The Department of Transportation of the Pentagon , SpaceX by Elon Musk are collaborating to evaluate the feasibility of using cargo rockets to send cargo not only into space, but also to Earth.
The US plan obviously considers, to begin with, the prospect of sending urgent military supplies to troops anywhere on the planet in minutes.
Cargo rockets: is the idea technically feasible? Yes. Is it practicable? Depends.
Many factors are favorable, and on a technical level the Pentagon's idea of using cargo rockets for expeditions is absolutely feasible. However, costs and implementation times are not at all obvious and easy, and this could make the idea impractical, or completely impracticable.
Times? Spatial
A rocket taking off from Vandenberg Air Force Base in Southern California could theoretically enter low-Earth orbit and re-enter the atmosphere virtually anywhere on the planet.
Missile travel would have staggering implications, primarily for military transport. A C-17 Globemaster III heavy transport flying at 500 miles per hour, for example, takes 12 hours to get from California to Okinawa, Japan, an island practically on China's doorstep (why did this just come to mind?). Cargo rockets, however, could make the journey in less than 30 minutes.
Cargo rockets do not need a chain of tankers for aerial refueling, nor permission to fly over foreign countries on a long and winding flight route. Rockets are (for now, anyway) capable of going without any country being able to shoot them down, and along the most imaginable routes.
The capacity? Wide
Think about moving the equivalent of a C-17 payload anywhere in the world in less than an hour
Gen. Stephen R. Lyons, Chief of the Pentagon Transportation Department
He was wrong by default. SpaceX, a massive 50-meter (160-foot) high rocket, developed Starship cargo rockets to transport people and cargo to the Moon, Mars, and possibly beyond. Compared to a C-17 aircraft, it can carry even more cargo (100 tons against the 85 of the C-17).
There are two possible modes of transport under exam. The first involves a direct flight from a space base to an arrival point. The second involves pre-positioning supplies in orbit on a spacecraft that could rapidly deorbit and land when needed. Both could deliver the goods in minutes.
It might work?
There is nothing to suggest it won't. SpaceX has launched nearly 100 rockets so far, with only two total or partial failures. Equally important in a resupply mission is a successful landing, and the company is achieving record after record in this regard.
A real problem, however, is time. While actual spaceflight may take as little as 30 minutes, a space transportation mission could take days, weeks, or even months. A rocket must be prepared for spaceflight, a process that includes mounting it on the launch pad, fueling the rocket, and installing the cargo payload.
Cargo rockets could then only be launched in relatively good weather. Bad conditions can cause delays of up to a week.
Storing cargo aboard satellites would ensure a quick response, bringing the right supplies into orbit early would solve the problem.
The biggest problem at the moment? The usual: money.
The launch of the SpaceX Falcon 9 spacecraft capable of carrying 25 tons costs $ 28 million. SpaceX estimates that the Starship rocket could cost much less, up to $ 2 million per launch. However, a 12-hour flight from California to Japan in a C-17 Globemaster III currently costs $ 312.000.
To this cost must be added that of an aerial refueling tanker such as the Stratotanker KC-135. Nevertheless, even with the best estimates, currently transporting cargo with cargo rockets would cost four times more than sending the same load by plane.
However, cost isn't everything, especially when bullets fly. While space transportation is still too expensive to become a peacetime military activity, if Transportation Command and SpaceX come up with a plan to quickly prepare and launch cargo rockets, it could become a useful alternative during a potential war.
