> What was so terrible about the 1960's mission architecture? That it could get 2 people to the moon for a few days. While Starhip can get 5-10 people to the m

> What was so terrible about the 1960's mission architecture? That it could get 2 people to the moon for a few days. While Starhip can get 5-10 people to the moon for a few months including lots research capabilities, showers, ground artifacts and much more. You are basically comparing a scooter to a truck. How does that make sense? There is a reason that non of the contractors went with that kind of architecture when the original contract was bid.