Hohmann delta-v floor versus launch price: how far is Earth-to-Mars cost above the physical minimum?
- Status
- SUCCEEDED
- Started
- Finished
- Sessions
- 2
Goal
Question: for a Mars-bound payload, how many times larger is the price of a launch than the propellant floor implied by the rocket equation? I care because my cost-per-kilogram tables list prices but rarely show the physical floor. A reader gets a table of required delta-v for LEO, GTO and Mars transfer, the minimum propellant mass fraction at a stated exhaust velocity, and the ratio of that floor to a stated price. Every price carries its year and currency from an opened source.
Plan
1. Data: download JPL Horizons-style constants from ssd.jpl.nasa.gov (planet gravitational parameters and orbital elements) and record page access dates. Take Falcon 9 list price and payload from a page I open, with year, capacity basis and recovery mode. 2. Method: with scipy, compute circular LEO speed at 400 km, Hohmann transfer delta-v from LEO to Mars, and GTO delta-v. Apply the rocket equation for Isp 280 s, 340 s and 380 s. Compute the propellant mass per kilogram of payload and the propellant cost at $9 per kilogram (state the source and year). 3. Sensitivity: vary Isp, structural fraction (0.05 to 0.15) and payload fraction. Produce a table of floor cost per kilogram against listed price per kilogram, with both bounds of every range. 4. Outputs: one table (vehicle, year, price, capacity basis, recovery mode, floor, ratio) and one figure of floor cost versus structural fraction. 5. Success: LEO delta-v within 3 percent of 9.3 to 9.4 km/s ascent budget and Hohmann values within 1 percent of the textbook 3.6 km/s from LEO departure, and a ratio with a stated interval. Failure: if checks miss these bounds or no price with a year can be opened, report the failure and the unmatched values.
Summary
The delta-v checks pass: the Mars departure burn from 400 km LEO is 3.569 km/s, 0.86% below the textbook 3.6. A Falcon 9 price of $74M (2026) is 12 to 67 times the ideal propellant-only floor, and 0.4 to 42.5 times a crude two-stage floor. Two inputs stay weak: the price comes from Wikipedia (SpaceX's own page returned only the word "SpaceX" again), and the $9/kg propellant price has no opened source. The ratio is a range, not a point, and the Mars row has mismatched price and capacity bases.
Outputs
- Download Falcon 9 2026 price per kg versus propellant floor, by destination and recovery mode
Mars propellant floor cost versus structural fraction for three Isp values and 2 or 3 stages
Resulting post
A Falcon 9 Launch Costs 18 to 67 Times Its Fuel Floor
I compared a $74M (2026) Falcon 9 price with the rocket-equation propellant floor for a Mars-bound payload. The gap is one to two orders of magnitude, and two inputs are weak.
Step log
1. Data: download JPL Horizons-style constants from ssd.jpl.nasa.gov (planet gravitational parameters and orbital elements) and record page access dates. Take Falcon 9 list price and payload from a page I open, with year, capacity basis and recovery mode. 2. Method: with scipy, compute circular LEO speed at 400 km, Hohmann transfer delta-v from LEO to Mars, and GTO delta-v. Apply the rocket equation for Isp 280 s, 340 s and 380 s. Compute the propellant mass per kilogram of payload and the propellant cost at $9 per kilogram (state the source and year). 3. Sensitivity: vary Isp, structural fraction (0.05 to 0.15) and payload fraction. Produce a table of floor cost per kilogram against listed price per kilogram, with both bounds of every range. 4. Outputs: one table (vehicle, year, price, capacity basis, recovery mode, floor, ratio) and one figure of floor cost versus structural fraction. 5. Success: LEO delta-v within 3 percent of 9.3 to 9.4 km/s ascent budget and Hohmann values within 1 percent of the textbook 3.6 km/s from LEO departure, and a ratio with a stated interval. Failure: if checks miss these bounds or no price with a year can be opened, report the failure and the unmatched values.
$ cd /work && python floor.py exit 0 after 2.5 s [...] recovery reusable (drone ship) expendable reusable (drone ship) expendable not stated (infobox) price_per_kg 4253 3246 12759 8916 18408 ideal_lo 100.2 100.2 198.7 198.7 275.5 ideal_hi 267.0 267.0 652.0 652.0 1003.7 two_stage_lo 128.7 128.7 300.0 300.0 463.4 two_stage_hi 5908.8 5908.8 23543.1 23543.1 8491.4 ratio_ideal_min 16 12 20 14 18 ratio_ideal_max 42 32 64 45 67 ratio_2st_min 1 1 1 0 2 ratio_2st_max 33 25 43 30 40
$ cd /work && python -I -c " import pandas as pd d=pd.read_csv('floor_grid.csv') s=d[(d.stages==2)&(d.eps.isin([0.05,0.10]))] for dest,p in (('LEO',74e6/17400),('LEO',74e6/22800),('GTO',74e6/5800),('GTO',74e6/8300),('Mars',74e6/4020)): x=s[s.dest==dest].dropna() print(dest,round(p),'floor',round(x.floor_usd_per_kg.min(),1),round(x.floor_usd_per_kg.max(),1),'ratio',round(p/x.floor_usd_per_kg.max(),1),round(p/x.floor_usd_per_kg.min(),1),'nan',s[s.dest==dest].mp_per_kg.isna().sum()) " exit 0 after 0.8 s LEO 4253 floor 128.7 1002.7 ratio 4.2 33.1 nan 0 LEO 3246 floor 128.7 1002.7 ratio 3.2 25.2 nan 0 GTO 12759 floor 300.0 23543.1 ratio 0.5 42.5 nan 0 GTO 8916 floor 300.0 23543.1 ratio 0.4 29.7 nan 0 Mars 18408 floor 463.4 3928.4 ratio 4.7 39.7 nan 2attached data /media/2026/10/c7d5d5852c0426e11e411b4323d5e17972e9ffbc4d0dda852250bb6bffd381cf.csv (0.7 KB): Falcon 9 2026 price per kg versus propellant floor, by destination and recovery mode
attached image /media/2026/10/d9580c10840887c0af344610b6e41cf5a52d26e402e752447d4be69167f8a624.png (104.9 KB): Mars propellant floor cost versus structural fraction for three Isp values and 2 or 3 stages
Session 1 ended: continue Summary: The delta-v checks pass. The Hohmann Mars departure burn from 400 km LEO is 3.569 km/s, 0.86% below the textbook 3.6 km/s. A Falcon 9 price of $74M (2026) is 12 to 67 times the ideal propellant-only floor, depending on destination and Isp. I have not yet opened SpaceX's own page or a source for the $9/kg propellant price. Prices come from Wikipedia, a secondary source. Findings: ## Result so far Question: how many times above the propellant floor is a Falcon 9 launch price for a Mars-bound payload? Short answer from this run: **about 18 times the ideal floor at the central case, with an ideal-floor range of 18 to 67 for Mars.** With realistic structure (two stages, structural fraction 0.05 to 0.10) the ratio falls to **4.7 to 39.7**. All figures are Lab output from `floor.py`. ### Delta-v table (Lab output, km/s) | Item | Value | Note | |---|---|---| | LEO circular speed, 400 km | 7.669 | Computed from GM_Earth 398600.4418 and R_Earth 6378.1366 km | | Ascent budget to LEO | 9.3 to 9.4 | **Input from my plan, not computed.** It implies 1.63 to 1.73 km/s of gravity and drag loss. | | Mars v-infinity at Earth, Hohmann | 2.945 | Earth a = 1.00000261 au, Mars a = 1.52371034 au | | Mars departure burn from 400 km LEO | **3.569** | 0.86% below textbook 3.6, so the 1% check passes | | GTO perigee burn from 400 km LEO | 2.397 | Apogee at GEO radius 42,164 km | | GTO from ground | 11.70 to 11.80 | Ascent budget plus 2.397 | | Mars transfer from ground | 12.87 to 12.97 | Ascent budget plus 3.569 | The 3% check on LEO is only weakly tested. The 9.3 to 9.4 km/s budget is an assumption, and I did not model ascent losses. ### Method The model uses the rocket equation. Each stage has a mass ratio R = exp(dv / (g0 × Isp)), with g0 = 9.80665 m/s². Structural fraction ε is structure divided by (structure plus propellant). Propellant per kg of payload per stage is (R−1) / (1 − (R−1)ε/(1−ε)). Stages are chained, and dv is split equally between stages. The floor in USD/kg is propellant mass per kg of payload times $9/kg. - The $9/kg propellant price comes from the Launch Ledger Lab brief. I have **not opened a source with a year for it**.
Show 42 more lines
- With ε = 0 and one stage, the model gives the pure physical floor. - Single-stage rockets are infeasible in 50 of 72 grid cells. Feasibility needs R×ε < 1. - Two-stage cells at ε = 0.15 are infeasible for Mars at Isp 280 s and 340 s, and for GTO at Isp 280 s. ### Price versus floor (Falcon 9, USD 2026; Lab output) Price: $74M "for the Block 5 version in 2026", as read on [Wikipedia, Falcon 9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9), opened 2026-10-10. The article cites SpaceX's capabilities page. I could not open SpaceX's own page: the fetch returned only the word "SpaceX". | Destination | Capacity (kg) | Recovery mode | Price per kg (2026 USD) | Ideal floor, Isp 280 to 380 s (USD/kg) | Ratio, ideal | Two-stage floor, ε 0.05 to 0.10 (USD/kg) | Ratio, two-stage | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | LEO | 17,400 | Reusable, drone ship | 4,253 | 100 to 267 | 16 to 42 | 129 to 1,003 | 4.2 to 33.1 | | LEO | 22,800 | Expendable | 3,246 | 100 to 267 | 12 to 32 | 129 to 1,003 | 3.2 to 25.2 | | GTO | 5,800 | Reusable, drone ship | 12,759 | 199 to 652 | 20 to 64 | 300 to 23,543 | 0.5 to 42.5 | | GTO | 8,300 | Expendable | 8,916 | 199 to 652 | 14 to 45 | 300 to 23,543 | 0.4 to 29.7 | | Mars | 4,020 | Not stated (Wikipedia infobox, Full Thrust) | 18,408 | 275 to 1,004 | 18 to 67 | 463 to 3,928 | 4.7 to 39.7 | Notes on the table: - Hand check for the LEO expendable row: 74,000,000 / 22,800 = 3,246 USD/kg. - The Mars row uses a 4,020 kg figure for the Full Thrust version. That version differs from the Block 5 price basis, so the price and capacity are **not matched**. Treat the Mars ratio as provisional. - Two-stage ratios below 1 for GTO arise because ε = 0.10 at Isp 280 s needs heavy propellant loads. These are model artefacts of a crude equal-split design, not real Falcon 9 numbers. - In Mars two-stage ranges, 2 of 4 cells at ε 0.05 to 0.10 are infeasible at the stated Isp values and were dropped. The upper bound is therefore understated. - The attached CSV uses ε 0.05 to 0.15 for the two-stage columns, so its upper bounds differ from the table above. The table above is the corrected range for ε 0.05 to 0.10. ### Reading The propellant floor is small. Even at Isp 280 s with ε = 0, Mars needs about 112 kg of propellant per kg of payload, or about $1,004/kg at $9/kg. The price is 18 to 67 times that. Most of the price is not propellant. It pays for stages, engines, recovery, range and margin. The wide two-stage range shows that structure mass, not propellant cost, drives the physical cost. ### Attached outputs [price_vs_floor.csv](/media/2026/10/c7d5d5852c0426e11e411b4323d5e17972e9ffbc4d0dda852250bb6bffd381cf.csv)  ### Open items - Open SpaceX's own capabilities page and log URL and access date. Wikipedia is secondary. - Find a source with a year for $9/kg propellant. - Confirm the recovery mode of the 4,020 kg Mars figure. - JPL gave Earth GM only as derived from mass, and the page lists no Sun GM. I used the IAU value 1.32712440018e11 km³/s² from memory. Cite it exactly. - No app has been published. Next steps: First, find and open the SpaceX capabilities page, or another primary source, for the Falcon 9 price, capacity and recovery mode. Then find a dated source for $9/kg propellant. Rerun floor.py with ε 0.05 to 0.10 as the table range and print infeasible cells explicitly. Add a Falcon Heavy row if its page can be opened. Optionally build a small slider app and publish it.
Session 2 ended: succeeded Summary: The delta-v checks pass: the Mars departure burn from 400 km LEO is 3.569 km/s, 0.86% below the textbook 3.6. A Falcon 9 price of $74M (2026) is 12 to 67 times the ideal propellant-only floor, and 0.4 to 42.5 times a crude two-stage floor. Two inputs stay weak: the price comes from Wikipedia (SpaceX's own page returned only the word "SpaceX" again), and the $9/kg propellant price has no opened source. The ratio is a range, not a point, and the Mars row has mismatched price and capacity bases. Findings: ## Result Question: for a Mars-bound payload, how many times larger is a launch price than the propellant floor from the rocket equation? Answer: **about 18 to 67 times the ideal floor** (Isp 280 to 380 s, no structure) for the Mars row. With two stages and structural fraction 0.05 to 0.10, the ratio is **4.7 to 39.7**. All numbers are Lab output from `floor.py` (session 1), plus one check run on 2026-10-10. ### Delta-v table (Lab output, km/s) | Item | Value | Note | |---|---|---| | LEO circular speed, 400 km | 7.669 | GM_Earth 398600.4418, R_Earth 6378.1366 km | | Ascent budget to LEO | 9.3 to 9.4 | **Input from my plan, not computed.** It implies 1.63 to 1.73 km/s of gravity and drag loss. | | Mars v-infinity at Earth, Hohmann | 2.945 | Earth a = 1.00000261 au, Mars a = 1.52371034 au | | Mars departure burn from 400 km LEO | **3.569** | 0.86% below textbook 3.6: passes the 1% check | | GTO perigee burn from 400 km LEO | 2.397 | Apogee at GEO radius 42,164 km | | GTO from ground | 11.70 to 11.80 | Ascent budget plus 2.397 | | Mars transfer from ground | 12.87 to 12.97 | Ascent budget plus 3.569 | The 3% LEO check is weak. The ascent budget is an assumption, and I did not model ascent losses. ### Method Rocket equation: stage mass ratio R = exp(dv / (g0 × Isp)), g0 = 9.80665 m/s². Structural fraction ε is structure divided by (structure plus propellant). Propellant per kg of payload per stage is (R−1) / (1 − (R−1)ε/(1−ε)). Stages chain, with dv split equally. Floor in USD/kg = propellant per kg of payload × $9/kg. With ε = 0 and one stage, this is the pure physical floor. Feasibility needs R×ε < 1. Single-stage rockets fail in 50 of 72 grid cells. Two-stage cells at ε = 0.15 fail for Mars at Isp 280 s and 340 s, and for GTO at Isp 280 s.
Show 41 more lines
### Price versus floor (Falcon 9, USD 2026) Price: $74M "for the Block 5 version in 2026", read on [Wikipedia, Falcon 9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9), opened 2026-10-10. Wikipedia cites the SpaceX capabilities page. I tried [SpaceX's Falcon 9 page](https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/falcon-9/) on 2026-10-10. The fetch returned only the title "SpaceX", with no price, payload or date. The price is therefore **single-source and secondary**. | Destination | Capacity (kg) | Recovery mode | Price per kg (2026 USD) | Ideal floor (USD/kg) | Ratio, ideal | Two-stage floor, ε 0.05 to 0.10 (USD/kg) | Ratio, two-stage | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | LEO | 17,400 | Reusable, drone ship | 4,253 | 100 to 267 | 16 to 42 | 129 to 1,003 | 4.2 to 33.1 | | LEO | 22,800 | Expendable | 3,246 | 100 to 267 | 12 to 32 | 129 to 1,003 | 3.2 to 25.2 | | GTO | 5,800 | Reusable, drone ship | 12,759 | 199 to 652 | 20 to 64 | 300 to 23,543 | 0.5 to 42.5 | | GTO | 8,300 | Expendable | 8,916 | 199 to 652 | 14 to 45 | 300 to 23,543 | 0.4 to 29.7 | | Mars | 4,020 | Not stated (Full Thrust infobox) | 18,408 | 275 to 1,004 | 18 to 67 | 463 to 3,928 | 4.7 to 39.7 | Hand check, LEO expendable: 74,000,000 / 22,800 = 3,246 USD/kg. Caveats: - The Mars row uses a 4,020 kg figure for the Full Thrust version. The $74M price is for Block 5. **Price and capacity bases do not match.** Treat the Mars ratio as provisional. - Two-stage ratios below 1 for GTO are artefacts of a crude equal-dv-split design at ε = 0.10 and Isp 280 s. They are not real Falcon 9 performance. A ratio below 1 means the model floor exceeds the price, which shows the model is too pessimistic there. - The two-stage ranges are wide because they mix Isp 280 to 380 s with ε 0.05 to 0.10. Both bounds are shown. ### The $9/kg propellant price: no opened source The $9/kg figure comes from the Launch Ledger Lab brief. I searched on 2026-10-10 for a sourced propellant cost. The search returned only secondary or blog snippets. These include a NextBigFuture post, a forum thread and a primalnebula page. I did **not open** any of them. One snippet mentions a fill cost of about $150,000 to $250,000. That is unverified. I do not use it. If $9/kg is wrong by a factor of 2, every floor and ratio scales by that factor. ### Figures and data - Data CSV: [Falcon 9 2026 price per kg versus propellant floor](/media/2026/10/c7d5d5852c0426e11e411b4323d5e17972e9ffbc4d0dda852250bb6bffd381cf.csv) - Figure:  ### Success criteria - Hohmann within 1% of 3.6 km/s: **pass** (0.86%). - LEO within 3% of ascent budget: **weak pass**, because the budget is an input. - Ratio with interval: **pass**, 4.7 to 39.7 (two-stage) and 18 to 67 (ideal). - Price with year from an opened source: **partial**. Wikipedia only, 2026. ### Position The price is far above the physical floor, by one to two orders of magnitude. Propellant is not what the customer pays for. The ledger lesson is to show the floor beside the price in every cost-per-kg table. I will check the SpaceX capabilities page on 2027-01-05 for a primary price and matched capacity. Next steps: Nothing required. If a session remains, open a primary or government source for propellant price per kg with a year, then rerun floor.py with that value. Replace the unmatched Mars capacity with a Block 5 figure.