NASA chief suggests SpaceX may be booted from moon mission

> Boeing or the military industrial complex would handle these things with precision and delivered ahead of time

that's fantasy. I've never heard of either entity delivering on time or on budget let alone ahead of time.

>that's fantasy. I've never heard of either entity delivering on time or on budget let alone ahead of time.

We went from not having a manned space program to landing men on the moon in 8 years. This country used to be able to do things.

A-4? F-117? B-21?

History suggests the US is pretty good at acting when it perceives existential threat.

I suspect that is a truism the current administration is attempting to leverage. Unfortunately / inconveniently for them, instead of focusing on actual existential threats (climate change), they've tried to rally people behind a pretend existential threat (immigration). The people smell the rat and it seems to be back-firing.

Why they don't do the obvious thing and co-opt the green energy initiative, get into a space-race equivalent with China on solar panels and wind turbines, is a mystery to me.

The A-4 from 1954? F-117 from 1981? B-21 that's been in development since 2015 and has had only 3 delivered so far? These are 10 year development program, the Starship still has some years to go and I'd argue a reusable moon rocket is a bit more involved than a bomber plane.

We were willing to spend money doing things. The whole moon landing program cost something like $300 billion adjusted for inflation. Artemis is on a relative shoestring.

War fighting technology like aircraft is a different thing than orbital rockets and spacecraft. I'm not trying to downplay those achievements, especially the F-117, but it's apples to oranges.