Mainly production costs. Take the Apollo versus Space-shuttle as an example... In the Apollo design, each 'stage' of the rocket was simply jettisoned to burn up in the atmosphere once it was 'spent'. With the Shuttle, the only non re-usable part was the main external fuel tank. The solid rocket boosters returned to earth by parachute, the main shuttle vehicle landed like an aeroplane would (instead of an oceanic 'splash-down' as the Apollo crafts used to do). The external fuel tank, once jettisoned, burned up in the atmosphere.
It is reusable.
No Apollo spacecrafts are not a shuttle craft, mainly because it lands in the sea and it does not land like a plane.And it is not reusable.
Its reusable....most of the time
The major difference between a spacecraft and a space shuttle is that the other spacecrafts can not be reused once the do return to the earth with the astronauts. But the shuttle is launched lime a rocket, flys like a plane and lands like a plane on a runway, it is always reusable.
A reusable spacecraft
No the Apollo spacecrafts are not reusable, like the space shuttles.
It is reusable.
No Apollo spacecrafts are not a shuttle craft, mainly because it lands in the sea and it does not land like a plane.And it is not reusable.
Its reusable....most of the time
Spacecrafts
reusable
45%
They are reusable and good to carry things in and they don't have to kill trees
Although several spacecrafts have been sent to Venus, no alien spacecrafts have been discovered on its surface.
It is calculated by using a branch of Newtonian mathematics called orbital mechanics.
Nuclear energy provides energy, not a push of motion.
Plastic can easily be reduced by using reusable bags.