Spacetalk-Starship
New member
Opinions on SLS?
Last edited:
Opinions on SLS?
- Thread starter Spacetalk-Starship
- Start date
Thunder Chicken
Resident Lua Script Rabble-Rouser
It's a mighty expensive way to dump SSMEs into the ocean. It really doesn't have a viable mission right now, never did IMO. Starship is showing a predilection for blowing up before it can even get to LEO, and that is the basis for SpaceX's HLS. The SLS program has been cancelled after a hypothetical Artemis III landing which requires a functioning Lunar Gateway and HLS to put boots on the moon again.
In short...
In short...
PhantomCruiser
Wanderer
As much as I'd like to see a slew of SLS rockets fly, it's dead, just life support, and needs to be unplugged. The post shuttle brain-drain was slightly delayed because of Constellation/Artemis, but with such a low ops temp, it's just too expensive.
Congress got it backwards anyway. Decide on the mission, then pick/choose/build a rocket based on the mission.
I don't know if it'd have been worth man-rating the Delta 4 heavy, of trying to convince Elon to man-rate the Falcon heavy, but it seems like either would be cheaper than SLS.
Congress got it backwards anyway. Decide on the mission, then pick/choose/build a rocket based on the mission.
I don't know if it'd have been worth man-rating the Delta 4 heavy, of trying to convince Elon to man-rate the Falcon heavy, but it seems like either would be cheaper than SLS.
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
I would rate the SpaceX Raptor engine to be more advanced in all aspects. But really, what else should we expect if its 30-40 years newer? Also, the deep vertical integration of SpaceX means, that other launcher / spacecraft ideas with a Raptor engine will never get a chance.
barrygolden
Well-known member
Still wondering why this cost so much takes years to build and can't do what the Saturn 5 could do . It did look really super on the pad couple years ago saw it at night from Coco beach even there it was breath taking not sure if Artemis 2 will fly seems like no need
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
Because the budget was so small. In sum, its terribly expensive, but annually, the SLS budget was pretty small for a project of this size. Since most of the costs are fixed costs that have to be paid every year, requiring more time reduces the variable costs in the budget, like engineer salaries, but extremely inflates the fixed costs. And of course Boeing was another problem, the company's crisis also affected the SLS, it seems.
