this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
22 points (95.8% liked)
Space
1854 readers
48 users here now
A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics
Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instanceโs local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.
Related Communities
๐ญ Science
- !curiosityrover@lemmy.world
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !esa@feddit.nl
- !nasa@lemmy.world
- !perseverancerover@lemmy.world
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !space@beehaw.org
๐ Engineering
๐ Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Preface: I'm no rocket surgeon.
Wish they weren't scribbling off SpaceX's design so hard. It's entirely possible that examining the conditions and dynamics of re-entry would lead to a very Starship-like design in the end, but there's merit in exploring the possibilities. Especially since this is supposed to be a smaller vehicle, so it won't be experiencing the same exact conditions as Starship at any stage of flight. Fingers crossed that it really is just a render for publicity and the actual design will be informed by physics, not FOMO.
But it certainly puts a smile on my face to see ESA gradually pulling its head out of its ass and realizing that reusability isn't a fad.
If they have to copy something, I wish they would pick the Stoke upper stage. I feel like the capsule reentry has to be way easier than the Starship one. I'm sure the aerospike would add a bunch of issues. And the architecture is still unproven. It just seems like a less insane vehicle that will scale up and down better.
A capsule design will likely never be fully reusable, since it doesn't allow you to shield the second stage engine(s), propellant tanks and anything else that usually goes in the trunk section. For a fully reusable design, you need to go with either a spaceplane or whatever it is that we're calling the Starship's cylinder-with-control-surfaces design.
EDIT: Looked into Stoke's design a little more. It's a fascinating idea and I will be looking forward to test launches!
There's one more option - propulsive re-entry. You point your big engines retrograde and burn until your velocity is effectively zero, then descend on a <1g burn. Won't need heat shields if you don't have to endure re-entry heat. But this ain't happening until we develop ludicrously more efficient high thrust engines and orbital fuel production.