• Balex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    NASA just realistically isn’t a launch provider. SLS began development in 2011 and has only flown twice since 2022. It’s has cost them almost $32 billion to develop. It even uses quite a bit of older hardware despite all the development costs.

    Compare that to SpaceX’s Starship. It started full development in 2019, has cost $15 billion to date, brand new everything, fully reusable, developed arguably the best engine ever made, has flown multiple times now (to varying degrees of success).

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      NASA just realistically isn’t a launch provider. SLS began development in 2011 and has only flown twice since 2022. It’s has cost them almost $32 billion to develop. It even uses quite a bit of older hardware despite all the development costs.

      i’m going to chose to believe that you’ll agree w me that these deficiencies were intentionally manufactured “reagan-style”.

      • Doomsider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yup, the same way they have crippled the US Post service. They destroy everything that is good so their friends can privatize and take over to reap huge profits.

      • Balex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not too familiar with the politics behind all of this, especially around that time. My understanding is that it’s mainly a difference in approach to development. NASA has to worry about appealing to politicians and the public. So they spend more time and money to make sure to get it right the first time.

        SpaceX doesn’t have that same kind of worry, so they can develop quickly and fly test vehicles often to learn quickly.

        There’s pros and cons to both sides imo, but that’s why I think it makes more sense for NASA to use private launch providers while they focus more on the missions themselves.

    • BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I thought total cost of SLS program is above 100billion alredy. And all that to fly bunch of people around the moon

      • Balex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s for the entire Artemis program. SLS is just one part of that. I guess since I was comparing it to Starship it’d be fair to include Orion which would bump it up to $44 billion.