3 ms·

FWIW we barely avoided that here in the USA. I half believe that Congress didn't think anyone would meet the COTS milestones or they'd have never approved it. S

FWIW we barely avoided that here in the USA. I half believe that Congress didn't think anyone would meet the COTS milestones or they'd have never approved it. SpaceX delivered a product so much cheaper with excellent reliability and on-schedule that even the worst of the worst pork-barrel lobbyist-friendly sycophants in Congress couldn't justify cutting them out. But they still tried to keep them out of military contracts. It took some political grease (eg spreading facilities across multiple states to make jobs) and a lawsuit to be allowed to even bid on those contracts. Even so... we are still wasting money on SLS which is comically behind schedule and over budget. If it ever flies expect NASA to pay 10x what an equivalent SpaceX Starship launch costs. Defense and space procurement is the least efficient research, jobs, and welfare program ever devised.

mulmen 3y ago
> If it ever flies SLS has already been around the Moon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_1
adventured 3y ago
While I agree that SLS is a potential boondoggle, in one big respect I like that it exists: I like keeping as many of those people employed as possible, even if it's a de facto subsidy program. I like keeping those skillsets domestically available and primed, spread across several entities (SpaceX, NASA, Blue Origin, ULA and so on). I want us to be able to do it, or other similar big things (a space station, whatever), should the situation warrant building something big. I want those people to be ready to build for early colonies on the Moon or Mars in the next few decades and SpaceX can't provide all the employment. SLS will cost way too much (already does). It is fairly absurd. I'm still glad that it exists. Build it. Write the check. I don't want SpaceX to be our only path to the Moon and or Mars. I don't agree with the cost or the bureaucracy. I don't agree with lots of things the US Government spends a lot of money on though. If NASA needs $5 billion extra per year to subsidize SLS, as a taxpayer I'm fine with it. Their budget has gone from $26b to $33b over the past five years. Let's get that to $38 billion in a few more years.

mulmen 3y ago

> If it ever flies SLS has already been around the Moon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_1

adventured 3y ago

While I agree that SLS is a potential boondoggle, in one big respect I like that it exists: I like keeping as many of those people employed as possible, even if it's a de facto subsidy program. I like keeping those skillsets domestically available and primed, spread across several entities (SpaceX, NASA, Blue Origin, ULA and so on). I want us to be able to do it, or other similar big things (a space station, whatever), should the situation warrant building something big. I want those people to be ready to build for early colonies on the Moon or Mars in the next few decades and SpaceX can't provide all the employment. SLS will cost way too much (already does). It is fairly absurd. I'm still glad that it exists. Build it. Write the check. I don't want SpaceX to be our only path to the Moon and or Mars. I don't agree with the cost or the bureaucracy. I don't agree with lots of things the US Government spends a lot of money on though. If NASA needs $5 billion extra per year to subsidize SLS, as a taxpayer I'm fine with it. Their budget has gone from $26b to $33b over the past five years. Let's get that to $38 billion in a few more years.