>>14177267Based and correct.
>>14177278As per Falcon 9 the correct way to do partial reuse is to build a large recoverable first stage, a cheap throwaway second stage, and a reusable crew vehicle. Cheap propellant tanks are a myth and hauling large first stage engines to orbit is dumb.
Reusable 80's tech Shuttle LRBs would use shorter, wider tanks and a delta wing to do flyback reuse. In the 90's or 00's they could update to do propulsive landing but it probably wouldn't be worth the additional effort compared to just running the vehicle until it reached end of life and replacing it completely.
The Shuttle ET cost over 90 million. Falcon 9 costs $60 million or less. Falcon 9 can do over 15 tons to LEO reusable and 22 expendable, Shuttle could do 28 tons. The ET was not cheap.
Shuttle took months to refurbish and was a nightmare. Someone post the pic of shuttle completely surrounded by service structure.
