at aerospace transportation (although it is a pain in the ass). As for the future aerospace transportation method, I prefer an aerospace fighter that uses electromagnetic propulsion for first-stage boost. , as we all know, electromagnetic propulsion is currently a highly efficient acceleration method, and there is the possibility of repeated use (see electromagnetic gun). A 50KM long electromagnetic propulsion guide rail should be able to accelerate the manned cabin to 5 with an acceleration acceptable to ordinary people. At a speed of -10 Mach, after reaching the upper middle layer of the atmosphere, the pulse detonation engine or plasma engine can be used to achieve orbital flight and gradually enter the space transfer station.

5. Summary

It’s not that you look down on SpaceX, but as a private space organization that has only succeeded once in six launches, can you first improve the launch success rate, and then Make these eye-catching things, and when doing it, consider whether it is practical.

I sincerely hope that SpaceX can become a civilian spokesperson in the era of large spaceflight, rather than the current concept company that relies on attracting attention and speculating on futures. At the same time, various events since the founding of SpaceX also reflect the increasingly obvious impetuous atmosphere in the American scientific research community, at least in the private scientific research community.