This is very disappointing, from Popular Mechanics. A real “explainer” would explain why SLS is not in fact going to get astronauts to Mars, and why “power” is not the most important figure of merit for a rocket. Instead, they just regurgitate BS from NASA.
2 thoughts on “An SLS “Explainer””
Comments are closed.
In contrast to the post above this one, in this case it’s the first sentence that is problematic.
The Space Launch System is the biggest and most expensive rocket ever developed.
I tried to comment over there, but my comment got deleted twice. I guess they can’t stand any heat. Here’s what I wrote:
A half a billion dollars for a handful of cubesats, oh joy. SLS will be obsolete before it flies thanks to Falcon Heavy and ULA Vulcan, and since most of the mass lifted to orbit for any deep space mission is fuel, the total system mass in LEO can be supplied at about 5% to 10% of the direct cost of SLS via multiple launches of FH. Amortizing the preposterous development cost of SLS over a few flights per decade while supporting a near-idle standing army of ground crew makes the comparison even more embarrassing.
SLS is a jobs program, nothing more. There are no payloads even under serious consderation (much less active development) that would need this outsize launch vehicle. Your tax dollars at play.