Vocal Voices

To be honest, when the first NASA Human explorers hit Mars they're likely to be offered a Beer by the SpaceX residents.

Suff wrote:To be honest, when the first NASA Human explorers hit Mars they're likely to be offered a Beer by the SpaceX residents.

Err, No, but do keep up the SpaceX ads, we love them so much. NOT.

And don't forget to dis the useless ESA in all of this, absolute rubbish organisation, so why a lead player?

Mars Sample Return (MSR) anyone? It only appears more times in your (full) graphic than SpaceX.

This is a NASA post. So the only SpaceX mention here is the HLS which SpaceX won the ONLY contract for.

So let's talk reality?

SLS? 10 years in delivery, cost around $10bn. So far, it hasn't launched yet. Cost to launch? $1bn. Parts recovered from the launch? The two boosters and the return capsule (think Apollo but a bit bigger). Lift capacity right now to LEO, 95t. Mass to trans lunar injection, 27t. All theoretical but based on their decades of experience.

How many RS25 space shuttle rocket engines does NASA have? 16. That is 4 launches. However Aerojet Rocketdyne have expanded their facilities to produce more.

These RS25 engines have compelted dozens of flights to space, returned, been refurbed and sent back to space again.

What will happen when SLS launches? They'll throw them in the sea.

Planned launches, 1 per year till 2029 except for 2026.

SpaceX.

Falcon 9 is the most productive, most stable and the workhorse rocket for the world. Almost every launch now returns the booster to earth to be refurbished and used again. Only the second stage and deployment body is burned up on reentry. They also have the Crew Dragon, and Dragon, spaceships which supply the ISS with crew and supplies respectively. Both of which are refurbished and used time and time again.

60 launches planned for 2022.

Starship 2 years in delivery (yes it's nearly 10 years since it was "designed", but they've only been working on it 2 years), cost so far $2bn. Cost to launch estimated between $2m and $100m with smart money on $10m. Re usable parts, 100%. Lift capacity expected 100t. Mass to TLI, 100t with refuelling for which starship is designed. It will take 4 launches of fuel to refuel starship to move 100t mass to the moon at a cost of up to $500m max estimate but more likely $50m.

How many rocket engines on Starship? 39, 33 on the booster and 3 atmospheric on the starship plus 3 vacuum on the starship.
How many lost per launch? None.
What is Raptor 2 production right now? 1 per day. 1 rocket worth by May. Continuing production.

Other salient facts.

Starship will have twice the thrust of SLS on take-off
Thrust for starship remains constant after take-off as all 33 raptors remain with the rocket until meco (main engine cut off). SLS loses the boosters and continues on 4 RS25. With less than 1/4 of starship thrust.

SpaceX estimates Starship will gain the capacity to lift 150t to LEO.

Planned launches? 26 to prove the entire system. Then up to mulitple times a day thereafter. Both land and sea launch and recovery capability in production.

ESA.

Ariane 5 rocket, 8.5t lift capacity, cost to launch with it, $150m. Totally discarded every launch, no re usability. 10 launches planned for 2022.

No comparison with SLS or Starship.

Ariane 6. Same as Ariane 5 essentially. 2 years late to testing.

Planned launches so far. None.

Blue Origin.

New Glenn.

Re-usable first stage two to three stage rocket to compete with Starship and SLS. Mass to LEO, 45t-90t

Current status. Vaporware. Currently even the engine has not yet completed testing and they are contracted to ULA for their defence launches.

This is the reality. There are those who are doing it and those who are talking about doing it. NASA is taking an age and a small country level defence budget. They will get there and will be irrelevant within time. SpaceX is doing it, currently hampered by constantly sliding environmental assessment. We who watch believe the environmental assessment will continue to slide until SLS makes the history books by launching first in June. Immediately to be consigned to the history books as Starship outshines it and takes over from it.

Reality is exactly that. Reality. SLS is right out of the Apollo era, 20th century approach and costs. Starship is right out of the 21st century. Fast, flexible and designed to be a space workhorse.

You can take bets on how this is going to go, but SpaceX has proven competence and is going for broke. Boeing has proven incompetence and is going broke and NASA continues to suck in vast amounts of government money so it can be fully sure not one single thing will go wrong when it's rocket takes off. Ensuring that very little progress is ever made and that very few launches will be made.