Talk:Reusable Booster System

Contracts have been awarded, Dec 2011
As of this morning, 6 Dec 2011, USAF has issued contracts to Boeing, Andrews Space, and Lockheed Martin for the RBS tasks. Here's a link: Andrews Space & Boeing also [in addition to Lockheed Martin win Reusable Booster System demo contracts]. There should be a lot of mainline aerospace press coverage in a few days. N2e (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * And here's the AvWeek article on the contract awards U.S. Air Force Plans Reusable Space Booster, Aviation Week, 9 Dec 2011. Cheers.  N2e (talk) 05:09, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Reusable Booster System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724204127/http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=23692 to http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=23692
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724204127/http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=23692 to http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=23692
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521103206/http://www.andrews-space.com/news.php?subsection=MzU1 to http://andrews-space.com/news.php?subsection=MzU1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:47, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Could add detail from the NRC 2012 report
The NRC 2012 report has lots of good detail in its 115 pages. It describes the phasing (subscale Pathfinder, larger RB-demo, RBS-Y prototype), and the various technology risk areas (eg the rocket engine development, the automatic flyback control system, the rocketback maneuver). Has specs for the Pathfinder and RBD phases and discusses the business case. Figure 4.7 shows that possible commercial expendible (eg SpaceX) costs could undercut the costs of EELV and destroy the USAF business case. - Rod57 (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)