Hubbry Logo
Reusable launch vehicleReusable launch vehicleMain
Open search
Reusable launch vehicle
Community hub
Reusable launch vehicle
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Reusable launch vehicle
Reusable launch vehicle
from Wikipedia
Booster hooked up on a crane
Recovery of Falcon 9 first-stage booster after its first landing

A reusable launch vehicle has parts that can be recovered and reflown, while carrying payloads from the surface to outer space. Rocket stages are the most common launch vehicle parts aimed for reuse. Smaller parts such as fairings, boosters or rocket engines can also be reused, though reusable spacecraft may be launched on top of an expendable launch vehicle. Reusable launch vehicles do not need to make these parts for each launch, therefore reducing its launch cost significantly. However, these benefits are diminished by the cost of recovery and refurbishment.

Reusable launch vehicles may contain additional avionics and propellant, making them heavier than their expendable counterparts. Reused parts may need to enter the atmosphere and navigate through it, so they are often equipped with heat shields, grid fins, and other flight control surfaces. By modifying their shape, spaceplanes can leverage aviation mechanics to aid in its recovery, such as gliding or lift. In the atmosphere, parachutes or retrorockets may also be needed to slow it down further. Reusable parts may also need specialized recovery facilities such as runways or autonomous spaceport drone ships. Some concepts rely on ground infrastructures such as mass drivers to accelerate the launch vehicle beforehand.

Since at least in the early 20th century, single-stage-to-orbit reusable launch vehicles have existed in science fiction. In the 1970s, the first reusable launch vehicle, the Space Shuttle, was developed. However, in the 1990s, due to the program's failure to meet expectations, reusable launch vehicle concepts were reduced to prototype testing. The rise of private spaceflight companies in the 2000s and 2010s lead to a resurgence of their development, such as in SpaceShipOne, New Shepard, Electron, Falcon 9, and Falcon Heavy. Many launch vehicles are now expected to debut with reusability in the 2020s, such as Starship, New Glenn, Neutron, Maia, Miura 5, Long March 10 and 12, Terran R, Stoke Space Nova, and the suborbital Dawn Mk-II Aurora.[1]

The impact of reusability in launch vehicles has been foundational in the space flight industry. So much so that in 2024, the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station initiated a 50-year forward looking plan for the Cape that involved major infrastructure upgrades (including to Port Canaveral) to support a higher anticipated launch cadence and landing sites for the new generation of vehicles.[2]

Configurations

[edit]

Fully reusable launch vehicle

[edit]

Several companies are currently developing fully reusable launch vehicles as of January 2025. Each of them is working on a two-stage-to-orbit system. SpaceX is testing Starship, which has been in development since 2016 and has made an initial test flight in April 2023[3] and a total of 11 flights as of October 2025. Blue Origin, with Project Jarvis, began development work by early 2021, but has announced no date for testing and have not discussed the project publicly.[4] Stoke Space is also developing a rocket which is planned to be reusable.[5][6]

As of January 2025, Starship is the only launch vehicle intended to be fully reusable that has been fully built and tested. The fifth test flight was on October 13, 2024, in which the vehicle completed a suborbital launch and landed both stages for the second time. The Super Heavy booster was caught successfully by the "chopstick system" on Orbital Pad A for the first time. The Ship completed its second successful reentry and returned for a controlled splashdown in the Indian Ocean. The test marked the second instance that could be considered meeting all requirements to be fully reusable.[7][failed verificationsee discussion]

Partially reusable launch systems

[edit]

Partial reusable launch systems, in the form of multiple stage to orbit systems have been so far the only reusable configurations in use. The historic Space Shuttle reused its Solid Rocket Boosters, its RS-25 engines and the Space Shuttle orbiter that acted as an orbital insertion stage, but it did not reuse the External Tank that fed the RS-25 engines. This is an example of a reusable launch system which reuses specific components of rockets. ULA's Vulcan Centaur was originally designed to reuse the first stage engines, while the tank is expended. The engines would splashdown on an inflatable aeroshell, then be recovered. On 23 February 2024, one of the nine Merlin engines powering a Falcon 9 launched for the 22nd time, making it the most reused liquid fuel engine used in an operational manner, having already surpassed Space Shuttle Main Engine number 2019's record of 19 flights. As of 2024, Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy are the only orbital rockets to reuse their boosters, although multiple other systems are in development. All aircraft-launched rockets reuse the aircraft.

Other than that a range of non-rocket liftoff systems have been proposed and explored over time as reusable systems for liftoff, from balloons[8][relevant?] to space elevators. Existing examples are systems which employ winged horizontal jet-engine powered liftoff. Such aircraft can air launch expendable rockets and can because of that be considered partially reusable systems if the aircraft is thought of as the first stage of the launch vehicle. An example of this configuration is the Orbital Sciences Pegasus. For suborbital flight the SpaceShipTwo uses for liftoff a carrier plane, its mothership the Scaled Composites White Knight Two. Rocket Lab is working on Neutron, and the European Space Agency is working on Themis. Both vehicles are planned to recover the first stage.[9][10]

So far, most launch systems achieve orbital insertion with at least partially expended multistaged rockets, particularly with the second and third stages. Only the Space Shuttle has achieved a reuse of the orbital insertion stage, by using the engines and fuel tank of its orbiter. The Buran spaceplane and Starship spacecraft are two other reusable spacecraft that were designed to be able to act as orbital insertion stages and have been produced, however the former only made one uncrewed test flight before the project was cancelled, and the latter is not yet operational, having completed eight suborbital test flights, as of April 2025, which achieved all of its mission objectives at the fourth flight.

Reusable spacecraft

[edit]

Launch systems can be combined with reusable spaceplanes or capsules. The Space Shuttle orbiter, SpaceShipTwo, Dawn Mk-II Aurora, and the under-development Indian RLV-TD are examples for a reusable space vehicle (a spaceplane) as well as a part of its launch system. Contemporary reusable orbital vehicles include the X-37, Dragon 2, and the upcoming Dream Chaser, Indian RLV-TD and the upcoming European Space Rider (successor to the IXV).

As with launch vehicles, all pure spacecraft during the early decades of human capacity to achieve spaceflight were designed to be single-use items. This was true both for satellites and space probes intended to be left in space for a long time, as well as any object designed to return to Earth such as human-carrying space capsules or the sample return canisters of space matter collection missions like Stardust (1999–2006)[11] or Hayabusa (2005–2010).[12][13] Exceptions to the general rule for space vehicles were the US Gemini SC-2, the Soviet Union spacecraft Vozvraschaemyi Apparat (VA), the US Space Shuttle orbiter (mid-1970s-2011, with 135 flights between 1981 and 2011) and the Soviet Buran (1980–1988, with just one uncrewed test flight in 1988). Both of these spaceships were also an integral part of the launch system (providing launch acceleration) as well as operating as medium-duration spaceships in space. This began to change in the mid-2010s.

In the 2010s, the space transport cargo capsule from one of the suppliers resupplying the International Space Station was designed for reuse, and after 2017,[14] NASA began to allow the reuse of the SpaceX Dragon cargo spacecraft on these NASA-contracted transport routes. This was the beginning of design and operation of a reusable space vehicle.[citation needed] The Boeing Starliner capsules also reduce their fall speed with parachutes and deploy an airbag shortly before touchdown on the ground, in order to retrieve and reuse the vehicle.[citation needed] As of 2021, SpaceX is building and testing the Starship spaceship to be capable of surviving multiple hypersonic reentries through the atmosphere so that they become truly reusable long-duration spaceships; no Starship operational flights have yet occurred.[citation needed]

Entry systems

[edit]

Heat shield

[edit]

With possible inflatable heat shields, as developed by the US (Low Earth Orbit Flight Test Inflatable Decelerator - LOFTID)[15] and China,[16] single-use rockets like the Space Launch System are considered to be retrofitted with such heat shields to salvage the expensive engines, possibly reducing the costs of launches significantly.[17] Heat shields allow an orbiting spacecraft to land safely without expending very much fuel. They need not take the form of inflatable heat shields, they may simply take the form of heat-resistant tiles that prevent heat conduction. Heat shields are also proposed for use in combination with retrograde thrust to allow for full reusability as seen in Starship.

Retrograde thrust

[edit]

Reusable launch system stages such as the Falcon 9 and the New Shepard employ retrograde burns for re-entry, and landing.[citation needed]

Landing systems

[edit]

Reusable systems can come in single or multiple (two or three) stages to orbit configurations. For some or all stages the following landing system types can be employed.

Parachutes and airbags

[edit]

These are landing systems that employ parachutes and bolstered hard landings, like in a splashdown at sea or a touchdown at land. The latter may require an engine burn just before landing as parachutes alone cannot slow the craft down enough to prevent injury to astronauts. This can be seen in the Soyuz capsule. Though such systems have been in use since the beginning of astronautics to recover space vehicles, only later have the vehicles been reused.[citation needed]

Examples include:

Horizontal (winged)

[edit]

Single or main stages, as well as fly-back boosters can employ a horizontal landing system. These vehicles land on earth much like a plane does, but they usually do not use propellant during landing. Vehicles that land horizontally on a runway require wings and undercarriage. These typically consume about 9-12% of the landing vehicle mass,[citation needed] which either reduces the payload or increases the size of the vehicle. Concepts such as lifting bodies offer some reduction in wing mass,[citation needed] as does the delta wing shape of the Space Shuttle. A variant is an in-air-capture tow back system, advocated by a company called EMBENTION with its FALCon project.[18]

Examples include:

Vertical (retrograde)

[edit]

Systems like the McDonnell Douglas DC-X (Delta Clipper) and those by SpaceX are examples of a retrograde system. The boosters of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy land using one of their nine engines. The Falcon 9 rocket is the first orbital rocket to vertically land its first stage on the ground. The first stage of Starship is caught by the same arms that raise it to the launch platform after performing most of the typical steps of a retrograde landing.[19] Starship's second stage is also planned to be caught by arms attached to a tower when landing on Earth or to land vertically on the Moon or Mars. Blue Origin's New Shepard suborbital rocket also lands vertically back at the launch site. Retrograde landing typically requires about 10% of the total first stage propellant, reducing the payload that can be carried due to the rocket equation.[20]

Landing using aerostatic force

[edit]

There is also the concept of a launch vehicle with an inflatable, reusable first stage. The shape of this structure will be supported by excess internal pressure (using light gases). It is assumed that the bulk density of the first stage (without propellant) is less than the bulk density of air. Upon returning from flight, such a first stage remains floating in the air (without touching the surface of the Earth). This will ensure that the first stage is retained for reuse. Increasing the size of the first stage increases aerodynamic losses. This results in a slight decrease in payload. This reduction in payload is compensated for by the reuse of the first stage.[21]

Constraints

[edit]

Extra weight

[edit]

Reusable stages weigh more than equivalent expendable stages. This is unavoidable due to the supplementary systems, landing gear and/or surplus propellant needed to land a stage. The actual mass penalty depends on the vehicle and the return mode chosen.[22]

Refurbishment

[edit]

After the launcher lands, it may need to be refurbished to prepare it for its next flight. This process may be lengthy and expensive.[citation needed] The launcher may not be able to be recertified as human-rated after refurbishment, although SpaceX has flown reused Falcon 9 boosters for human missions.[citation needed] There is eventually a limit on how many times a launcher can be refurbished before it has to be retired, but how often a launcher can be reused differs significantly between the various launch system designs.[citation needed]

Return to launch site

[edit]

After 1980, but before the 2010s, two orbital launch vehicles developed the capability to return to the launch site (RTLS). Both the US Space Shuttle—with one of its abort modes[23][24]—and the Soviet Buran[25] had a designed-in capability to return a part of the launch vehicle to the launch site via the mechanism of horizontal-landing of the spaceplane portion of the launch vehicle. In both cases, the main vehicle thrust structure and the large propellant tank were expendable, as had been the standard procedure for all orbital launch vehicles flown prior to that time. Both were subsequently demonstrated on actual orbital nominal flights, although both also had an abort mode during launch that could conceivably allow the crew to land the spaceplane following an off-nominal launch.[citation needed]

In the 2000s, both SpaceX and Blue Origin have privately developed a set of technologies to support vertical landing of the booster stage of a launch vehicle. After 2010, SpaceX undertook a development program to acquire the ability to bring back and vertically land a part of the Falcon 9 orbital launch vehicle: the first stage. The first successful landing was done in December 2015,[26] since then several additional rocket stages landed either at a landing pad adjacent to the launch site or on an landing platform at sea, some distance away from the launch site.[27] The Falcon Heavy is similarly designed to reuse the three cores comprising its first stage. On its first flight in February 2018, the two outer cores successfully returned to the launch site landing pads while the center core targeted the landing platform at sea but did not successfully land on it.[28]

Blue Origin developed similar technologies for bringing back and landing their suborbital New Shepard, and successfully demonstrated return in 2015, and successfully reused the same booster on a second suborbital flight in January 2016.[29] By October 2016, Blue had reflown, and landed successfully, that same launch vehicle a total of five times.[30] It must however be noted that the launch trajectories of both vehicles are very different, with New Shepard going straight up and down without achieving orbital flight, whereas Falcon 9 has to cancel substantial horizontal velocity and return from a significant distance downrange, while delivering the payload to orbit with the second stage.[citation needed]

Both Blue Origin and SpaceX also have additional reusable launch vehicles under development. Blue is developing the first stage of the orbital New Glenn LV to be reusable, with first flight planned for no earlier than 2024. SpaceX has a new super-heavy launch vehicle under development for missions to interplanetary space. The SpaceX Starship is designed to support RTLS, vertical-landing and full reuse of both the booster stage and the integrated second-stage/large-spacecraft that are designed for use with Starship.[31] Its first launch attempt took place in April 2023; however, both stages were lost during ascent. On the fourth launch attempt however, both the booster and the ship achieved a soft landing in the Gulf of Mexico and the Indian Ocean, respectively.[citation needed]

History

[edit]
NEXUS concept
Atlantis taking off on STS-27

With the development of rocket propulsion in the first half of the twentieth century, space travel became a technical possibility. Early ideas of a single-stage reusable spaceplane proved unrealistic and although even the first practical rocket vehicles (V-2) could reach the fringes of space, reusable technology was too heavy. In addition, many early rockets were developed to deliver weapons, making reuse impossible by design. The problem of mass efficiency was overcome by using multiple expendable stages in a vertical launch multistage rocket. USAF and NACA had been studying orbital reusable spaceplanes since 1958, e.g. Dyna-Soar, but the first reusable stages did not fly until the advent of the US Space Shuttle in 1981.

Perhaps the first reusable launch vehicles were the ones conceptualized and studied by Wernher von Braun from 1948 until 1956. The von Braun ferry rocket underwent two revisions: once in 1952 and again in 1956. They would have landed using parachutes.[32][33]

The General Dynamics Nexus was proposed in the 1960s as a fully reusable successor to the Saturn V rocket, having the capacity of transporting up to 450–910 t (990,000–2,000,000 lb) to orbit.[34][35] See also Sea Dragon, and Douglas SASSTO.

The BAC Mustard was studied starting in 1964. It would have comprised three identical spaceplanes strapped together and arranged in two stages. During ascent the two outer spaceplanes, which formed the first stage, would detach and glide back individually to earth. It was canceled after the last study of the design in 1967 due to a lack of funds for development.[36]

McDonnell Douglas DC-X
X-33 concept
Kistler K-1 concept
Hopper prototype Phoenix RLV
Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne

The Space Shuttle era

[edit]

NASA started the Space Shuttle design process in 1968, with the vision of creating a fully reusable spaceplane using a crewed fly-back booster. This concept proved expensive and complex, therefore the design was scaled back to reusable solid rocket boosters and an expendable external tank.[37][38] Space Shuttle Columbia launched and landed 27 times and was lost with all crew on the 28th landing attempt; Challenger launched and landed 9 times and was lost with all crew on the 10th launch attempt; Discovery launched and landed 39 times; Atlantis launched and landed 33 times; Endeavour launched and landed 25 times. The last mission of Space Shuttle, STS-135, landed back on Earth on 21 July 2011 after delivering supplies and equipment to the International Space Station ISS.[39]

In 1986 President Ronald Reagan called for an air-breathing scramjet National Aerospace Plane (NASP)/X-30. The project failed due to technical issues and was canceled in 1993.[40]

In the late 1980s a fully reusable version of the Soviet Energia rocket, the Energia II, was proposed. Its boosters and core would have had the capability of landing separately on a runway.[41] This concept was not developed and even the original expendable Energia flew only twice in the late 1980s. The second flight launched the reusable spacecraft Buran on its first and only, uncrewed mission.[42]

In the 1990s the McDonnell Douglas Delta Clipper VTOL SSTO proposal progressed to the testing phase. The DC-X prototype demonstrated rapid turnaround time and automatic computer control.[43]

In mid-1990s, British research evolved an earlier HOTOL design into the Skylon design, which remained in development at Reaction Engines until 2024 when the company went bankrupt.[44] In 2025, the European Space Agency (ESA) announced a plan to use technologies developed for Skylon's SABRE engine in its future Flying Engine Testbed initiative INVICTUS.[45]

From the late 1990s to the 2000s, the European Space Agency (ESA) studied the recovery of the Ariane 5 solid rocket boosters.[46] The last recovery attempt took place in 2009.[47]

Two commercial ventures, Kistler Aerospace (later Rocketplane Kistler) and Rotary Rocket, attempted to build reusable privately developed rockets in the 1990s before going bankrupt.[48][49][50][51]

NASA proposed reusable concepts to replace the Shuttle technology, to be demonstrated under the X-33 and X-34 programs, which were both cancelled in the early 2000s due to rising costs and technical issues.[52][53][54]

The Ansari X Prize contest, created in 1996, was intended to develop private suborbital reusable vehicles. Many private companies competed, with the winner, Scaled Composites, reaching the Kármán line twice in a two-week period in 2004 with their reusable SpaceShipOne.[55] The design was later developed into the space tourism vehicle SpaceShipTwo, which flew on multiple suborbital flights, but never reached the Kármán line.[56]

Between 1999 and 2004, the German DLR was working on two reusable launch vehicle concepts within the ASTRA (Ausgewählte Systeme und Technologien für Raumtransport) program. The Liquid Fly-back Booster (LFBB) was a winged horizontal landing booster for the Ariane family of rockets.[57][58] The Hopper spacecraft was a rocket sled-launched spaceplane. In 2004, DLR performed a series of drop test with Phoenix RLV, a subscale prototype of Hopper, at the North European Aerospace Test range in Kiruna.[59][60]

In 2001, the Russian Khrunichev space centre proposed a reusable fly-back booster Baikal for the Angara family of rockets.[61] This vehicle never flew.[62] A similar concept was later proposed by Roscosmos in 2018 with no subsequent updates.[63]

In 2005, NASA initiated the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program supporting private companies in developing uncrewed cargo vehicles for resupplying the ISS.[64] This program has briefly resurrected the reusable Kistler K-1 concept by Rocketplane Kistler before it was cancelled for lack of private funding.[65][66] However, another recipient of COTS funding from NASA, SpaceX, managed to use this support to keep operating and to develop its Falcon 9 rocket, which later became partially reusable.[67][68]

2010s

[edit]
Falcon Heavy side boosters landing during 2018 demonstration mission.
Adeline concept
Long March 9 and 10 models
Next Generation Launch Vehicle (NGLV) rocket family
Static firing test of the Zhuque-3

In 2012, SpaceX started a flight test program with experimental vehicles. These subsequently led to the development of the Falcon 9 reusable rocket launcher.[69] SpaceX achieved the first vertical soft landing of a reusable orbital rocket stage on December 21, 2015, after delivering 11 Orbcomm OG-2 commercial satellites into low Earth orbit.[70] The first reuse of a Falcon 9 first stage occurred on 30 March 2017.[71] SpaceX now routinely recovers and reuses their first stages, as well as reusing fairings.[72]

In 2015, Airbus Defence and Space proposed the Adeline reusable engine pod for the Ariane family of rockets.[73] In 2018, CNES declared the concept not financially interesting and it hasn't been developed further.[74]

On 23 November 2015 the New Shepard rocket became the first Vertical Take-off, Vertical Landing (VTVL) sub-orbital rocket to reach space by passing the Kármán line (100 km or 62 mi), reaching 329,839 ft (100,535 m) before returning for a propulsive landing.[75][76]

In November 2016, the European Space Agency (ESA) has selected the Spanish Company PLD Space to start developing a reusable first stage under the agency's FLPP program.[77] This project became known as Miura 5 in 2018, when PLD Space redesigned the vehicle to increase its payload capacity after a review by ESA.[78] In April 2019, PLD Space performed a successful drop and recovery test of a Miura 5 first stage demonstrator.[79][80]

In 2017, the German Aerospace Center (DLR) started working on the Reusable Flight Experiment (ReFEx) aiming to demonstrate a winged fly-back rocket booster. As of 2024, its launch was planned for late 2026 atop a Brazilian VSB-30 sounding rocket from the Koonibba Test Range in Australia.[81]

In 2018, China was researching possible reusability for the Long March 8 system.[82] This had been later abandoned.[83] However, multiple Chinese private companies developing reusable launch vehicles have been performing VTVL test flights of varying complexity and success since 2019.[84][85][86][87]

In March 2019, the German Aerospace Center (DLR) started working on the EU-funded project RETALT aimed at developing retropropulsion technologies for reusable rockets.[88]

In 2019 Rocket Lab announced plans to recover and reuse the first stage of their Electron launch vehicle, intending to use parachutes and mid-air retrieval.[89] On 20 November 2020, Rocket Lab successfully returned an Electron first stage from an orbital launch, the stage softly splashing down in the Pacific Ocean.[90]

2020s

[edit]

In 2020, the only operational reusable orbital-class launch systems were the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, the latter of which is based upon the Falcon 9. SpaceX was also developing the fully reusable Starship launch system.[91] Blue Origin was developing its New Glenn orbital rocket with a reusable first stage.

In October 2020, Roscosmos signed a development contract for Amur, a new launcher with a reusable first stage.[92] In 2024, Roscosmos expected the vehicle to fly no earlier than 2030 and announced intention to start developing a prototype first stage in 2025.[93][94]

In December 2020, the European Space Agency (ESA) signed contracts to start developing THEMIS, a prototype reusable first stage.[95] In September 2025, the first THEMIS prototype has been fully assembled at its launch site at Esrange in Sweden.[96] Lessons learned through the development and testing of THEMIS, as well as smaller-scale demonstrators CALLISTO,[97] FROG-T, and FROG-H[98] will be used in development of future European reusable launchers Maia[99] and Ariane Next.[100][101][102]

In January 2022, the German Aerospace Center (DLR) initiated the Advanced Technologies for High Energetic Atmospheric Flight of Launcher Stages (ATHEAt) program for demonstrating various technologies related to launch vehicle reusability. The first suborbital test flight of the program successfully launched on 6 October 2025 from Andøya Space in Norway and the second, using a different rocket booster, is scheduled for 2026 from Esrange Space Center in Sweden.[103][104][105][106]

In 2022, China revealed plans to use reusable first stages on the new Long March 9 and 10 rockets, which are expected to serve the country's crewed Lunar program.[107][108] In August and September 2025, China performed first hot fire tests of Long March 10's first stage, including a restart sequence likely related to first stage landing maneuvres needed for reusability.[109]

In October 2023, the Spanish company PLD Space, supported by ESA's FLPP funding,[110] tested various technologies for its future reusable launch vehicle Miura 5 by successfully launching the suborbital rocket Miura 1 from the El Arenosillo Test Centre in Huelva, Spain. The company claims that as much as 70% of the technology needed for Miura 5 can be tested on Miura 1.[111][112]

In September 2024, the Indian government has approved plans to develop a new partially reusable rocket NGLV. The vehicle, with a VTVL first stage, is expected to be operational around 2033.[113]

In November 2024, China debuted the Long March 12 rocket,[114] whose later version Long March 12A is expected to have a reusable first stage.[115] In January 2025, the Longxing-2 VTVL demonstrator, likely a precursor to Long March 12A's first stage, flew on a high altitude suborbital test flight. As of October 2025, the outcome of this test is not known publicly.[116][117][118]

In June 2025, the Japanese company Honda performed a successful 300 m high VTVL flight of a liquid-propellant demonstrator rocket equipped with grid fins and landing legs.[119][120]

In September 2025, the European Space Agency (ESA) has awarded a contract to the Italian company Avio to start developing a reusable upper stage demonstrator.[121][122][123] Later in 2025, ESA has also awarded a related contract to the Italian company Ingegneria Dei Sistemi (IDS) to design a reusable rocket stage recovery vessel.[124] Meanwhile, Avio has been developing the FD1 and FD2 rocket demonstrators of methalox engines for their future Vega Next rocket, with possible reusability-related features like grid fins.[125][126][127][128][129]

On 20 October 2025, the Chinese company LandSpace performed a static-fire test of its new rocket Zhuque-3 intended for partial reusability. The first stage of the rocket was equipped with grid fins, aerodynamic chines, and landing legs.[130] Later in October, they conducted a vertical integration rehearsal, installing the payload in its fairing on the rocket.[131][132]

List of reusable launch vehicles

[edit]
Company Vehicle Reusable Component Launched Recovered Reflown Payload to LEO First Launch Status
United States NASA Space Shuttle Orbiter 135 133 130 27,500 kg 1981 Retired (2011)
Side booster 270 266 ?[a]
United States NASA Ares I First stage 1 1 0 25,400 kg 2009 Retired (2010)
United States SpaceX Falcon 9 First stage 558 511 478 17,500 kg (reusable)[133]
22,800 kg (expended)
2010 Active
Fairing half >486[b] >300 (Falcon 9 and Heavy)[b]
United StatesNew Zealand Rocket Lab Electron First stage 63 9 0[c] 325 kg (expended) 2017 Active, reflight planned
United States SpaceX Falcon Heavy Side booster 22 18 14 ~33,000 kg (all cores reusable)
63,800 kg (expended)
2018 Active
Center core 11 0[d] 0
Fairing half >18[b] >300 (Falcon 9 and Heavy)[b]
United States SpaceX Starship First stage 11 3 2 15,000 kg (Block 1)
35,000 kg (Block 2)

100,000 kg (Block 3)

200,000 kg (Block 4)

2023 Active
Second stage 11 0 0
United States United Launch Alliance Vulcan Centaur First stage engine module 2 0 0 27,200 kg 2024 Active, recovery planned
China Space Pioneer Tianlong-3 First stage 1 0 0 17,000 kg 2025 Planned
United States Blue Origin New Glenn First stage, fairing 1 0 0 45,000 kg 2025, Jan Active, recovery planned
China Galactic Energy Pallas-1 First stage 0 0 0 5,000 kg 2025, Aug Planned
China Deep Blue Aerospace Nebula 1 First stage 0 0 0 2,000 kg 2025 Planned
South Korea Perigee Aerospace Blue Whale 1 First stage 0 0 0 170 kg 2025 Planned
United StatesNew Zealand Rocket Lab Neutron First stage (includes fairing) 0 0 0 13,000 kg (reusable)
15,000 kg (expended)
2025 Planned
United States Stoke Space Nova Fully reusable 0 0 0 3,000 kg (reusable)
5,000 kg (stage 2 expended)
7,000 kg (fully expended)
2026 Planned
China CAS Space Kinetica-2 First stage 0 0 0 12,000 kg 2025 Planned
China I-space Hyperbola-3 First stage 0 0 0 8,300 kg (reusable)
13,400 kg (expended)
2025 Planned
China LandSpace Zhuque-3 First stage 0 0 0 18,300 kg (reusable)
21,300 kg (expended)
2025 Planned
China CALT Long March 12B First Stage 0 0 0 12,000 kg (reusable) 2026 Planned
China Deep Blue Aerospace Nebula 2 First stage 0 0 0 20,000 kg 2025 Planned
China Orienspace Gravity-2 First stage 0 0 0 17,400 kg (reusable)
21,500 kg(expended)
2025 Planned
United States Relativity Space Terran R First stage 0 0 0 23,500 kg (reusable)
33,500 kg (expended)
2026 Planned
SpainEuropean Union
PLD Space
Miura 5 First stage 0 0 0 900 kg 2026 Planned
FranceEuropean Union
MaiaSpace
Maia First Stage 0 0 0 500 kg (reusable)
1,500 kg (expended)
2,500 kg (3rd stage and expended)
2026 Planned
China Space Pioneer Tianlong-3H Side booster 0 0 0 68,000 kg (expended) 2026 Planned
Center core 0 0 0
China Orienspace Gravity-3 First stage, fairing 0 0 0 30,600 kg 2027 Planned
China CALT Long March 10A First Stage 0 0 0 14,000 kg (reusable)
18,000 kg (expended)
2027 Planned
Russia Roscosmos Amur First stage 0 0 0 10,500 kg 2030 Planned
India ISRO NGLV "Soorya" First stage 0 0 0 14,000 kg 2033 Planned
China CALT Long March 9 First Stage 0 0 0 100,000 kg 2033 Planned
Second Stage 0 0 0
FranceEuropean Union
ArianeSpace
Ariane Next First Stage 0 0 0 TBD 2030s Planned
ItalyEuropean Union
Avio
Vega Next TBD 0 0 0 TBD 2030s Planned
  1. ^ An exact figure for reused SRBs is not possible because the boosters were broken up for parts at the end of recovery and not kept as complete sets of parts.
  2. ^ a b c d As of 12 January 2024. A presentation slide at the company's all-hands meeting stated that fairing halves of the Falcon 9 and Heavy rockets had been recovered and reflown "more than 300 times".[134]
  3. ^ Rocket Lab announced in 2024 that it will be reusing a recovered first stage.[135]
  4. ^ The center booster used for Arabsat-6A was landed but not recovered.

List of reusable spacecraft

[edit]
Company Spacecraft Launch Vehicle Launched Recovered Reflown Launch Mass First Launch Status
United States NASA Space Shuttle orbiter Space Shuttle 135 133 130 110,000 kg 1981 Retired (2011)
Soviet Union NPO-Energia Buran Energia 1 1 0 92,000 kg 1988 Retired (1988)
United States Boeing X-37 Atlas V, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy 7 7 5 5,000 kg 2010 Active
United States SpaceX Dragon Falcon 9 51 49 30 12,519 kg 2010 Active
United States NASA Orion Space Launch System 2 2 0 10,400 kg (excluding service module and abort system) 2014 Active, reflight planned
United States Boeing Starliner Atlas V 3 3 1 13,000 kg 2019 Active
China CASC Shenlong (spacecraft) Long March 2F 3 2 unknown unknown 2020 Active, reusability unknown
United States Sierra Space Dream Chaser Vulcan Centaur 0 0 0 9,000 kg 2026 Planned
European Union ESA Space Rider Vega C 0 0 0 4,900 kg 2027 Planned
China CAST Mengzhou Long March 10A 0 0 0 14,000 kg 2027 Planned

List of reusable suborbital spacecraft

[edit]
Company Vehicle First launch to space Launches to space (only successful launches counted) Recovered from space (only successful recoveries counted) Reflown to space (only successful launches counted) Notes
United States Blue Origin New Shepard 2015 27 26 22 Fully reusable. Active as of December 2024. Of the 27 (successful) launches to space, 3 were to an altitude over 80 km (USAF/NASA limit for space) but below 100 km (international limit for space) and 24 to an altitude over 100 km.
United States Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo (VSS Unity) 2018 12 12 11 Fully reusable. Retired in 2024. Only flew to above 80 km (USAF/NASA limit for space) but not above 100 km (international limit for space).
United States Mojave Aerospace Ventures/Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne 2004 3 3 2 Fully reusable. Retired in 2004. Of the 3 (successful) launches to space, all were to an altitude over 100 km (international limit for space).
United States North American Aviation/USAF/NASA North American X-15 1962 13 12 11 Fully reusable. Retired in 1968. Of the 13 (successful) launches to space, 2 were to an altitude over 100 km (international limit for space) and 11 to an altitude over 80 km (USAF/NASA limit for space) but below 100 km.

List updated 1 December 2024.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
A reusable launch vehicle (RLV) is a type of spacecraft or rocket system engineered to return to Earth substantially intact following the delivery of its payload to orbit or beyond, allowing for refurbishment and relaunch multiple times to reduce operational costs compared to expendable vehicles. The concept of reusability emerged in the mid-20th century amid efforts to make space access more economical, with early studies by NASA exploring recovery techniques for boosters and stages as far back as the 1960s. The first operational realization came with NASA's Space Shuttle program, launched in 1981, which featured a reusable orbiter vehicle and solid rocket boosters that were recovered and refurbished for 135 missions until the program's retirement in 2011; this partially reusable design demonstrated the feasibility of reuse but highlighted challenges like high maintenance costs and limited flight rates. In the 21st century, private sector innovation has driven significant advancements, particularly through SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket, introduced in 2010, whose first-stage boosters land propulsively on drone ships or ground pads for recovery and reuse—achieving over 500 successful landings by late 2025 and enabling individual boosters to fly up to 31 times, dramatically lowering per-launch costs to under $3,000 per kilogram to low Earth orbit. This success has spurred competition, with systems like Rocket Lab's Electron rocket incorporating reusable components, Blue Origin's New Glenn which demonstrated partial reusability on its maiden flight and first-stage landing in November 2025, while international efforts include China's reusable variants of the Long March series. Ongoing developments focus on fully reusable architectures to further slash costs and enable high-cadence missions for satellite deployment, crewed exploration, and interplanetary travel; SpaceX's Starship, a two-stage system designed for complete reusability with rapid turnaround, has undergone multiple test flights since 2023, aiming for orbital operations and beyond by 2026, potentially carrying 150 metric tons to orbit at a fraction of traditional expenses. The economic advantages of RLVs, including economies of scale and reduced manufacturing needs, are projected to expand the space economy by making launches routine and affordable, supporting NASA's Artemis program and commercial ventures alike.

Overview

Definition and Principles

A reusable launch vehicle (RLV) is a launch system engineered to deliver payloads to orbit while returning substantially intact to Earth, allowing for recovery, refurbishment, and multiple subsequent flights to achieve cost reductions over single-use alternatives. This design emphasizes the vehicle's ability to perform repeated missions, distinguishing it from expendable launch vehicles that are discarded after one use, thereby prioritizing lifecycle cost efficiency through hardware reuse rather than optimizing for minimal mass in disposable components. Core engineering principles of RLVs center on maintaining structural integrity across multiple stress cycles, including the extreme loads from ascent, orbital insertion, atmospheric reentry, and landing, which necessitate robust materials and higher safety margins compared to expendable systems. Vehicles must incorporate recovery hardware, such as guidance and control systems for precise descent, which adds mass—but enables intact recovery and minimizes refurbishment needs. Propellant loading represents another key principle, involving the refueling of cryogenic or storable propellants prior to each launch, typically hours before liftoff, to support rapid turnaround without replacing propulsion elements. The basic operational cycle of an RLV begins with propellant loading and launch from Earth, followed by ascent to orbit, payload deployment, controlled reentry through the atmosphere, and landing at a designated site for recovery. Post-landing, the vehicle undergoes inspection and refurbishment to verify structural integrity and component functionality, enabling recertification and preparation for relaunch, with goals to reduce turnaround time to days or even hours. This cycle integrates reusability from the conceptual design phase, favoring operability and reliability over peak performance to sustain frequent operations.

Advantages and Challenges

Reusable launch vehicles provide substantial cost advantages by distributing the expense of hardware across multiple missions, thereby lowering per-launch expenditures. For SpaceX's Falcon 9, reusability has reduced launch costs to approximately $67 million as of 2023, compared to $160 million for equivalent expendable systems like the ULA Atlas V. The cost per kilogram to low Earth orbit has similarly declined from $10,000 to about $2,900 through booster reuse and refurbishment as of November 2025, with individual boosters reused up to 30 times amortizing costs effectively. At high flight rates, such as 200 launches annually, reusable systems can achieve costs as low as 52% of expendable vehicles, or roughly $10 million per launch for certain configurations. These vehicles also enhance sustainability by minimizing space debris generation and resource demands. By recovering and reflights components, reusables prevent the addition of discarded stages to orbit, where rocket bodies including spent upper stages account for approximately 5% of cataloged objects and contribute significantly to annual debris mass increases. Reduced manufacturing requirements further lower overall resource consumption and environmental impacts associated with producing new rockets for each mission. Reusability supports higher launch cadence, enabling more frequent missions critical for deploying large satellite constellations or conducting crewed operations. In satellite constellation plans, reusable rocket technology serves as an enhancement for cost reduction (targeting 80-90% savings per launch) and enabling higher launch frequencies in later stages, but not essential for initial deployment; expendable rockets can suffice for building scale through frequent missions, as demonstrated by the Iridium constellation, with reusability acting as "icing on the cake" for long-term sustainability. This increased frequency, driven by lower costs and rapid turnaround, has facilitated the rapid buildup of mega-constellations exceeding 10,000 satellites in some cases. Despite these benefits, reusable launch vehicles face notable challenges, including elevated upfront development costs—often three times those of expendable designs—due to the need for advanced recovery and durability features. Ensuring reliability over 10 or more flights per vehicle adds engineering complexity, with issues like material wear under repeated thermal and mechanical stresses requiring extensive testing and maintenance. The Falcon 9 first stage, for instance, has achieved up to 30 reuses as of November 2025, demonstrating progress but highlighting ongoing demands for robust re-flight guarantees. A primary quantitative trade-off is the approximately 30% reduction in payload fraction to accommodate extra mass for landing legs, grid fins, and return propellant, which initially limits mission capacity but yields net savings through repeated use.

System Configurations

Fully Reusable Vehicles

Fully reusable launch vehicles represent architectures in which all primary elements—such as boosters, core stages, and upper stages—are engineered to separate, reenter the atmosphere, and land intact for recovery, refurbishment, and relaunch. These systems often employ multi-stage configurations where each component contributes to ascent while maintaining independent yet coordinated return capabilities, enabling the entire stack to be reused without discarding major hardware. This integrated approach contrasts with expendable designs by prioritizing durability and minimal maintenance across the vehicle. Key design features enhance the feasibility of full-system reuse. Propellant cross-feeding allows transfer of fuel and oxidizer from lower to upper stages during powered flight, optimizing mass distribution and reducing structural penalties associated with carrying return propellant reserves. In analyzed two-stage configurations, cross-feeding achieves dry mass reductions of 2% to 14% over non-cross-fed parallel-burn setups, directly improving propellant efficiency by allowing stages to deplete tanks more completely before separation. Synchronized recovery trajectories coordinate the descent paths of all elements to converge on designated landing zones, often using powered vertical descents for precision. Unified avionics architectures integrate guidance, navigation, and control systems across stages, streamlining data sharing and autonomous operations for the full stack. SpaceX's Starship exemplifies this architecture as a fully reusable, two-stage-to-orbit system comprising the Super Heavy booster and Starship spacecraft, both utilizing methalox (methane and liquid oxygen) propulsion via Raptor engines. The design incorporates cross-feeding to supply the upper stage from the booster's reserves during ascent, supporting efficient staging. As of October 2025, Starship has completed 11 integrated flight tests from Starbase, Texas, validating elements like booster hot-staging separation and controlled returns, though routine full-stack reuse remains in iterative development. Theoretical performance metrics underscore the scalability of fully reusable vehicles. Designs target reuse cycles exceeding 100 flights per vehicle, amortizing fixed costs and enabling launch cadences of multiple missions per day with minimal refurbishment. Propellant efficiency gains from cross-feeding and optimized trajectories can yield payload capacities up to 150 metric tons to low Earth orbit in reusable mode, with overall system costs potentially reduced by factors of 10 or more through high flight rates.

Partially Reusable Vehicles

Partially reusable vehicles represent a hybrid approach in launch system design, where only specific components, such as the first stage or booster, are recovered and reflown, while others like the upper stage are discarded after use. This configuration prioritizes the reuse of the lower portions of the vehicle, which separate earlier in the ascent and experience less extreme conditions during return. For instance, the SpaceX Falcon 9 employs booster-only reuse, recovering its first stage via powered landing while expending the second stage to achieve orbital insertion. Engineering trade-offs in partially reusable systems favor recovering lower stages due to their suborbital reentry velocities, typically around 2-3 km/s, which reduce thermal and structural stresses compared to upper stages that must decelerate from orbital speeds exceeding 7 km/s. This simplification lowers the mass penalties associated with recovery hardware, such as propulsion reserves and control systems, enabling more feasible refurbishment cycles without compromising payload capacity. The Falcon 9 exemplifies these benefits, with its first stage boosters achieving reuse rates exceeding 30 flights per vehicle by late 2025, demonstrating cost reductions through repeated operations while maintaining operational reliability. Recovery mechanisms for these partial systems integrate aerodynamic and propulsive elements tailored to the booster's descent profile, including deployable grid fins for atmospheric steering and cold gas thrusters for fine attitude control during reentry and landing burns. In the Falcon 9, four titanium grid fins provide aerodynamic deceleration and guidance from hypersonic speeds down to subsonic, while nitrogen cold gas thrusters in podded clusters enable precise orientation without contaminating the main engines. These systems add minimal dry mass—approximately 2-3% of the booster's inert weight—yet ensure pinpoint landings on drone ships or ground pads. The evolution of partial reusability has progressed from initial efforts in recovering secondary components like payload fairings to full-scale stage recovery in operational fleets. SpaceX's program began with successful fairing recoveries using parachutes and recovery vessels starting in 2018, achieving reuse of fairing halves up to 34 times as of November 2025 to incrementally reduce costs. This built toward routine booster recoveries, with over 440 first-stage landings as of November 2025, highlighting a stepwise maturation that balances complexity with economic viability. Refurbishment for partial systems, such as booster inspections, adds 1-2 months per turnaround but supports higher launch cadences than fully expendable designs.

Reusable Upper Stages and Spacecraft

Reusable upper stages represent a critical advancement in launch vehicle architecture, enabling the recovery and reuse of components that operate in orbit after payload separation. These stages typically incorporate propulsion systems for controlled deorbit maneuvers, atmospheric reentry, and powered landings, distinguishing them from expendable designs by reserving propellant margins specifically for return operations. For instance, the Starship upper stage, developed by SpaceX, is engineered for full reusability through propulsive recovery, utilizing its Raptor engines to perform deorbit burns from low Earth orbit (LEO) and subsequent vertical landings on Earth or other celestial bodies. This approach allows the stage to execute precise trajectory adjustments post-mission, facilitating rapid turnaround for subsequent flights. Dedicated spacecraft, such as crewed capsules and cargo variants, further exemplify reusability in orbital operations by integrating robust reentry systems with recovery mechanisms. The Crew Dragon spacecraft, operated by SpaceX under NASA's Commercial Crew Program, features a PICA-X ablative heat shield for atmospheric entry protection and deploys drogue followed by main parachutes for splashdown recovery in the ocean, enabling multiple missions per vehicle with refurbishment between flights. Cargo variants like Cargo Dragon similarly employ heat shields and parachutes, allowing the return of up to 3,000 kg of material from orbit while prioritizing structural integrity for reuse. These designs emphasize autonomous navigation and attitude control during reentry to ensure safe landing zones. Orbital mechanics play a pivotal role in reusable upper stage and spacecraft operations, necessitating careful propellant allocation to balance payload delivery with return capabilities. Stages must retain reserves—typically around 1-2% of total propellant—for deorbit burns that lower perigee into the atmosphere, followed by additional margins for entry corrections and landing propulsion to counteract gravitational and aerodynamic forces, as in Starship's case with approximately 14 metric tons reserved. In the case of Starship, these reserves support not only direct reentry from LEO but also extended missions requiring orbital maneuvers, ensuring the vehicle achieves the necessary velocity reductions without compromising mission objectives. Such allocations are derived from trajectory optimization models that account for delta-v requirements, typically ranging from 100-200 m/s for deorbit and landing in reusable configurations. Integration challenges for reusable upper stages and spacecraft arise from the need to interface with orbital infrastructure, such as docking ports or refueling depots, while maintaining autonomy for return. For LEO operations, systems like Crew Dragon demonstrate reliable autonomous docking to the International Space Station using laser-based sensors and thrusters, followed by undocking and independent reentry trajectories. In higher orbits like geostationary Earth orbit (GEO), challenges intensify due to greater delta-v demands for deorbit, often requiring precise rendezvous for propellant transfer or capture by servicing vehicles, as conceptualized in Starship's in-orbit refueling architecture that involves multiple tanker flights to enable return from deep space trajectories. These operations demand advanced guidance algorithms to handle relative motion and collision avoidance, with ongoing demonstrations achieving full autonomy in recent tests.

Reentry Technologies

Atmospheric Entry Methods

Atmospheric entry for reusable launch vehicles begins with the vehicle's deorbit from orbital velocities, typically around 7.8 km/s for low Earth orbit, where aerodynamic forces in the upper atmosphere initiate deceleration. As the vehicle descends, it encounters hypersonic flow regimes above Mach 5, characterized by strong shock waves that compress and heat the surrounding air to temperatures exceeding 10,000 K, leading to dissociation of molecules like O₂ and N₂. This heating causes ionization of air species, forming a plasma sheath around the vehicle—a low-density ionized layer that can attenuate radio signals and complicate communications during peak heating phases between approximately 100 km and 40 km altitude. The primary deceleration occurs through atmospheric drag, reducing velocity from hypersonic to subsonic speeds (below Mach 1, or roughly 0.3 km/s at sea level) over altitudes from 120 km to 10 km, with peak dynamic pressure and heating concentrated in the 80-50 km range. Reentry trajectories are broadly classified into ballistic and lifting types, each influencing the vehicle's range, heating profile, and control requirements. Ballistic reentry follows a near-parabolic path with negligible lift, relying solely on drag for deceleration, which results in a steep entry angle (typically 1-2 degrees) and concentrated heating over a shorter downrange distance of about 1,000-2,000 km. In contrast, lifting reentry employs vehicles with lift-to-drag ratios (L/D) of 0.3 to 3, using controlled angle of attack—often 30-60 degrees—to generate lift that extends the trajectory, allowing cross-range capabilities up to 5,000 km and more gradual deceleration to manage peak loads. Angle of attack adjustments, combined with bank angle modulation (rolling the vehicle to vector lift), enable trajectory shaping to avoid excessive heating or g-forces while targeting specific landing sites. Guidance during atmospheric entry ensures the vehicle remains within a narrow entry corridor, typically 100-200 km wide, to prevent skip-out to space or excessive atmospheric loading. Modern systems integrate GPS for real-time position and velocity updates, providing accuracy to within 10 meters even through partial plasma attenuation, supplemented by inertial measurement units (IMUs) for attitude determination. Reaction control systems (RCS), consisting of small thrusters firing hydrazine or cold gas, provide fine attitude corrections—up to 5-10 degrees per second—essential for maintaining bank angles and angle of attack in the hypersonic phase where aerodynamic surfaces are ineffective due to low dynamic pressure. These guidance algorithms, often predictive and adaptive, continuously solve for optimal control inputs to minimize cross-track errors and fuel use. The fundamental equation governing deceleration is the aerodynamic drag force: Fd=12ρv2CdAF_d = \frac{1}{2} \rho v^2 C_d A where ρ\rho is atmospheric density, vv is vehicle velocity, CdC_d is the drag coefficient (typically 0.5-1.5 for reentry shapes), and AA is the reference area. This equation derives from the conservation of momentum in fluid dynamics: the force equals the rate at which momentum is imparted to the airflow, approximated as half the dynamic pressure 12ρv2\frac{1}{2} \rho v^2 times the effective area CdAC_d A, validated through wind tunnel and flight data for hypersonic regimes. For reusable vehicles, the ballistic coefficient β=mCdA\beta = \frac{m}{C_d A} (with mm as mass) quantifies entry harshness; lower β\beta (e.g., 100-300 kg/m²) enables higher-altitude deceleration, reducing peak heating by 20-50% compared to higher-β\beta ballistic capsules, thus supporting reusability through gentler trajectories. By modulating CdC_d via shape or angle of attack, reusables optimize FdF_d to achieve controlled energy dissipation over extended paths.

Thermal Protection Systems

Thermal protection systems (TPS) are critical for reusable launch vehicles, shielding the structure from the intense aerodynamic heating encountered during atmospheric reentry while enabling multiple flights with minimal refurbishment. Unlike single-use ablative systems that erode away to dissipate heat, reusable TPS prioritize durability, low mass, and rapid turnaround to support economic viability. These systems must withstand extreme conditions without significant degradation, balancing thermal insulation, structural integrity, and manufacturability. Reentry heating arises primarily from the compression of atmospheric gases in the vehicle's shock layer, generating convective heat fluxes, alongside radiative heating from the hot plasma. Peak surface temperatures can reach up to 3,000°F (1,650°C) for typical orbital reentries, though steeper trajectories or higher velocities may push localized hotspots toward 2,000°C or more. This heating profile influences TPS selection, with windward surfaces facing the highest loads and leeward areas requiring lighter protection. Historical ablative TPS, such as those used in the Apollo program, relied on charring materials like phenolic resins but were not designed for reuse. Reusable TPS materials fall into two broad categories: passive insulators and active cooling systems. Passive reusable systems include ceramic-based options like reinforced carbon-carbon (RCC) composites for leading edges, which endure temperatures up to 1,650°C through oxidation-resistant coatings, and silica or alumina tiles that provide low-conductivity insulation for body flaps and undersides. Metallic TPS, such as Inconel or titanium panels with insulation blankets, offer robustness for moderate heating zones up to 1,100–1,800°F, supporting attach hardware and reducing maintenance needs. Advanced concepts incorporate heat pipes—evaporative devices that redistribute heat via capillary action—to maintain uniform temperatures in metallic structures, preventing hotspots during reentry. Active cooling methods, like transpiration cooling, enhance reusability by injecting coolant through porous walls to form a protective boundary layer, potentially reducing surface temperatures by 50% or more compared to passive systems. This approach uses materials such as sintered metals or ceramics permeated with cryogenics from the vehicle's tanks, enabling higher heat flux tolerance for hypersonic reentries. While still in development, transpiration systems promise 100+ flight lifecycles with minimal mass penalties. Reusability-specific innovations focus on multi-mission durability, such as ablative-reusable hybrids like PICA-X, a phenolic-impregnated carbon ablator variant that chars minimally and allows selective tile reuse after inspection. For SpaceX's Starship, the TPS combines thousands of hexagonal ceramic tiles for the windward side, capable of withstanding 1,400–1,600°C, with ablative blankets underneath; ongoing iterations in 2025 continue to address tile adhesion and ablation resistance challenges for rapid refurbishment, targeting 10–100 flights per set. Recent test flights, including Flights 10 and 11 in August and October 2025, demonstrated survival through reentry heating but highlighted issues like tile loss and heat seepage through gaps. Similarly, NASA's Toughened Uni-piece Fibrous Refractory Oxidation-resistant Composite (TUFROC) offers a reusable alternative for leading edges, integrating fibrous insulation with ceramic coatings for 20+ reuses under 1,650°C conditions. These adaptations reduce replacement costs by emphasizing inspect-and-repair protocols over full overhauls. Validation of TPS performance relies on ground-based arc jet facilities and in-flight data to refine thermal models. NASA's Ames Arc Jet Complex simulates reentry environments with plasma flows up to 10 MW/m² enthalpy, testing material recession, temperature gradients, and structural response on instrumented samples. These tests, combined with telemetry from vehicles like the Space Shuttle or Starship prototypes, enable predictive simulations that correlate heat flux to ablation rates or insulation integrity, ensuring reliability across flight profiles. Over 1,000 arc jet runs have qualified systems like Orion's TPS, confirming multi-flight margins.

Landing and Recovery Systems

Vertical Landing Techniques

Vertical landing techniques for reusable launch vehicles rely on propulsion-based descents to achieve precise, controlled touchdowns after atmospheric reentry. These methods involve a powered descent phase where engines are relighted in the atmosphere to decelerate the vehicle from high velocities, typically using a "hoverslam" or suicide burn maneuver. In this approach, the booster free-falls under gravity until the final moments, at which point the engines ignite to rapidly reduce velocity to near zero just above the surface, avoiding the need for prolonged hovering that would consume additional propellant. Throttle control plays a critical role in the terminal phase, allowing engines to modulate thrust for a soft touchdown, with descent rates managed to achieve minimal vertical velocity at contact. Propellant management is essential for these techniques, as reserves must be allocated specifically for the landing burn without compromising ascent performance. Typically, 5-10% of the first-stage propellant is reserved for recovery operations, including reentry and landing burns; for example, studies indicate about 5.6% for the reentry burn and 1.2% for the landing burn in representative configurations. This allocation ensures sufficient delta-v for reentry and landing while minimizing mass penalties, with the exact reserve optimized based on trajectory and vehicle mass. Control systems enable stability during the descent, primarily through gimbaled engines that provide thrust vector control for attitude adjustments and trajectory corrections. Software algorithms, often employing model predictive control or optimal guidance laws, integrate sensor data to execute the hoverslam profile, countering aerodynamic disturbances and ensuring precise alignment. For instance, the Falcon 9 booster uses its central Merlin engine with gimbal actuation and throttling capabilities ranging from 40% to 100% thrust to maintain stability and achieve controlled deceleration. Key technical challenges in reusable rocket first-stage recovery include achieving high-precision navigation and guidance for trajectory control amid environmental uncertainties, wind effects, and aerodynamic disturbances, deep engine throttling to enable precise descent burns with ratios often exceeding 10:1 while managing combustion stability and performance degradation, and landing buffering systems that absorb residual impact forces through pneumatic-hydraulic or honeycomb mechanisms in deployable legs. These general concepts are addressed through iterative testing and development, paralleling historical efforts in aerospace engineering where incremental refinements overcome initial failures. Success metrics for vertical landings emphasize touchdown accuracy and operational reliability, with modern systems achieving positional errors under 10 meters on landing pads or droneships. As of November 2025, Falcon 9 boosters have achieved 518 successful landings with an overall success rate of about 97.5%, and individual boosters have flown up to 31 times, enabling rapid turnaround and cost reductions.

Horizontal and Alternative Landing Methods

Horizontal landing methods for reusable launch vehicles typically employ winged or lifting-body configurations that utilize aerodynamic lift and drag during reentry and descent to enable a controlled glide to a runway. These systems, exemplified by the Space Shuttle Orbiter, rely on control surfaces such as elevons, rudders, and speed brakes to modulate trajectory and attitude, achieving precision landings on conventional runways with touchdown speeds around 350 km/h. The Space Shuttle's design featured a hypersonic lift-to-drag (L/D) ratio of approximately 1 during initial reentry, transitioning to a subsonic L/D of about 4.5, which allowed for cross-range capabilities of up to 2,000 km and energy management through bank-angle adjustments up to 80 degrees. Modern examples, such as Sierra Space's Dream Chaser spaceplane, build on this approach with a lifting-body shape optimized for unpowered horizontal landings, incorporating composite materials for reusability over 15+ missions while minimizing thermal stress through a lower reentry angle. Alternative passive recovery methods, including parachutes and airbags, are employed for capsules or stages lacking propulsion for powered descent, prioritizing simplicity and lower mass penalties over precision. Parachute systems typically deploy in sequence: a drogue parachute stabilizes and decelerates the vehicle post-reentry, followed by main parachutes that reduce terminal velocity to 5-7 m/s for splashdown or land impact. NASA's Orion crew module, for instance, uses three main parachutes capable of withstanding the failure of one, achieving a descent rate under 6 m/s even in off-nominal conditions, with mortar-fired deployment from the heat shield apex. For terrestrial landings, airbag systems attenuate impact loads; Orion's configuration includes six venting airbags that inflate to cushion a 7.6 m/s vertical touchdown, absorbing energy through controlled deflation and reducing g-forces to below 4 g for crew safety. Aerostatic recovery concepts, such as helicopter capture, target upper stages or boosters by combining parachutes with mid-air apprehension to avoid ocean exposure and enable rapid refurbishment. In this method, a parachute lowers the stage to 1-2 km altitude, where a helicopter uses a hook or line to snag the parachute risers, suspending the payload for transport to shore. Rocket Lab demonstrated this in 2022 with its Electron booster, successfully capturing an inert stage mid-air before controlled release into the ocean, highlighting the technique's potential for lightweight vehicles under 1,000 kg dry mass. Balloon-assisted variants, though less operational, have been explored for gentler descents of small upper stages, using buoyant platforms to slow descent rates to under 1 m/s, but remain conceptual due to deployment complexities. These non-vertical methods offer trade-offs favoring reduced propellant reserves—potentially saving 5-10% of vehicle mass compared to vertical propulsion—but introduce higher refurbishment demands from aerodynamic heating and structural wear on delicate wings or parachutes. Horizontal approaches excel in precision (errors under 1 km) and reusability for crewed vehicles but incur a 15-20% payload penalty from added mass, while parachute systems simplify integration for upper stages at the cost of variable landing sites and post-flight drying. Overall, they complement vertical techniques by suiting configurations where fuel efficiency trumps pinpoint accuracy.

Design and Operational Constraints

Mass and Structural Penalties

Reusable launch vehicles require additional hardware for recovery and reentry, including landing legs, grid fins for aerodynamic control, and heat shields for thermal protection, which collectively increase the dry mass by approximately 10-20%. For instance, the mass of landing gear such as legs and grid fins can raise the first-stage dry mass by 15%. These components are essential for enabling controlled descent and landing but impose a direct penalty on overall vehicle efficiency. This added mass fraction, often denoted as Δmreuse/mtotal0.15\Delta m_{\text{reuse}} / m_{\text{total}} \approx 0.15, reduces the payload capacity to low Earth orbit (LEO) by decreasing the effective Δv\Delta v budget according to the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation: Δv=veln(m0mf),\Delta v = v_e \ln \left( \frac{m_0}{m_f} \right), where vev_e is exhaust velocity, m0m_0 is initial mass, and mfm_f is final mass after burnout; the reusability hardware increases mfm_f, thereby lowering the achievable payload mass. Quantitative assessments indicate payload reductions of up to 50% compared to equivalent expendable vehicles, as seen in reusable two-stage-to-orbit designs where first-stage inert weight rises by 10% and upper-stage by 20%, compounded by reserved propellants for return. To endure repeated launch, ascent, reentry, and landing cycles, structural reinforcements incorporate fatigue-resistant materials such as aluminum-lithium (Al-Li) alloys, which offer superior strength-to-weight ratios and improved cryogenic performance over traditional aluminum alloys. These materials, like alloy 2195, enable thinner walls and higher load capacities while mitigating crack propagation under cyclic stresses. Mitigation strategies focus on lightweight composites, such as graphite-epoxy for propellant tanks, which can achieve 20-40% mass savings relative to metallic structures, and optimized geometries via advanced manufacturing like friction stir welding for Al-Li components. By 2025, these approaches, including carbon-fiber reinforced plastics and refined finite element sizing, have minimized overall vehicle mass penalties to as low as 4% in innovative designs through targeted structural enhancements.

Refurbishment and Reliability Issues

The refurbishment process for reusable launch vehicles begins immediately after recovery, involving a structured workflow of inspection, testing, and maintenance to prepare the hardware for subsequent flights. Non-destructive testing techniques, such as ultrasonic inspections and radiographic evaluations, are employed to assess structural integrity without damaging components, allowing operators to identify potential issues like cracks or material fatigue. Component replacement occurs as needed, with high-wear elements like certain engine parts or thermal protection tiles swapped out; for instance, Merlin engines on the Falcon 9 undergo detailed post-flight analysis and refurbishment at dedicated facilities, with full engine replacements typically required after approximately 10 flights to maintain performance standards. Turnaround times for refurbished boosters have significantly shortened, enabling rapid reuse cycles that typically span days to weeks. SpaceX's Falcon 9 has achieved turnaround times as low as 2 days between flights for select boosters as of late 2025, facilitated by streamlined processes at launch sites and dedicated refurbishment facilities in Texas and California. This workflow culminates in recertification through static fire tests and system checks to verify operational readiness, ensuring the vehicle meets flight safety criteria before relaunch. Reliability remains a core focus, with refurbished vehicles demonstrating exceptional performance metrics. Falcon 9 first-stage boosters have achieved over 497 successful re-flights as of November 2025, with a near-100% mission success rate for reflown hardware—though one reused booster (B1086) was lost post-landing in March 2025—contributing to an overall program reliability exceeding 99% across hundreds of missions. Industry targets for failure rates in reusable systems aim for less than 1% per flight, a threshold met through rigorous post-recovery validation and redundancy in critical systems like propulsion. Cost reduction in reusable rocket design frequently entails reusing or adapting existing components, such as fairing mechanisms from prior expendable systems with minimal modifications, to expedite development and minimize expenses. This strategy, however, can compromise reliability if components are not fully revalidated for reuse stresses, necessitating enhanced testing, redundancy in critical areas, and comprehensive qualification to avert risks like control system electrical shorts or pressure regulation anomalies. Key challenges in refurbishment stem from cumulative wear due to repeated thermal cycles during reentry and high-frequency vibrations from launch and landing, which can accelerate material degradation in engines and structural elements. To address these, predictive maintenance strategies incorporating AI-driven analytics are increasingly utilized to forecast component lifespans and prioritize interventions, minimizing downtime and enhancing long-term reliability. Economically, refurbishment balances upfront hardware savings—estimated at up to 70% reduction in launch costs through reuse—against ongoing expenses for labor, specialized facilities, and testing. For SpaceX, these operational costs have been optimized to under 10% of new booster production expenses, supporting high launch cadences while recouping investments via repeated missions.

Historical Development

Early Concepts and 20th-Century Efforts

The concept of reusable launch vehicles emerged in the early 20th century amid foundational rocketry theories. Russian scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, often regarded as a father of astronautics, along with Friedrich Tsander, proposed early ideas for winged reusable spacecraft capable of reaching orbit and returning to Earth, emphasizing recovery to enable sustained space exploration. These visions built on Tsiolkovsky's 1903 rocket equation and his 1929 multistage rocket proposals, which laid groundwork for efficient propulsion but highlighted the need for recoverable designs to reduce costs. In the mid-20th century, German-American engineer Wernher von Braun advanced reusable rocket concepts through popular media and technical studies. In a 1952 Collier's magazine series, von Braun described a three-stage "Ferry Rocket" system for transporting crews and cargo to orbit, featuring recoverable upper stages with winged reentry vehicles to enable routine spaceflight. His designs, illustrated by artist Chesley Bonestell, influenced public and military interest in reusability, including proposals for recoverable boosters in Walt Disney's 1955 Man in Space television program, which reached over 40 million viewers. However, these ideas relied on unproven materials and propulsion, remaining largely conceptual amid the Cold War focus on ballistic missiles. Soviet efforts in reusable systems culminated in the Buran program during the 1970s and 1980s, driven by competition with the U.S. Space Shuttle. Buran, an orbiter launched atop the expendable Energia rocket, achieved its maiden unmanned orbital flight on November 15, 1988, completing two orbits before an automated runway landing, demonstrating partial reusability through its recoverable airframe and thermal protection. The program, which traced roots to 1960s prototypes like the MiG-105 and Spiral, aimed for 10 planned flights but was curtailed by economic pressures and the USSR's dissolution in 1991, with only one flight executed. U.S. programs in the 1990s pursued practical demonstrations of reusability. The Delta Clipper Experimental (DC-X), a suborbital prototype developed by McDonnell Douglas under DARPA's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (later transferred to NASA), conducted 12 vertical takeoff and landing tests, of which 8 were successful, between 1993 and 1996 at White Sands, validating rapid reusability, cryogenic tank integrity, and autonomous control for single-stage vehicles. Building on this, NASA's X-33 program, partnered with Lockheed Martin from 1996, sought to prove all-composite structures for a reusable single-stage-to-orbit vehicle under the VentureStar concept, investing $912 million by 2001 but canceling the effort due to persistent failures in the composite liquid hydrogen tank, such as leaks during cryogenic testing. Throughout the 20th century, technological limitations hindered widespread adoption of reusable launch vehicles, favoring expendable designs. Materials challenges, including insufficient high-temperature tolerance in composites (limited to ~600°F) and superalloys prone to oxidation and creep at reentry heats exceeding 1800°F, demanded extensive development absent in the post-Apollo era. Structural issues, such as cryogenic tank durability for repeated cycles and thermal protection systems vulnerable to gap heating, compounded costs and risks. Additionally, computing constraints restricted precise real-time control for reentry and landing, with early avionics lacking the processing power for dynamic stability in reusable engines, as seen in the need for advanced fault-tolerant systems only emerging later. These barriers, coupled with high development expenses, entrenched expendable rockets as the dominant paradigm until the century's end.

21st-Century Advancements and Operational Systems

The 21st century marked a pivotal shift in reusable launch vehicle development, driven primarily by private sector innovation and government partnerships, transitioning from experimental prototypes to operational systems capable of routine flights. SpaceX led this resurgence with its Grasshopper test vehicle, a suborbital prototype that demonstrated vertical takeoff and landing (VTVL) capabilities through a series of hops in 2013, reaching altitudes of up to 744 meters during its final test on October 7. These tests validated propulsion and control systems essential for booster recovery, paving the way for orbital applications. Building on this foundation, SpaceX achieved a historic milestone on December 21, 2015, with the first successful return-to-launch-site (RTLS) landing of a Falcon 9 first-stage booster following an orbital payload deployment, enabling the vehicle's reuse on subsequent missions. By October 2025, SpaceX had recorded over 500 successful Falcon 9 booster landings, with individual boosters achieving up to 31 flights and many flying more than 20 times, establishing reusability as a core operational practice that supported high-cadence launches. Other private entities contributed to suborbital and conceptual advancements, while NASA facilitated crewed reuse. Blue Origin's New Shepard, a fully reusable suborbital system, completed its first powered booster landing on November 23, 2015, during an uncrewed test flight reaching 100 kilometers altitude, and has since flown 36 missions by October 2025, including multiple crewed space tourism flights with rapid turnaround times between reuses. United Launch Alliance (ULA) explored partial reusability for its Vulcan Centaur rocket, announcing in August 2025 progress on recovering the BE-4 engine section to lower costs, though operational demonstrations remain in development. NASA's Commercial Crew Program played a crucial role by certifying SpaceX's Crew Dragon spacecraft for reuse in June 2020, allowing the capsule to fly multiple astronaut missions to the International Space Station starting with Crew-2 in 2021, thereby integrating human-rated reusability into U.S. spaceflight operations. Key milestones in scaling reusability included SpaceX's Starship program, which began prototype testing in 2019 with suborbital hops and evolved to full-stack orbital attempts by 2023, achieving six successful integrated flights by October 2025 despite early challenges like stage separations and reentry. These efforts addressed prior design constraints through iterative improvements in materials and software, enabling rapid prototyping at Starbase, Texas. Overall, reusability drove substantial cost reductions; for instance, Falcon 9 launches dropped to approximately $67 million per flight by 2025, compared to over $200 million for comparable expendable systems a decade earlier, primarily due to booster refurbishment efficiencies and amortized development. This economic impact has democratized access to space, supporting constellations like Starlink and fostering a competitive launch market.

Key Operational Techniques

Powered Return to Launch Site

The Powered Return to Launch Site (RTLS) maneuver enables the first stage of a reusable launch vehicle to return directly to the originating launch pad or an adjacent landing zone following separation from the upper stage. This technique is particularly suited for missions with lower energy requirements, such as low Earth orbit insertions, where the booster does not travel far downrange. The process relies on vertical takeoff, vertical landing (VTVL) principles, adapted for site-specific recovery. The maneuver sequence commences immediately after stage separation, typically at altitudes around 70-80 km and velocities of approximately 2 km/s. The boost-back burn involves reigniting a subset of the first-stage engines—often three out of nine for systems like the Falcon 9—to reverse the booster's horizontal velocity and arc its trajectory back toward the launch site; this burn lasts about 20-30 seconds and occurs roughly 2-3 minutes post-launch. Following a ballistic coast phase, the reentry burn activates one or more engines for 15-25 seconds at altitudes of 50-70 km to decelerate the vehicle, reducing peak heating and dynamic loads during atmospheric entry, where grid fins provide steering for stability. The sequence culminates in the landing burn, igniting the center engine (or multiple engines in a sequenced pattern) about 30-60 seconds before touchdown to nullify residual velocity, achieving a soft vertical landing with throttle control for precision. Fuel budgeting for RTLS demands precise allocation of residual propellant after ascent, reserving margins for the boost-back, reentry, and landing burns while maximizing payload delivery. Compared to downrange recovery, RTLS requires additional propellant specifically for the boost-back burn to counteract downrange momentum, typically necessitating 3-5% more of the first stage's total propellant load to enable the return without compromising upper-stage performance. This reservation, drawn from the overall first-stage capacity of around 400 metric tons for vehicles like the Falcon 9, can reduce mission payload capability by up to 60% relative to expendable profiles, though optimizations in trajectory design mitigate this penalty for suitable missions. Achieving RTLS demands stringent precision in navigation and control, with landing tolerances on the order of tens of meters to ensure safe touchdown on concrete pads or zones. Autonomous systems, relying on onboard avionics, GPS receivers, inertial measurement units, and real-time telemetry, handle the entire descent without ground intervention, computing trajectory corrections via algorithms that integrate sensor data for grid fin actuation and engine throttling. SpaceX's Falcon 9 exemplifies this, having completed numerous RTLS landings at Landing Zone 1 near Cape Canaveral with high reliability, leveraging redundant flight computers to manage uncertainties like wind shear or atmospheric variability. Key advantages of RTLS include facilitating rapid turnaround for booster reuse, as the recovered stage remains at the launch site without requiring maritime retrieval or overland transport, thereby streamlining logistics and reducing operational delays. By 2025, this has supported SpaceX's high-cadence launch manifest, with Falcon 9 boosters routinely refurbished and reflown within weeks, contributing to cost savings estimated at over 30% per mission through minimized recovery expenses and enhanced reliability.

Other Recovery and Reuse Strategies

Downrange recovery strategies extend the operational flexibility of reusable launch vehicles beyond launch-site returns, accommodating missions with heavier payloads that require expending more propellant during ascent. These methods typically involve precision landings on autonomous drone ships positioned hundreds of kilometers offshore or on remote land-based pads, allowing the first stage to achieve higher orbital insertions. For instance, SpaceX's Falcon 9 has executed over 400 successful downrange landings on drone ships as of August 2025, demonstrating the reliability of this approach for geostationary transfer orbit missions. This technique prioritizes payload capacity over immediate site recovery, with the drone ships equipped for stable platform landings in open ocean conditions. Capture methods represent innovative alternatives for recovering lighter components like payload fairings, often using airborne or ship-based systems to minimize water exposure and simplify refurbishment. SpaceX initially tested helicopter-assisted drops of fairing halves into nets aboard fast-moving recovery ships to simulate descent and capture dynamics, gathering data on structural integrity during 2018 trials. Although early attempts at dry net capture were abandoned by 2021 in favor of wet recovery—where fairings splash down under parachutes and are retrieved by ships using cranes or divers— this evolution has enabled routine reuse, with fairing halves re-flown on 307 missions at 100% success rate by February 2025. Such techniques highlight the trade-offs in recovery complexity for components not requiring full vertical landing capabilities. Following downrange or capture recovery, transport and return logistics form a critical chain to enable rapid turnaround and multi-site reuse. Recovered boosters are secured vertically on the drone ship's deck using custom fixtures to withstand sea transit, with the vessel then towed or self-propelled back to port over 1-3 days depending on weather and location. Upon arrival, the booster is offloaded via crane onto barges or trucks for horizontal transport to processing facilities, often covering distances between sites like Florida's Cape Canaveral and California's Vandenberg Space Force Base. This global reuse infrastructure, refined through iterative operations, supports booster relocations for optimized launch cadences while adding logistical steps that influence overall refurbishment timelines. Emerging strategies like in-orbit refueling expand reuse paradigms to upper stages and spacecraft, decoupling recovery from Earth return for interplanetary missions. SpaceX's Starship architecture envisions tanker variants launching to low Earth orbit to transfer cryogenic propellants—methane and oxygen—to a dedicated orbital depot or directly to the target vehicle via docking ports and fluid lines. An intervehicular propellant transfer demonstration is planned for 2026, paving the way for full-scale operations, with plans for a Starship-derived depot to be refilled by up to a dozen tankers for lunar missions by 2026. This approach enables extended vehicle lifespans without atmospheric reentry penalties, though it demands precise cryogenic management to prevent boil-off.

Examples of Reusable Systems

Orbital Launch Vehicles

Orbital launch vehicles represent the core of reusable space access, enabling repeated use of major rocket components to reduce costs and increase launch frequency for missions to low Earth orbit (LEO) and beyond. The pioneering Falcon 9, developed by SpaceX, achieved the first orbital-class first-stage reuse in 2017 and has since become the workhorse of the industry, with over 500 successful booster landings by November 2025, demonstrating a landing success rate exceeding 98% across thousands of attempts. This partial reusability—recovering the first stage via propulsive landing on drone ships or ground pads—has enabled payload capacities of up to 22,800 kg to LEO in reusable configuration, supporting a diverse array of commercial, scientific, and national security missions. Particularly, Falcon 9 has played a pivotal role in deploying the Starlink satellite constellation, where reusability has achieved cost savings of up to 80% per launch compared to traditional expendable rockets, enabling higher launch frequencies for scaling the network in later stages. Although not essential for initial deployment, which can utilize expendable or early partially reusable configurations to build initial scale through frequent missions, reusability serves as an enhancement for long-term sustainability. Advancements toward full reusability are exemplified by SpaceX's Starship system, which underwent multiple integrated flight tests in 2024 and 2025, including engine reuse and successful booster catches achieved by late 2025—such as grabbing a 70-meter rocket out of the sky and landing it back on the pad using the launch tower's mechanical arms (known as Mechazilla)—with successes in multiple test flights, including Flight 8 in March 2025 and subsequent ones, aiming for rapid turnaround of both stages without refurbishment. While still in developmental testing with 11 flights completed by October 2025, Starship targets 150 metric tons to LEO in fully reusable mode, positioning it as a super heavy-lift vehicle for ambitious goals like satellite constellations and interplanetary transport. Full reusability in Starship is projected to enable 80-90% cost reductions per launch, supporting unprecedented launch cadences for mega-constellations such as an expanded Starlink, though initial build-outs may rely on existing systems like Falcon 9 for establishing scale. European efforts, led by ArianeGroup under the Themis program, are exploring reusable first-stage technologies as an evolution from the expendable Ariane 6, with prototype testing progressing in 2025 to address competitiveness gaps. Emerging players are also advancing reusable orbital systems. Relativity Space's Terran R focuses on 3D-printed manufacturing for rapid production and first-stage recovery, targeting 23,500 kg to LEO in reusable mode with a maiden flight anticipated in 2026. Similarly, Rocket Lab's Neutron medium-lift rocket plans sea-based first-stage landings, offering 13,000–15,000 kg to LEO reusable, with its debut launch scheduled for 2026.
VehicleOperatorReuse TypeFirst Reuse DateNotes
Falcon 9/HeavySpaceXFirst stage (propulsive landing)2017Over 500 successful landings by November 2025; 99%+ recovery success rate; 22,800 kg to LEO reusable for Falcon 9, 26,700 kg for Heavy sides/center core.
StarshipSpaceXFull stack (both stages, tower catch for booster)2025 (successful catches starting March)11 integrated tests by October 2025, including multiple successful booster catches such as Flight 8 in March 2025; advancing to operational full reuse; 150 t to LEO reusable.
Themis (Ariane evolution)ArianeGroup/ESAFirst stage partial reusabilityDevelopmental (2025 prototypes)Testing reusable booster tech for Ariane 6 successor; aims for cost reduction; payload TBD.
Terran RRelativity SpaceFirst stage (propulsive)Planned 2026+In advanced development with 50%+ design release by mid-2025; 23,500 kg to LEO reusable.
NeutronRocket LabFirst stage (sea landing)Planned 2026+First launch in 2026; 13,000–15,000 kg to LEO reusable; focuses on constellation deployments.

Reusable Spacecraft

Reusable orbital spacecraft represent a critical advancement in space transportation, enabling repeated missions to low Earth orbit for crewed and cargo delivery while reducing costs through refurbishment and relaunch. These vehicles, distinct from launch systems, focus on orbital operations, docking, and safe return, primarily serving the International Space Station (ISS) for human spaceflight and logistics. Key examples include capsules and spaceplanes designed for multiple flights, with reentry methods like parachutes or gliding optimized for structural integrity and rapid turnaround. The Crew Dragon, developed by SpaceX in partnership with NASA under the Commercial Crew Program, is a crewed and cargo-capable capsule that has achieved operational reusability since 2020. It supports up to seven astronauts or equivalent cargo, docking autonomously to the ISS for crew rotations and resupply missions. As of November 2025, the most-flown Crew Dragon capsules, such as Endeavour, have completed up to 7 reuses, with NASA and SpaceX extending the design life to 15 missions per vehicle through rigorous post-flight inspections and component replacements. Reusability is enhanced by its heat shield, which withstands multiple reentries, and landing via four main parachutes that deploy sequentially for a soft ocean splashdown, allowing recovery and refurbishment within months. Key missions include Demo-2 (first crewed flight in 2020), ongoing NASA Crew rotations (e.g., Crew-8 in 2024 and Crew-9 in 2025), and private Axiom Space missions to the ISS. Sierra Space's Dream Chaser is an uncrewed cargo spaceplane designed as a lifting-body glider for ISS resupply, emphasizing rapid reusability with a planned lifespan of 15 or more missions per vehicle. It carries up to 5,500 kg of pressurized and unpressurized cargo, launching atop a Vulcan Centaur rocket and returning via runway landing to facilitate quick turnaround without ocean recovery logistics. As of November 2025, the vehicle remains in development, with its inaugural free-flyer demonstration mission delayed to late 2026 due to integration challenges and NASA contract modifications; it will initially operate without ISS docking to validate reusability features. The glider's winged design enables precise horizontal landings on runways like Kennedy Space Center's Shuttle Landing Facility, tying reusability to minimal wear on aerodynamic surfaces. Future roles include ISS cargo delivery under NASA's Commercial Resupply Services program. Boeing's CST-100 Starliner, also part of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, is a crewed capsule intended for up to seven astronauts, with the crew module designed for reusability up to 10 flights and a six-month turnaround. It features autonomous docking to the ISS and lands via three main parachutes for splashdown or airbag-assisted ground landing, supporting crew transport and potential cargo roles. As of November 2025, Starliner has not achieved operational reusability due to ongoing certification delays from thruster and helium leak issues during its 2024 crewed test flight (Crew Flight Test), with the next uncrewed flight targeted for early 2026; the service module remains expendable. Despite challenges, NASA maintains plans for Starliner to complement Crew Dragon in ISS crew rotations once certified.
SpacecraftOperatorReuse Flights (as of Nov 2025)Key Missions
Crew DragonSpaceX/NASAUp to 7 per capsuleISS Crew rotations (Crew-1 to Crew-9), Axiom-1 to Axiom-4
Dream ChaserSierra SpacePlanned 15+ (not yet flown)Planned ISS cargo resupply (CRS-33+), free-flyer demo 2026
StarlinerBoeing/NASAPlanned 10 (not yet achieved)Crew Flight Test (2024), planned OFT-2 (2026)

Suborbital and Test Vehicles

Suborbital and test vehicles play a pivotal role in advancing reusable launch technologies by enabling controlled experiments with vertical propulsion, landing systems, and recovery processes in environments below orbital velocity. These platforms focus on short-duration missions, such as low-altitude hops and high-altitude suborbital trajectories, to validate design iterations, reduce development risks, and gather data on material stresses and control algorithms without the need for full orbital infrastructure. By iteratively testing reusability elements like engine relights and autonomous guidance, they serve as foundational steps toward scalable orbital systems. Blue Origin's New Shepard exemplifies a mature suborbital reusable vehicle, consisting of a single-stage liquid hydrogen/oxygen booster and a crew capsule for tourism and scientific payloads. Launched vertically from West Texas, the system reaches approximately 100 km altitude before the booster performs a powered descent and landing near the pad, while the capsule deploys parachutes for a soft touchdown. This configuration has enabled rapid reuse cycles, with minimal refurbishment between flights. As of November 2025, New Shepard has achieved 36 successful missions, including crewed flights carrying 86 humans, demonstrating reliable suborbital reusability through repeated vertical landings and booster reflights. A key milestone includes sustaining operations with the same hardware fleet across multiple years, contributing to cost reductions in access to space. SpaceX's Starship prototypes, particularly the SN series (SN8 through SN15), conducted essential suborbital hop tests from 2020 to 2021 at the Boca Chica facility in Texas to refine reusability features for the larger Starship system. These stainless-steel prototypes, powered by Raptor engines, performed controlled ascents to altitudes of 6–12 km, followed by flip maneuvers, atmospheric reentry simulations, and propulsive landings to test grid fin stability and engine throttling. While early attempts (SN8–SN14) resulted in hard landings or explosions that provided critical failure data, SN15 achieved the first successful high-altitude landing in May 2021, validating the belly-flop and catch-up burn techniques central to vertical reusability. These tests, though not involving hardware reuse themselves, established empirical foundations for subsequent prototypes and full-stack flights. Rocket Lab's Electron rocket incorporates reusability trials focused on its first stage and kick stage (the Photon upper stage), aimed at enabling economical small satellite launches. The carbon-composite first stage uses electric pump-fed Rutherford engines for precise control during descent, with recovery via parachutes and splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. The kick stage, evolved into the Photon spacecraft, supports suborbital payload delivery and has been tested for post-separation recovery to assess refurbishment viability for future missions. As of 2025, Rocket Lab has conducted multiple first-stage recoveries—beginning with intact splashdowns in 2020 and advancing to structural upgrades for potential powered landings—while kick stage trials emphasize orbit insertion and deorbit maneuvers to preserve hardware integrity. These efforts represent incremental progress toward operational reuse in the small-launch market. The following table summarizes key suborbital and test vehicles, highlighting their contributions to reusability development:
VehicleOperatorTest TypeReuse CountStatus
New ShepardBlue OriginSuborbital hops, vertical landings, payload delivery36 total flights; boosters reused 5–12 times eachOperational
Starship SN seriesSpaceXHigh-altitude hops, propulsive maneuvers0 (prototypes one-time use)Testing complete; informs ongoing program
Electron (kick stage trials)Rocket LabFirst-stage recovery, upper-stage payload validation3+ first-stage recoveries; 0 full reusesTrials ongoing

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.