curprev16:0116:01, 3 September 2019 SaffronSamtalkcontribs 6,040 bytes+13 Intro section has a bias towards ELVs over reusable systems. Notably, the mention of "potential for lower cost" was misleading, given that the main disadvantage of ELVs over mature reusable systems like Falcon 9 is that ELVs have significantly higher per-launch costs. The new introduction offers a more balanced view.undo
curprev03:2203:22, 25 December 2017 N2etalkcontribs 10,444 bytes+915 copyedit lede, to generalize expendable launch vehicles to the ones we see today: they ''may'' be designed to be ELVs, in which case expendable is the only way they fly; or they may be RLVs flown in expendable mode to increase payload mass or energyundo
curprev22:2122:21, 23 January 2009 Sdsdstalkcontribs 9,629 bytes+210 →Overview: == Design rationale == better describes this section's content. Note the article as a whole is about more than just the design choice. Edit for content too.undo
