←back to thread

NASA chief suggests SpaceX may be booted from moon mission

(www.cnn.com)
404 points voxleone | 4 comments | 21 Oct 25 12:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.529s | source
Show context
radu_floricica ◴[21 Oct 25 13:53 UTC] No.45655837[source]▶
I'm not really sure if keeping a strict schedule has any real relevance here, outside maybe PR and politics. Starships will drop the cost to other bodies in the same way Falcon dropped the cost to orbit. Why would anyone want to invest in a technology and a project that will be obsolete by the time it's implemented?
replies(5): >>45655867 #>>45655910 #>>45655981 #>>45656146 #>>45656398 #
sofixa ◴[21 Oct 25 14:00 UTC] No.45655910[source]▶
> Starships will drop the cost to other bodies

Assuming SpaceX can deliver it. They've failed to do a successful test flight with even a fraction of the officially planned capacity. Who knows how long it will take them, if they can even pull it off, to deliver it.

replies(1): >>45656027 #
1. destitude ◴[21 Oct 25 14:09 UTC] No.45656027[source]▶
They could have delivered today if they weren't concerned about reusability.
replies(3): >>45656233 #>>45656602 #>>45656989 #
2. Cthulhu_ ◴[21 Oct 25 14:24 UTC] No.45656233[source]▶
Could they? The Apollo program took 9 years from conception to landing the first person on the moon, and cost $257 billion adjusted for 2020 dollars ($25.4B at the time). For comparison, the Artemis program was budgeted for $86B [0], with less to spend due to NASA budget cuts. The SpaceX Artemis contract is "only" worth $2.9B. Finally, the Starship program has cost an estimated $5-8B so far [1].

Some conclusions / opinions: Starship so far is relatively cheap compared to the previous program that took Americans to the moon. Developing a moon capable rocket takes a long time, especially if they don't just copy the existing designs from 60 years ago. And a single purpose rocket will long-term be more expensive than a more generalised / reusable platform, but that's more capitalist objectives than political (e.g. beating the commies).

[0] https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/nasa-ig-artemis-will-cost...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starship

3. verzali ◴[21 Oct 25 14:55 UTC] No.45656602[source]▶
Probably not for the price they offered though.
4. philistine ◴[21 Oct 25 15:26 UTC] No.45656989[source]▶
Reusability is not a bonus like Falcon 9. The whole concept assumes reusability to refuel the lunar lander in Earth orbit since it cannot get to the Moon on its own. It must be refuelled between 10 and 20 times. They won't even say exactly how many times yet. You cannot just yeet that many Starships to get to the Moon once. You must reuse.