this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
124 points (92.5% liked)

Technology

58157 readers
3561 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

NASA finally admits what everyone already knows: SLS is unaffordable::"At current cost levels the SLS program is unsustainable."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bye@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Was Saturn V affordable?

Because maybe the question isn’t whether it’s affordable but whether we are budgeting enough money.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Maybe if we gave a little less to SpaceX, NASA could afford to do more.

[–] weew@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If NASA cancelled every single contact they had with SpaceX... they might be able to afford 1/3rd of an SLS launch. Or maybe not, because then they'd have to start paying Russians for rides up to the ISS.

SpaceX is saving NASA boatloads of money. Which Congress is forcing them to waste on SLS.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Can I ask: do you actually believe NASA builds their own rockets themselves? Like out back in their shed with a table saw and pliers?

The prime contractor on the sls is boeing.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Boeing used to be a good engineering firm.

[–] Ddhuud@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Yes, up until mid 90s

[–] anlumo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

As certified by Boeing?

[–] photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

SpaceX is getting 2-3 bn dollars for Starship HLS development, most of the funding is coming from SpaceX itself. SLS costs up to 4 bn per flight. I'm not even going to mention the insane cost-overruns and years of delays associated with NASA's cost-plus contract with Boeing to build the damn thing.

SLS is a sunk cost fallacy and jobs program.

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Even then, commercial launch providers get much further with less money. Sure, if NASA had more budget, they could afford the SLS program. But the commercial launch providers show that they could be more efficient with the money they do have.

[–] MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

That would destroy US space capabilities. Just because Elon is a racist dipshit doesn’t mean we should stop building the best rockets in the world.

Honestly if we have less money to Boeing and more to spacex, NASA would be way better off.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 year ago

Even considering that, the SLS is poor value for money. It’s basically a dumber space shuttle that you throw away. It’s a parody of 1970s technology.

We can, and should, do better for that price tag.

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago

No, and that's why we don't launch then anymore.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

There was no alternative to what Saturn V did at the time. The SLS program is clearly going about things in a very expensive way and we have private alternatives that may be sufficient at a fraction of the price

[–] Anahkiasen@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That was my immediate thought, it's space exploration, it's meant to cost more than is reasonable or affordable, because monetary rationale has never been a factor in it. Even if it did pay out in the long run with inventions and discoveries in the past, it's never going to make budget sense because exploration and pushing our specie's boundaries shouldn't be. It's a miracle what space agencies are/were able to accomplish with super strict budgets in the past, but in the end there's only so much you can do by cutting corners and letting the private sector fill the gaps

[–] weew@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago

but the SLS isn't pushing boundaries. It's just reusing leftover space shuttle parts and isn't meant to do much more than what Atlas V managed. And still somehow costs billions per launch.