[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by flipper35

For better or worse, this is how the Soviet Union did their program as well. Plus, when the Starship is reusable it will be a 30 to 50 million per launch of 100t to LEO instead of the 2.2 billion per launch that the SLS is.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/thursdays-starship-flight-provided-a-glimpse-into-a-future-of-abundant-access-to-space/

I am not really a fan of Musk, but SpaceX is doing a pretty good job at throwing test articles up there and making progress on each launch.

As they say, Space is hard.

yeah, after they spend insane money on trying to get the thing to work, it might, sometimes, only cost a a hundred million a launch.

but like, its not there, and it wont be there untill they launch it dozens of more times. i mean stuff they claimed to have sorted out, still didnt work. like the first stage just you know, not landing. if the first stage doesn't land, MOST of the cost savings isnt there. who cares if the empty tin can of a shell lands and can be reused if the 33 raptor engines hit the ocean at mach 2? that was the expensive part, and the part that they claimed works great. and the empty tin can still didnt land either.

the thing with SLS is it works. and its largely already paid for.

so any comparison for future costs, is just not true. starship doesn't work, and wont work, and be safe for humans, for dozens of launches. so far, while SLS is expensive, it does a thing. starship is going to be even more expensive to develop, and still doesnt do the thing. so it has a zero return. none. zero.

space is hard. thats why software program management doesnt work for its development. you dont launch with known problems, and then wonder why it didnt work and call it a success.