4 ms·
Apollo cost a nontrivial fraction of GDP. It was risky indeed, but we shouldn’t forget that the project had spectacular resources available, far more than SLS.
by robotresearcher 4y ago
Apollo cost a nontrivial fraction of GDP. It was risky indeed, but we shouldn’t forget that the project had spectacular resources available, far more than SLS.
IIRC Apollo cost around a quarter trillion dollars in today’s money.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- DennisP 4y agoOn the other hand, Starship is costing less to develop than SLS, but with a bigger rocket, groundbreaking* new engines and full reusability while SLS is a disposable with warmed-over Shuttle technology. * (Admittedly a little too groundbreaking.)