SpaceX Grasshopper Flies High

The RCModelReviews youtube channel has a number of good videos on basic RC concepts (not multirotor specific, but the RC stuff still applies).

One tip I'll give you is to look into getting a Eurgle/FlySky/Imax/Turnigy 9x Transmitter (different brand names, same basic Chinese knockoff..). It's a solid radio with a lousy stock firmware, but there are a number of good open soruce firmwares out there that are very easy to flash onto the controller (especially if you use something like the SmartieParts programming board). For ~$100 (for the radio plus the programmer) you end up with something that rivals radios costing an order of magnitude more (or so I've heard... I've never touched a high end radio).

I'm approaching the hobby in stages:

1) Buy a Blade mQX (which comes with a cheap transmitter) and learn the basics of flying a multirotor

2) Get a 9x transmitter, mod it, and learn how it works

3) Get a 'JR compatible' OrangeRX DSM2/DSMX module for the 9x, so you can bind it with the mQX and get used to flying with the full size 'real' tranmsmitter

4) Get an 'ARF' (almost ready to fly) kit (this should include the frame, ESCs, motors, props, etc), and a flight control board (I'll probably start with something cheap like the Kk 2.0). This is a good time to learn things like "What is an ESC?".

5) Start modding your ARF quad (replace the ESCs, add a camera, get a more capable flight controller (like the Arducopter), etc)

6) Build something from scratch

I'm currently on step 3, researching step 4.

Something as big and 'light' as the F9 first stage will be slowed down tremendously by the atmosphere. No need to add all the extra complexity and weight of parachutes.

The rocket equation is a harsh mistress, it demands exponential amounts of fuel the faster you want to accelerate a given stage (specifically, as a ratio to the exhaust velocity of the rocket). Given that orbital velocity is quite high (about 8.5 km/s) relative to the exhaust velocity of the best chemical propellants (about 3 km/s for LOX/Kerosene) this results in impractical mass fractions to contend with (17:1 to get to orbit, and that's with no payload). But you can cheat. If you use staging and drop away the dead weight of empty fuel tanks and no longer needed engines from lower stages then you can make an end run around the rocket equation. You make a rocket that can accelerate a payload up to a certain velocity, then you make an even bigger rocket which can deliver the entire other rocket as a payload to a different velocity, and so on, until the sum total of all the velocities is the necessary total speed you require to get to orbit.

We're actually fairly close to being able to make single-stage-to-orbit (or SSTO) launchers workable, but it's a difficult problem. We can just about make a single stage with a high enough mass fraction to do it, but then there is almost no payload remaining. And the only way to make a vehicle with such a tiny payload cost effective would be to make it reusable, but enabling reusability would add additional weight which would destroy any payload whatsoever and probably prevent it from even reaching orbit, catch-22. Potentially we could use advanced engines, rocket fuels, and lightweight materials (like carbon fiber) to build a reusable SSTO which would have a reasonable payload, but such designs are hugely untested and very risky. So for now the best hope for reusability seems to be to incrementally advance the design of existing multi-stage rockets.