3 ms·
Even if Starship completely fails, SLS is a pointless and ludicrously expensive dead end. Terminating it is the only logical thing to do.
by pfdietz 8mo ago
Even if Starship completely fails, SLS is a pointless and ludicrously expensive dead end. Terminating it is the only logical thing to do.
- kunai 8mo agoMight as well get some ROI out of it though. IMO the Blue Origin hate was overhyped. They're clearly the only ones who know what they're doing. NASA and SpaceX both are way in over their heads.
- pennomi 8mo agoThe Blue Origin hate is mostly how opaque the program is compared to SpaceX.
- NetMageSCW 8mo agoThe Blue Origin skepticism is based in how many decades they spent in making buildings instead of rockets and how long it has taken them to get anything to orbit.
- luke5441 8mo agoThe whole moon thing is a pointless and ludicrously expensive dead end. But if one wants to do it, one should choose between the working approaches.
- lukeschlather 8mo agoOrion is actually pointless, I don't understand why the mission goals are valuable. Partial success would be meaningless. Success is meaningless. Starship in contrast has a variety of meaningful objectives. Even if Starship only achieves proving that cryogenic fuel transfer in LEO is possible that's a valuable mission goal in and of itself. If you really think "the whole moon thing is pointless" NASA is pointless.
- pfdietz 8mo agoNASA does not seem to be constituted to be able to engage in a coherent manned space program of actual value. It's a long standing systemic issue. They are great at pretending to deliver value, but there's no "there" there.
- foobarbecue 8mo ago> If you really think "the whole moon thing is pointless" NASA is pointless. There's more to NASA than Artemis! NASA's robotic spaceflight programs generate extremely high science return at relatively low cost. Missions like Psyche, Europa Clipper, and Dragonfly are humanity's real explorers. And their aeronautics work is valuable as well. Low-boom, etc.
- potjack777 8mo ago[dead]