←back to thread

NASA chief suggests SpaceX may be booted from moon mission

(www.cnn.com)
404 points voxleone | 6 comments | 21 Oct 25 12:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.843s | source | bottom
Show context
allenrb ◴[21 Oct 25 20:38 UTC] No.45661384[source]▶
There is just so much wrong with this from start to finish. Here are a few things, by no means inclusive:

1. We’ve already beaten China to the moon by 56 years, 3 months, and some change. And counting.

2. Nothing based around SLS is remotely serious. The cost and timeline of doing anything with it are unreasonable. It is an absolute dead-end. The SpaceX Super Heavy has been more capable arguably as early as the second flight test and certainly now. They could have built a “dumb” second stage at any time, but aren’t that short-sighted.

3. Blue Origin? I’ve had high hopes for the guys for two decades now. Don’t hold your breath.

4. Anyone else? Really, really don’t hold your breath.

This whole “race to the moon, part II” is almost criminally stupid. Land on the moon when we can accomplish something there, not just to prove we haven’t lost our mojo since Apollo.

replies(37): >>45661569 #>>45661650 #>>45661812 #>>45661864 #>>45662019 #>>45662078 #>>45662268 #>>45662530 #>>45662636 #>>45662805 #>>45662869 #>>45663083 #>>45663232 #>>45663254 #>>45664108 #>>45664333 #>>45664434 #>>45664870 #>>45665102 #>>45665180 #>>45665389 #>>45665607 #>>45665948 #>>45666137 #>>45666225 #>>45666739 #>>45667016 #>>45667353 #>>45667484 #>>45667622 #>>45668139 #>>45668273 #>>45671330 #>>45671920 #>>45674500 #>>45674624 #>>45680644 #
1. paganel ◴[21 Oct 25 22:27 UTC] No.45662530[source]▶
> 1. We’ve already beaten China to the moon by 56 years, 3 months, and some change. And counting.

The Portuguese used to have the best sea-worthy ships throughout the 1400s. They were soon followed by the Spanish. It didn't matter, because by the 1600s the Dutch, and then the English, had transformed the world's big seas and oceans into their playground.

In other words, if you don't use it you lose it, and right now the Americans need to "use" it, they need to show that they're still capable of getting to the Moon and beyond.

replies(2): >>45662825 #>>45673455 #
2. fwip ◴[21 Oct 25 23:00 UTC] No.45662825[source]▶
Sailing vessels serve an actual purpose, though. The Dutch didn't build better boats for bragging rights.
replies(1): >>45663106 #
3. dekhn ◴[21 Oct 25 23:31 UTC] No.45663106[source]▶
National pride has long been tightly coupled to seafaring capabilities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship) "Richly decorated as a symbol of the king's ambitions for Sweden and himself, upon completion she was one of the most powerfully armed vessels in the worl"
replies(2): >>45666729 #>>45670479 #
4. TomWhitwell ◴[22 Oct 25 09:37 UTC] No.45666729{3}[source]▶
Underrated comment
5. fwip ◴[22 Oct 25 15:18 UTC] No.45670479{3}[source]▶
Sorry, you're right - they didn't build them solely for bragging rights.
6. ramblenode ◴[22 Oct 25 18:47 UTC] No.45673455[source]▶
The British won out over the Spanish because they realized they didn't need enormous warships to win naval battles. The Spanish weren't ignoring the need for a navy--they miscalculated and misallocated resources.

The irony is that the commenters saying we must go back to the moon are more like the Spanish: sticking to a sentimental 1960s vision of human-based space exploration despite evidence clearly favoring robotics and remote control.