Ars OpenForum

T

TEAMSWICTHER

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
170
  • #258
    theradicalmoderate said:
    Unfortunately, that's exactly the argument that Cruz is using to continue Block 1B development.

    Hopefully, when/if Starship starts refueling successfully, his tune will change. There is a case to be made that killing SLS before something has been proven to be able to take over its mission would take an unnecessary risk.¹ But F9/D2 + even a rudimentary HLS Starship (it needs the crew module to work, but it doesn't even need to land!) is a complete replacement for its part of the Artemis conops. That's something that could be proven out this year.

    We've already flushed a nice chunk of change down the toilet for FY26 EUS and ML2 development. But the FY27-28-29-30 out-year money has only been obligated. That's nothing a nice rescission can't fix.


    _________
    ¹We'll leave aside the fact that SLS/Orion has nothing to do without an HLS, and Starship is required to do that.
    Click to expand...
    SLS is going to be hard to kill. Especially as Senators watch SpaceX and Blue Origin twist themselves into knots trying to bring their crappy, overly complex, orbital refueling, garbage architectures online. NASA mission planners will be BEGGING congress to build more SLS launch vehicles. It's simple .. one mission and one launch ... is already enough complexity. SpaceX and Blue Origin are going to embarrass themselves.
     
    Upvote
    -24 (0 / -24)