undefined | Better HN

0 pointsSkyMarshal2y ago0 comments

Based on Starship’s partial-success in its very first test flight, as well as how routine rocket landing and recovery is becoming for SpaceX, I think Starship will fly, it’s only a matter of when not if.

The fact that SLS isn’t designed for reusability, making its per-launch cost something like $4billion, means it’s effectively already outclassed, outcompeted, and obsolete.

0 comments

mannerheim2y ago

SLS was already made redundant when the Falcon Heavy flew.

'Let’s be very honest, We don’t have a commercially available heavy-lift vehicle. The Falcon 9 Heavy may some day come about. It’s on the drawing board right now. SLS is real.' - Charles Bolden

Note the reason given here isn't that the Falcon Heavy didn't have as large a payload capacity - that excuse came after it started flying years before SLS, because apparently we're supposed to pretend things can't be assembled in space over multiple trips rather than sending up a multi-billion-dollar rocket.

I'm just wondering what the excuse for keeping SLS around will be after a cheaper vehicle that can beat its payload is here. Jobs, for sure. What else?

throwawaymaths2y ago

Isn't it the case that f9h's lift capacity has increased over the years due to engine improvements and stage lengthening..? Iirc fairing size is still a major limiting factor.

peoplearepeople2y ago

They have a bigger fairing in dev for the military, and the gateway launch

1 more reply

SkyMarshalOP2y ago

I concur not much excuse remains. I suppose FH needs to be human-rated, but Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon module recently achieved that rating so FH could probably get it too without undue difficulty.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse