3 ms·
Such a reusable system would have to be built from scratch. It would delay the return to the moon by a decade or more. It may not even be cheaper. And it would
by bayesian_horse 4y ago
Such a reusable system would have to be built from scratch. It would delay the return to the moon by a decade or more. It may not even be cheaper. And it would be frought with massive engineering insecurity.
Also you could say NASA is supporting SpaceX and others in doing something similar, which is better than having one single program in-house.
SLS is the safest bet for a soonish return to the moon. Anything else is just speculation.
- bottlepalm 4y agoIf the problem is getting to the moon ‘soon’ then yes SLS is your answer. If the problem is getting to the moon cheaply and frequently then the SLS is most definitely not. Therefore we need SLS out of the way to fund real sustainable solutions for space exploration.
- bayesian_horse 4y ago"Soon" could be a factor of decades. NASA can't entirely depend on SpaceX nailing it with Starship, and I suspect the first launch with Humans on board is still years away, let alone launching to the moon. Also, if you look closer at the SLS program, there will be replacements which will make the launches cheaper eventually. Not reusable though.
- hef19898 4y agoAnd as for now we still don't know for sure whether or not reusable rockets are actually more cost efficient than single use ones.
- bayesian_horse 4y agoI think SpaceX has shown that they can be, at least for Falcon 9. But it took quite a while and there is on the order of a hundred times more demand for what Falcon 9 can do than what SLS can do.