5 thoughts on “The MLP”

1. No, not when it flies. When it lands crew on the moon.
   Until then you have to pay the US entry to space tariff.

   The only other way I know of doing a shortcut would be if the private enterprise opertions set up shops next door to those companies doing SLS contracts and started siphoning off employees. Could they then get the Congress to relent a little? Even for the folks who have skills that didn’t tranfer to your company could you still pay their salary to allow them to twiddle thumbs for a fraction of what we’re being taxed for since there are no captial materials cost?

2. They can’t do math. It’s 80% over budget:

   “But the first launcher cost $308 million more than a budget set in 2014, for a total of $693 million, according to the report released Tuesday from NASA’s Office of Inspector General.”

3. NASA has managed to top Apollo! Back then, the unofficial operating principle of NASA was “Waste anything but time.” Today, they’re wasting everything, especially time. Way to go, NASA! /s

   Actually, this latest expenditure doesn’t surprise me. NASA spent $500 million on the launch tower for the Ares I Corndog.

4. The tipping point criteria is when the Starship demonstrates its overall superiority compared to the SLS. Nothing less and nothing more.

   The point where Starship demonstrates its superiority will be when it reaches orbit the first time. We can reasonably anticipate that the first stage will likely be recovered and so the Starship would clearly be shown to be far more cost-effective than he SLS. But that is practically a given.

   But the only legitimate thing that the SLS has going for it is that it is at the SHLV level unlike the FH. When Starship achieves orbit there could be some question as to how much payload it could deliver there. SLS B2 plans for 130 mt and the first Starship might be less than that. Yet the likelihood of future improvements to the Starship and also the likelihood that the Starship will be able to be refueled in orbit means that Starship reaching orbit essentially places it at the SLS level of capability.

   Certainly decision-makers with vested interests for SLS may continue pushing for SLS despite the logical criteria being met. However the many other decision-makers who don’t have a vested interest will be in the position with nothing personally to gain by continuing to supports SLS and their reputations to lose for supporting something that is a massive waste of money for no good reason. The media who like poking officials in the eye won’t miss the opportunity of asking why the support continues when Starship is clearly the better and nearly available options.

   We space advocates can help ensure that Starship is recognized as superior when the criteria is met by pushing for the general recognition of the criteria.

   DevelopSpace.info/tippingpoint

   1. But the only legitimate thing that the SLS has going for it is that it is at the SHLV level unlike the FH.

      Technically, that’s not true: Super heavy lift is typically defined in the industry as over 50mT to Low Earth Orbit. And Falcon Heavy exceeds that, at least in expendable mode (63.8mT).

      What limits Falcon Heavy more is the (relatively) small fairing volume. It’s adequate for the comsats it typically launches, but would be a lot more limiting if you’re sending up (say) lunar lander components. Of course, assuming that SpaceX lands one of the NSSL Phase II awards, it will be introducing a somewhat larger (5.4m x 18x6m) fairing to accommodate the big NRO sats; but obviously, SpaceX’s real solution to this problem is going to be Starship. Falcon Heavy has always been just an interim super heavy lift solution for Elon Musk.

      But even if Starship never flies, SLS’s larger payload mass and volume simply is not enough to justify its continued existence. It’s simply not a rocket anyone can afford to operate – not even NASA. The fact that it’s mobile launcher costs almost DOUBLE what it cost SpaceX to develop Falcon Heavy is the crowning achievement on this epic pork project.

Comments are closed.