Who will be the second one to successfully land an orbital rocket booster?

[PM3]

SpaceX was the first to successfully land an orbital rocket booster, on 22 December 2015. Ten years later, some companies have announced a first launch and landing attempt within the next 12 months:

- Blue Origin with New Glenn: NET December 2024
- Deep Blue Aerospace with Nebula-1: NET March 2025
- Rocket Lab with Neutron: NET mid 2025

Some more have been announced for 2026:

- CAST with CZ-10A
- PLD Space with Miura 5
- Firefly and Northrop Grumman with MLV
- Relativity with Terran R

Another two announced launches for 2025 some time ago, but this is outdated:

- Stoke Space with Nova
- Rocket Pi with Darwin 2

Deep Blue, CAST and Pi are Chinese, PLD is Spanish; all the other are US-American.

Which one, do you think, will be the the first after SpaceX to succeed?

[Timber Micka]

I voted BO and New Glenn.
Just a suggestion: CZ-8 and 12 should be on the list. They should be reusable well before CZ-10A flies.

[Cheapchips]

Like the majority so far, I went with New Glenn.  The time they've put into it's development and their existing New Sheppard experience must count for something!

If they don't land successfully next year then I'd expect Neutron or a Chinese launcher to pip it to the post in 2026.

[TheKutKu]

New Glenn has the clear advantage, since BO has much experience in landing stages and there are several New Glenns in various stages of production, while I'm skeptical about the announced launch rate for next year I believe the odds are overwhelmingly in its favour.

DeepBlue Aerospace does have a proven launch pad, reportedly a couple of their orbital launcher in production as well as a single flight on a subscale version of their launcher's S1, wouldn't be surprised if they are third, although more so on a technicality, since their Nebula-1 launcher is more of a demonstrator with very limited performances, for their larger launcher.

I voted BO and New Glenn.
Just a suggestion: CZ-8 and 12 should be on the list. They should be reusable well before CZ-10A flies.

CZ-8 is not planned to be recovered anymore, a CZ-12 variant is, and is officialy planned for 2025 for now.

Furthermore:
-I suggest swapping Rocket pi (their launcher project does not seem active anymore) with Landspace Zhuque 3 (aims for recovery in late 2025 according to recent interview)  or/and Galactic Energy Pallas 1 (as of latest information, they still want to recover a first stage later in 2025, with a 1st launch - that we've seen flight hardware of - planned for H1 2025), both seem to have comparable odds/timeline/advancement to Neutron IMO.

-PLD space is aiming for parachute recovery on their miura launcher, they are more comparable to Rocket lab's electron recovery (which I assume doesn't count). The only european orbital launcher project that aims to propulsively recover a launcher in the next two years is Maiaspace (their timeline is dubious however IMO).

[TrevorMonty]

RL has already landed a Electron booster softly in sea and refurbished ready for flight.

[DeimosDream]

Three way race between New Glenn, Neutron, and maybe CZ-??.

New Glenn currently has the lead and will probably be the first to -land- a booster, but Rocket Lab is gaining ground fast enough that I suspect Neutron will be the first to -reuse- a recovered booster.

Since this poll was about landing I voted New Glenn.

[PM3]

The poll is closed now. I voted for Neutron. This is why:

- There is a high risk of failure for the first landing attempts. Blue Origin is generally moving slow; I expect them to need much time (> 1 year) between the first NG launches.

- Deep Blue is a startup without launch experience. Those companies often set overambitious goals to attract investor money. While this poll ran, their first medium altitude hop test failed.

- Rocket Lab is generally moving fast (faster then SpaceX), and they already succeeded in reentry and parachute splashdown of an orbital booster. Therefore I think they have a good chance to successfully land Neutron before New Glenn.

[r8ix]

Does SpaceX catching the SuperHeavy booster count?

[deltaV]

Does SpaceX catching the SuperHeavy booster count?

No. SpaceX was the first company to successfully land an orbital rocket booster. They cannot also be the second company to do so even if they land two different rockets. The fact that Starship wasn't an option confirms that this interpretation is correct.

[jongoff]

I was one of the two who voted for Stoke, though I could've also gone for Rocket Lab. My thinking is that the odds of a successful booster catch on the first few tries with Blue is far from guaranteed. I think they'll make an attempt sooner, but I think there's a decent chance of Stoke or Rocket Lab getting there first. In hindsight, I probably should've voted Rocket Lab, as they're probably going to be trying to recover the stage from the get-go, while I'm not sure if Stoke will do some fully expendable flights before trying for first stage reuse. I think Stoke has a good chance of flying before Neutron flies, but unless they try for first stage reuse from the start, Rocket Lab is likely to catch up...

~Jon

[r8ix]

Does SpaceX catching the SuperHeavy booster count?

No. SpaceX was the first company to successfully land an orbital rocket booster. They cannot also be the second company to do so even if they land two different rockets. The fact that Starship wasn't an option confirms that this interpretation is correct.

Well, the question asks who will be the second one, not the second company, so it's a bit grey…

[laszlo]

NASA was the first one to successfully land an orbital booster in the early 80's. The Shuttle SRBs landed in the ocean, were recovered, refurbished and re-used. It was a barge landing without the barge. 34 years later SpaceX was the second with the Falcon.

NASA also successfully landed orbital upper stages starting in the 80's. This has also been done by the Soviet Union and the US Air Force. NASA and the Air Force re-used their recovered spacecraft.

[thespacecow]

Splashdown doesn't count, should be obvious the poll is for propulsive landings, otherwise there would be no point for this poll since Rocket Lab already recovered splashdown Electron booster.

Also Shuttle orbiter is not a complete reusable 2nd stage, it expended the propellant tank. The Soviet one is even less so since it doesn't even include engines, it's just a payload. USAF has no reusable 2nd stage either, a spaceplane launched on an expendable LV is not a reusable 2nd stage, it's also just a payload.

[PM3]

Yes, the poll was about propulsive landing. I forgot to mention that. And PLD Space should not have been on the list, as they are going for parachute splashdown.

[Skye]

Yes, the poll was about propulsive landing. I forgot to mention that. And PLD Space should not have been on the list, as they are going for parachute splashdown.

PLD Space is going for propulsive landing for the Miura NEXT & all subsequent rockets.

[lightleviathan]

Yes, the poll was about propulsive landing. I forgot to mention that. And PLD Space should not have been on the list, as they are going for parachute splashdown.

PLD Space is going for propulsive landing for the Miura NEXT & all subsequent rockets.

Miura NEXT is flying in 2030 though, and thus still shouldn't be in the comparison

[CraigLieb]

Why wouldn’t SpaceX catching Super Heavy win this  hands down? It’s a different rocket and a much more ambitious “landing”!

[Metalskin]

Why wouldn’t SpaceX catching Super Heavy win this  hands down? It’s a different rocket and a much more ambitious “landing”!

Hmm... depends how we interp. the term Orbital Rocket Booster. Is the StarShip a booster? I would have said no. And the first stage isn't orbital. Though I don't think anyone will be creating a booster stage that is orbital and lands, unless of course StarShip is deemed an orbital rocket booster... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[DanClemmensen]

Why wouldn’t SpaceX catching Super Heavy win this  hands down? It’s a different rocket and a much more ambitious “landing”!

They already won first place with F9. The question is "who" (i.e., SpaceX), not "which booster". They cannot be second because they are already first.

[Hog]

NASA's been successfully landing boosters since 1981, STS with chutes,  SLS without chutes.