Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The worst part of this news is the continuation of the Space Launch System (SLS), which has cost over seven billion dollars (not including Ares development costs), and is expected to end up costing forty-one billion by 2025, by which time they expect to complete a total of four launches (destination: nowhere important, and probably late).

Vulcan (from ULA), New Glenn (from Blue Origin), and Falcon Heavy (from SpaceX) are all better platforms for space exploration, which could enable science (such as the Europa mission) and travel (to Mars), and cost far less than SLS (in development and $/kg to orbit). NASA should be spending money on missions, not rocket development.




The correct acronym for SLS is Senate Launch System.


Oh, are we planning to launch the Senate into LEO? That seems like a winner of an election-year policy proposal.


Vulcan, New Glenn, and the Falcon Heavy really aren't in the same league as the SLS, at least as far as lifting capacity is concerned.

I think the SLS is an excellent use of NASA's time and money at the moment. They're using proven technology to build a system that they can either:

- fall back on in the event that commercial companies aren't able to deliver something comparable

- still act as a viable launch platform if cheaper alternatives are somehow disabled (e.g. another Falcon failure)




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: