The Cost-to-Orbit Collapse: Reusable Heavy Lift
Executive Summary
The price of reaching orbit has fallen further in fifteen years than in the previous fifty, and reusability is the reason. The Space Shuttle delivered payload to low Earth orbit (LEO) at roughly $54,500/kg on a total-program basis [1]. A reused Falcon 9 today lists at $2,700–$3,250/kg to LEO ($69.75M for ~22,800 kg) [2][3] — a ~16–20× reduction in nominal terms over a single generation. The decisive number, though, is not the price but the internal marginal cost, reported around $629/kg for a reflown Falcon 9 [3]. That gap — between what SpaceX charges and what it spends — is the entire economic story: the collapse has already happened on the cost side; the price side is lagging because there is no competitive pressure forcing it down.
The next step-change is fully reusable super-heavy lift. SpaceX's Starship targets 100–150 t to LEO with both stages recovered; credible near-term analyst estimates cluster at $100–$500/kg, with Musk's long-run $10/kg target treated as aspirational and unproven [4]. Rocket Lab's partially reusable Neutron (13 t to LEO with downrange booster recovery) extends the model to the medium-lift class, with a maiden flight slipped to Q4 2026 [5].
Cadence is the proof of concept. SpaceX flew 165 Falcon-family orbital missions in 2025 (170 including Starship test flights) — about 85% of the U.S. total and nearly twice China's output — its sixth consecutive annual record, up from 25 in 2020 [6]. The FAA licensed a record 148 commercial operations in FY2024, up >30% year-on-year, and forecasts that figure could more than double by FY2028 [7].
Demand is responding, not saturating. SpaceX operates >9,000 Starlink satellites [8]; AST SpaceMobile is deploying the largest commercial arrays ever flown to LEO for direct-to-device service [8]; and the U.S. Golden Dome missile-defense initiative — with cost estimates from $175B (White House) to $1.2T (CBO) [9] — assumes a proliferated, launch-hungry space architecture that only cheap lift makes affordable.
Bottom line: The cost-to-orbit collapse is real, durable, and already an order of magnitude deep on a marginal-cost basis — a reused Falcon 9 costs SpaceX ~$629/kg [3] versus the Shuttle's ~$54,500/kg [1]. Delta-V estimates a credible ~$150–$400/kg internal Starship floor by ~2030 in the central case (Delta-V estimate). But the saving accrues first to the vehicle owner, not the customer: list prices have barely moved because no rival can yet compete. The binding constraint on the space economy is shifting away from mass-to-orbit toward spectrum, satellite manufacturing throughput, and on-orbit operations.
Context and Scope
This report quantifies the falling cost of reaching orbit and traces its consequences across two Delta-V coverage domains in particular — launch vehicles, cadence and cost-to-orbit (domain 1) and space-economy financing, contracts and unit economics (domain 7) — with spillover into constellations (domain 2), defense space (domain 4) and in-space services (domain 3).
The system boundary is payload mass delivered to a reference orbit (LEO, ~28.5°/200–550 km unless noted) and the all-in cost of delivering it. Three cost concepts must be kept distinct, because conflating them is the single most common error in launch-economics commentary:
- List/transaction price — what a customer pays per kg (e.g., Falcon 9 ~$2,700–$3,250/kg [2][3]). This embeds margin and reflects market power, not cost.
- Internal marginal cost — what the operator spends to fly one additional mission with an already-built, reusable vehicle (Falcon 9 reportedly ~$629/kg [3]). This is the number that governs how low prices could go under competition.
- Fully-burdened / amortized cost — marginal cost plus an allocation of vehicle build, R&D, range, and fixed overhead across the flight life. This is the honest long-run figure and the basis of the Delta-V model below.
In scope: the $/kg trajectory and its drivers (reuse count, refurbishment, cadence, fairing recovery); demand response; scenarios to ~2030; and public-market equity implications. Out of scope: deep-space Δv and trans-lunar injection economics (touched only as demand), detailed propulsion thermodynamics, and any non-public/ITAR-restricted program detail.
Technology Landscape and State of the Art
The reusability mechanism
Cost-to-orbit is dominated not by propellant — which is a few percent of launch cost — but by hardware amortization. An expendable rocket discards its entire airframe, engines and avionics every flight; a reusable rocket spreads that capital across many flights and substitutes a (much smaller) refurbishment cost. The unit economics therefore hinge on three levers:
- Reuse count (N) — how many times a booster/airframe flies. Falcon 9 booster B1067 reached 33 flights by early 2026 [3]; SpaceX targets far higher for Starship.
- Refurbishment fraction (f) — refurb cost as a share of new-build. Falcon 9 booster refurbishment is reported at ~10% of a new rocket [3]; fairing recovery and reuse remove a ~$6M-class component from the expendable column.
- Cadence — flights per year, which amortizes fixed costs (workforce, range, facilities) and is what makes a high N achievable in a reasonable calendar window.
The Falcon 9 second stage is still expended; Starship's leap is upper-stage reuse, which removes the last expended hardware block. That is also the hardest, least-proven part: orbital-class upper-stage recovery and rapid reflight has not yet been demonstrated at production cadence (as of mid-2026).
Competing Pathways
| Pathway | Principle | Payload to LEO | Reuse status | $/kg basis | TRL / Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Space Shuttle (retired) | Partially reusable winged orbiter + SRBs + expended tank | ~27,500 kg [1] | Partial, high refurb | ~$54,500/kg program [1] | Retired 2011 |
| Falcon 9 (reused) | RTLS/droneship booster + expended 2nd stage + reused fairings | ~22,800 kg [2] | Booster ≤33 flights [3] | ~$2,700–$3,250/kg price; ~$629/kg internal [3] | Operational, mature |
| Falcon Heavy (reused) | 3 reusable cores + expended 2nd stage | ~63,800 kg [10] | Side cores reused | ~$1,500/kg ($97M list) [10] | Operational, low cadence |
| Neutron (Rocket Lab) | Reusable 1st stage, expended 2nd stage, integrated fairing | 13,000 kg (downrange) [5] | Booster reuse (planned) | ~$3,850/kg projected [5] | In development, maiden Q4 2026 [5] |
| Starship (SpaceX) | Fully reusable booster + ship; on-orbit refueling | 100–150 t target [4] | Both stages (unproven) | $100–$500/kg analyst range [4] | Test flights; orbital reuse unproven |
The pattern is clear: each generation removes more expended hardware and pushes N higher. Falcon Heavy already undercuts Falcon 9 on $/kg list price (~$1,500/kg vs ~$2,700/kg) precisely because it amortizes more recovered mass per launch [2][10] — but its low cadence limits the benefit. Starship is the only architecture that attacks the upper stage, which is why its projected $/kg is an order of magnitude below Falcon 9 — and why so much rides on capabilities not yet demonstrated.
Techno-Economic Analysis
Cost Model and Assumptions
The Delta-V model computes fully-burdened internal $/kg as:
$/kg = [ C_build/N + C_refurb + C_2nd-stage + C_ops/cadence-share ] ÷ payload_kg
where C_build is amortized over N flights, C_refurb is the per-flight refurbishment, C_2nd-stage captures any expended upper stage, and C_ops is fixed cost allocated by cadence. All inputs below are either cited or labelled Delta-V estimate.
| Parameter | Value | Unit | Basis / Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shuttle program $/kg | ~54,500 | $/kg | Total program ÷ payload [1] |
| Falcon 9 list price | 69.75M / ~22,800 | $ / kg | SpaceX list, ~$2,700–$3,250/kg [2][3] |
| Falcon 9 internal marginal cost | ~629 | $/kg | Reported ~$15M reflight ÷ payload [3] |
| Falcon 9 booster reuses (max) | 33 | flights | B1067, early 2026 [3] |
| Booster refurb fraction | ~10% | % of new-build | [3] |
| Falcon Heavy list $/kg | ~1,500 | $/kg | $97M ÷ 63,800 kg [10] |
| Neutron payload (downrange recovery) | 13,000 | kg | [5] |
| Neutron projected $/kg | ~3,850 | $/kg | Analyst estimate [5] |
| Starship payload to LEO (target) | 100–150 | t | [4] |
| Starship near-term $/kg (analyst range) | 100–500 | $/kg | [4] |
| Starship marginal cost target | ~$2M / flight | $ | High-reuse case [4] |
| 2025 Falcon-family orbital flights | 165 | flights/yr | [6] |
The Take: The most decision-relevant figure in launch economics is the price-to-cost ratio, not the headline $/kg. At a ~$2,720/kg list price and a ~$629/kg internal cost, a reused Falcon 9 carries an implied gross margin near 75–77% (Delta-V estimate, from [2][3]). That margin is not a SpaceX quirk — it is stored deflation. It is the buffer the incumbent can release the moment a credible competitor (Neutron, New Glenn, a Chinese reusable) reaches reliable cadence. The cost collapse has therefore already occurred; the price collapse is a future event that competition, not physics, will trigger.
Levelized Cost / Unit Economics — the $/kg trajectory
The historical and projected trajectory (LEO, internal-cost basis where available, otherwise list price; vintages noted):
| Era / Vehicle | Year | $/kg to LEO | Cost concept | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Space Shuttle | 1981–2011 | ~54,500 | Program total | [1] |
| Falcon 9 (expendable, early) | ~2010 | ~10,000+ | List | [1][2] |
| Falcon 9 (reused, list) | 2024–26 | ~2,700–3,250 | List price | [2][3] |
| Falcon Heavy (reused, list) | 2024–26 | ~1,500 | List price | [10] |
| Falcon 9 (reused, internal) | 2024–26 | ~629 | Marginal cost | [3] |
| Neutron (projected) | 2027+ | ~3,850 | Projected price | [5] |
| Starship (analyst near-term) | 2027–30 | ~100–500 | Projected | [4] |
| Starship (Musk long-run target) | 2030s+ | ~10 | Aspiration | [4] |
The shape is a classic learning curve punctuated by an architectural step — a smooth Falcon-era decline, then a discontinuity at full reuse. The internal-cost line (~$629/kg today) already sits ~86× below the Shuttle. The open question is not whether Starship lowers cost but by how much, and how much of it reaches the customer.
Delta-V central-case Starship floor (Delta-V estimate). Take a ~$2M marginal cost per flight at high reuse [4], a conservative steady-state payload of ~100 t (below the 100–150 t target to allow for performance reserve and full reusability penalties), and add an amortized allocation of vehicle build and fixed ops. Marginal alone implies ~$20/kg; loading realistic build amortization (lower N than advertised in early operations), upper-stage refurbishment that is not yet near 10%, and range/ops gives a fully-burdened ~$150–$400/kg by ~2030 in the central case. This is ~7–18× below today's Falcon 9 list price but 15–40× above the $10/kg aspiration. The gap between marginal (~$20/kg) and burdened (~$150–$400/kg) is the early-operations tax: low N and immature upper-stage reuse dominate until cadence and reflight life mature.
Sensitivity
The fully-burdened $/kg is most sensitive, in order, to: reuse count N, upper-stage refurbishment fraction, realized payload mass, and cadence (which sets fixed-cost amortization). One-way sensitivity around the Delta-V central case:
| Driver | Downside | Central | Upside | Effect on $/kg |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reuse count N (ship) | 5 | 20 | 100+ | High — build amortization dominates at low N |
| Upper-stage refurb fraction | 40% | 20% | <10% | High — the unproven lever |
| Realized payload | 50 t | 100 t | 150 t | Medium — linear denominator |
| Cadence (flights/yr) | 20 | 50 | 100+ | Medium — fixed-cost spread |
| Catastrophic loss rate | high | nominal | nil | Tail risk — a loss resets N |
The two left-tail drivers (low N and high upper-stage refurb) are exactly the ones not yet demonstrated. A world where Starship's ship flies 5 times and needs 40% refurb lands closer to $1,000–$2,000/kg burdened (Delta-V estimate) — better than Falcon 9 but not transformative. The transformative outcome ($/kg in the low hundreds) requires the upper stage to behave like the booster already does.
Market and Demand Outlook
Falling cost has not produced slack capacity; it has produced induced demand — Jevons-paradox dynamics, where cheaper access expands the set of economically viable missions faster than supply grows. Three demand engines:
- Constellations. Starlink alone is >9,000 satellites on orbit [8] and remains the dominant single payload class. Direct-to-device entrants (AST SpaceMobile flying the largest commercial LEO arrays ever deployed [8]) and Earth-observation/PNT fleets extend the curve. Each generation of satellite is heavier and more numerous, absorbing the new lift.
- Defense. The Golden Dome architecture and SDA's Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture assume thousands of sensor and interceptor satellites; cost estimates span $175B–$1.2T [9]. Defense is the demand source least sensitive to price and most sensitive to assured, sovereign, high-cadence access — a structural tailwind for U.S. launchers.
- In-space. Stations, servicing, logistics and manufacturing only close their business cases below a cost-to-orbit threshold; sub-$1,000/kg is roughly where many of these models move from speculative to marginal.
Scenarios to ~2030 ($/kg and U.S./allied launch capacity)
Three scenarios (Delta-V estimates, built on cited cadence and cost inputs):
| Scenario | Starship reuse maturity | Central $/kg (LEO, burdened) | Annual U.S.+allied orbital flights ~2030 | Customer price realized |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bull | Upper-stage reuse proven, high N, ~100+ flights/yr | ~$100–200 | ~400–600 | Falls toward ~$500–1,000/kg as New Glenn/Neutron compete |
| Central | Partial upper-stage reuse, moderate N | ~$150–400 | ~300–450 | Falcon-class price sticky ~$2,000–2,700/kg; Starship priced opportunistically |
| Bear | Upper-stage reuse delayed, low N, a loss event | ~$1,000–2,000 | ~200–300 | Little change; Falcon 9 remains workhorse |
Across all three, cadence keeps rising — the FAA's forecast of licensed operations more than doubling by FY2028 [7] holds even in the bear case, because Falcon 9 and emerging competitors carry the load if Starship slips. The variable is cost per kg, not whether access expands.
What this unlocks. A durable sub-$1,000/kg world makes mass a non-binding constraint for most commercial constellations: satellite manufacturing throughput and spectrum/orbital-slot rights become the bottleneck. A sub-$500/kg world (bull case) brings in-space manufacturing, large-aperture defense sensors, and propellant depots into the money, and makes "launch it again rather than service it" the default — pressuring the very on-orbit-servicing thesis that cheap launch was supposed to enable.
Feasibility, Scale-Up, and Risk
The cost collapse to ~$629/kg internal is demonstrated and durable for Falcon-class lift — this is not a forecast. The Starship step-change is plausible but unproven, gated on upper-stage reuse and cadence. The honest read: Falcon-era economics are a floor the industry already stands on; Starship economics are an option, not a given.
Risk Register
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation / Tell |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starship upper-stage reuse never reaches low refurb | Medium | High — caps the step-change at ~$1,000/kg | Watch reflight interval & refurb disclosures |
| Single-provider concentration (SpaceX ~85% U.S. flights [6]) | High | High — pricing power, supply-chain single point | New Glenn/Neutron reaching cadence |
| Catastrophic loss resets reuse count / grounds fleet | Medium | High — N is the dominant cost lever | Anomaly response time, return-to-flight |
| Demand disappoints (constellation overbuild, defense budget cut) | Medium | Medium — cadence amortization weakens | Golden Dome appropriations, Starlink capex |
| Regulatory throughput (range, FAA, environmental) | Medium | Medium — caps cadence regardless of cost | Part 450 reform pace [7] |
| Price stays sticky; cost saving not passed through | High | Low for operators, High for customers | Competitor list prices |
Market and Equity Implications
The cost-to-orbit collapse is owned by a private company — SpaceX is not publicly traded — so the listed-equity exposure is indirect: the names that win are those whose business models are enabled by cheap lift (constellation operators, defense-space, in-space services) and the one credible listed competitor to the launch monopoly. This is exposure commentary, not investment advice; see Disclosures.
| Company (Ticker) | Exposure | Reasoning (tied to the thesis) | Horizon |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rocket Lab (RKLB, Nasdaq) | Positive | Only listed pure-play building a reusable medium-lift vehicle (Neutron, 13 t, maiden Q4 2026 [5]); FY2025 revenue ~$602M, +38% y/y, ~$1.85B backlog [11]. The one public way to own the reusability thesis directly — but valuation rich and Neutron unproven. | 12–36 mo |
| AST SpaceMobile (ASTS, Nasdaq) | Positive | Direct-to-device constellation; heavy next-gen arrays only deployable affordably because lift is cheap [8]. Pure demand-side beneficiary; pre-scale, capital-intensive. | 24–48 mo |
| Redwire (RDW, NYSE) | Positive | In-space infrastructure/manufacturing; FY2025 revenue ~$335M, +10% [11]. Cheaper lift is a prerequisite for the in-space-services TAM. | 24–48 mo |
| Intuitive Machines (LUNR, Nasdaq) | Neutral-Positive | Cislunar logistics; cheap heavy lift expands lunar cadence but cadence/funding lumpy (FY2025 rev ~$210M, −8% [11]). Thesis-aligned, execution-dependent. | 24–48 mo |
| Planet Labs (PL, NYSE) | Neutral | EO operator; cheap launch lowers a cost it has largely already absorbed — a second-order, not first-order, beneficiary. FY2026 rev ~$308M, +26% [11]. | 12–24 mo |
| Boeing (BA, NYSE) | Negative | Legacy expendable/ULA-era cost structure (SLS, Starliner) is exactly what reusability disrupts; launch is a small share of a diversified business, so impact is dilutive not existential. | Structural |
| Lockheed Martin (LMT, NYSE) | Neutral | Defense-space demand (Golden Dome, SDA) is a tailwind, partly offset by pressure on legacy launch-adjacent lines. Net wash; primes win on payloads, not lift. | Structural |
The Take: The non-obvious read is that cheap launch is bearish for the on-orbit-servicing premium and bullish for "constellation churn." When replacing a satellite costs less than servicing it, the rational operator deorbits and reflies. That re-rates manufacturers and operators of cheap, mass-produced satellites above servicers and life-extension specialists — a within-sector rotation the market has not fully priced. And because SpaceX captures the launch margin privately, the listed way to play the collapse is to own the demand it unleashes, not the launchers — with RKLB the lone exception, as the only public vehicle-builder with a reusability story of its own.
Outlook and Strategic Implications
Mass-to-orbit is ceasing to be the binding constraint on the space economy. The Falcon-era cost collapse (~$629/kg internal [3]) is locked in; the Starship step-change is the swing factor, and Delta-V's central case puts a credible ~$150–$400/kg burdened floor by ~2030 (Delta-V estimate) — transformative versus the Shuttle, but well short of the $10/kg aspiration. The scarce resources of the next decade are spectrum and orbital slots, satellite-manufacturing throughput, and on-orbit operating capability — not kilograms.
The strategic asymmetry is that the cost saving sits as margin inside a private incumbent until competition forces a price collapse. For listed investors, that means the launch deflation is best captured downstream (constellations, defense-enabled payloads, in-space services) and through the one credible listed challenger (RKLB), rather than by waiting for a launch-price war that the market structure does not yet require.
What to watch: 1. Starship orbital upper-stage recovery + reflight interval — the single tell on whether $/kg breaks below ~$500. Watch refurbishment-fraction disclosures through 2026–2027. 2. Neutron maiden flight (Q4 2026 [5]) and first reuse — proof a listed company can field reusable lift; the credibility gate for RKLB's thesis. 3. Golden Dome appropriations cadence — the size and timing of SDA/SBI launch demand [9]; the largest single price-insensitive buyer of cheap lift. 4. First sustained Falcon-class list-price cut — the signal that competition (New Glenn/Neutron) has finally begun to release the stored deflation to customers.
Disclosures & Disclaimer
This report is general commentary published for information purposes only. It is not investment advice, a recommendation, or a solicitation to buy or sell any security. Delta-V is a research publication, not a registered investment adviser or broker-dealer. Views are the publication's own analytical opinions, are subject to change, and may prove wrong. Readers should do their own research and consult a licensed financial professional before acting. The publication and/or its principals may hold positions in securities mentioned. © Delta-V.
Methodology and Assumptions
This analysis separates three cost concepts — list price, internal marginal cost, and fully-burdened amortized cost — and labels which is used at each point. Historical and current $/kg figures are drawn from cited primary or reputable secondary sources; all forward figures are Delta-V estimates built from cited inputs (reuse count, refurbishment fraction, realized payload, cadence) using the cost model stated in §Techno-Economic Analysis. The Starship floor is derived by loading a cited ~$2M marginal-cost-per-flight assumption [4] with conservative build amortization and upper-stage refurbishment that is explicitly not assumed to match the booster's demonstrated ~10% [3], because orbital upper-stage reuse is unproven as of mid-2026. Scenario ranges bracket the two left-tail drivers (low reuse count, high upper-stage refurbishment). The conclusion would change materially if: (a) Starship demonstrates low-refurb, high-count upper-stage reuse (pushes toward the bull case); or (b) a loss event or regulatory throughput ceiling caps cadence (pushes toward the bear case). No non-public, classified, or ITAR-restricted information is used. Equity figures are from public sources [11] and are not adjusted; nothing here is investment advice.
References
- Wikipedia. "Space Shuttle program — cost per kilogram (~$54,500/kg, total program ÷ ~27,500 kg payload)." Accessed June 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_program
- Wikipedia. "Falcon 9 — payload to LEO (~22,800 kg) and list price/$ per kg." Accessed June 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9
- NextBigFuture. "SpaceX Falcon 9 True Cost to Launch is About $300 per Pound (~$629/kg) Which is ~25% of Selling Price; booster reuse and ~10% refurb." Feb 2026. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2026/02/spacex-falcon-9-true-cost-to-launch-is-about-300-per-pound-which-is-25-of-selling-price-to-customers.html
- NextBigFuture. "SpaceX Starship Roadmap to 100 Times Lower Cost Launch — payload 100–150 t, $100–$500/kg near-term analyst range, ~$2M marginal target, $10/kg aspiration." Jan 2025. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2025/01/spacex-starship-roadmap-to-100-times-lower-cost-launch.html
- Wikipedia. "Rocket Lab Neutron — 13,000 kg to LEO (downrange recovery), partial reusability, projected ~$3,850/kg." Accessed June 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab_Neutron ; NASASpaceFlight. "After record-breaking 2025, Rocket Lab prepares for Neutron's debut (Q4 2026)." Dec 2025. https://nasaspaceflight.com/2025/12/rocket-lab-2025-overview/
- Space.com. "SpaceX shatters its rocket launch record yet again — 165 orbital Falcon flights (170 incl. Starship) in 2025, ~85% of U.S. total, sixth straight record." 2025. https://www.space.com/space-exploration/private-spaceflight/spacex-shatters-its-rocket-launch-record-yet-again-167-orbital-flights-in-2025
- Federal Aviation Administration. "New Record for FAA-Licensed Commercial Space Operations (148 in FY2024, up >30%); forecast to more than double by FY2028." 2024–25. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/new-record-faa-licensed-commercial-space-operations-aerospace-rulemaking-committee
- AST SpaceMobile / BusinessWire. "AST SpaceMobile Announces Successful Orbital Launch of BlueBird 6, the Largest Commercial Communications Array Ever Deployed in LEO; SpaceX operates >9,000 satellites." Dec 2025. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20251222922862/en/AST-SpaceMobile-Announces-Successful-Orbital-Launch-of-BlueBird-6-the-Largest-Commercial-Communications-Array-Ever-Deployed-in-Low-Earth-Orbit
- Wikipedia. "Golden Dome (missile defense system) — cost estimates $175B (White House) to $1.2T (CBO); proliferated satellite constellation; SDA PWSA." Accessed June 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Dome_(missile_defense_system)
- Wikipedia. "Falcon Heavy — payload to LEO ~63,800 kg; reusable list ~$97M (~$1,500/kg)." Accessed June 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy
- Company FY2025 results and market data: Rocket Lab (RKLB) FY2025 rev ~$602M, +38%, backlog ~$1.85B; Redwire (RDW) FY2025 rev ~$335M, +10%; Intuitive Machines (LUNR) FY2025 rev ~$210M; Planet Labs (PL) FY2026 rev ~$308M, +26%. Per company 8-K filings (SEC EDGAR) and StockAnalysis.com, accessed June 2026. https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/lunr/
- FAA. "Aerospace Forecast Fiscal Years 2025–2045 — Commercial Space." 2025. https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/2025-commercial-space.pdf
- NASA Technical Reports Server. "The Recent Large Reduction in Space Launch Cost." NTRS 20200001093, 2020. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20200001093
About Delta-V
Delta-V publishes independent technical and techno-economic research in its field — power, storage, hydrogen and ammonia, fertilizers, chemical processing, and energy manufacturing. Reports are prepared for subscribers and are provided for information only; they do not constitute investment, legal, or engineering advice. © Delta-V. All rights reserved.