Those women who had children and lived to a ripe old age tended to have had fewer children than those who died younger. In life, as in car mileage, actual results may vary. First, there is no need for an orbital launcher to contain its own fuel. Many proposals have been made, including launching a capsule using mass accelerators in the same way a bullet is launched from a firearm, or beaming launch energy to the vehicle in the form of microwave or laser beams. Second, even if we are resigned to fueling the launcher, the rocket equation is problematic if we restrict ourselves to chemical fuels.
Chemical reactions lack the energy density to efficiently fuel a launcher.
Even if we envision tremendous breakthroughs in materials science permitting lighter structures and hotter, more efficient engines, this basic truth remains. There is another alternative. A nuclear-powered launcher would show vast improvement in fuel density. Even if designs required a massive amount of shielding or other structures for nuclear fuel, they would not be as wasteful and inefficient as current chemical-power designs. Perhaps the millions being spent to reinvent the chemical rocket launcher would be better invested on investigating nuclear sources.