Is SLS worth the cost? NASA's new megarocket comes with a mega price tag

Just an opinion, but it seems like an extremely high price tag for something that is using already used parts from the Space Shuttle Program, particularly the engines, to do essentially the same thing that the Apollo program did, but without the lander included.

It is still a bit "ahead" of SpaceX "Super Heavy" + "Star Ship" in its stage of development, but it had a factor of 2 head start, and does not look like it will be able to keep up with either the launch schedule nor the economics of the SpaceX alternative if SpaceX is successful in its plans and even remotely successful in its schedule. But, both look very ambitious at this point.

And NASA may (or may not) have some reliability advantages for the near future that may provide some synergism with the SpaceX efforts. (But NASA is starting to worry me with its testing failures combined with its slimmer testing process compared to the Apollo project, which still had a fatal fire and a near loss of Apollo 13 on its planned landing mission.)

The strange part is that NASA is planning to use Starship as its lunar lander, so, for that to actually happen, SpaceX needs to get a crew-certified Starship to the moon with a lot of fuel still aboard. If they can do that, why do we need to send the NASA astronauts there in the Orion capsule?

However, I did read that NASA is looking for an alternative for the lander. That seems to be "Blue Origin" plus Northrup Grumman, if Northrup Grumman decides to participate. And, that doesn't seem to be any farther along than SpaceX.
  • Like
Reactions: newtons_laws

Latest posts