SpaceX: Starship Will Be Going To the Moon, With Or Without NASA (behindtheblack.com)
- Reference: 0179918916
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/10/31/0045236/spacex-starship-will-be-going-to-the-moon-with-or-without-nasa
- Source link: https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/spacex-starship-will-be-going-to-the-moon-with-or-without-nasa/
> SpaceX is going to land this spaceship manned on the Moon, [2]whether or not NASA's SLS and Orion are ready . And even if those expensive, cumbersome, and poorly designed boondoggles are ready for those first two Artemis landings, SpaceX is likely to quickly outmatch them with numerous other private missions to the Moon, outside of NASA. It has the funds to do it, and it knows it has the customers willing to buy the flights.
The news comes from a [3]detailed update SpaceX released today on the Starship lunar lander. Here's the section where SpaceX "made it clear that it sees Starship and Superheavy as its own space effort, irrelevant of NASA":
> "To return Americans to the Moon, SpaceX aligned Starship development along two paths: development of the core Starship system and supporting infrastructure, including production facilities, test facilities, and launch sites -- which SpaceX is self-funding representing over 90% of system costs -- and development of the HLS-specific Starship configuration, which leverages and modifies the core vehicle capability to support NASA's requirements for landing crew on and returning them from the Moon. SpaceX is working under a fixed-price contract with NASA, ensuring that the company is only paid after the successful completion of progress milestones, and American taxpayers are not on the hook for increased SpaceX costs. SpaceX provides significant insight to NASA at every stage of the development process along both paths, including access to flight data from missions not funded under the HLS contract.
>
> Both pathways are necessary and made possible by SpaceX's substantial self-investments to enable the high-rate production, launch, and test of Starship for missions to the Moon and other purposes. Starship will bring the United States back to the Moon before any other nation and it will enable sustainable lunar operations by being fully and rapidly reusable, cost-effective, and capable of high frequency lunar missions with more than 100 tons of cargo capacity."
[1] https://slashdot.org/~schwit1
[2] https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/spacex-starship-will-be-going-to-the-moon-with-or-without-nasa/
[3] https://www.spacex.com/updates#moon-and-beyond
Re:What are the legal implications? (Score:4, Insightful)
NASA and the US government don't have exclusive rights to going to the moon. If the US government somehow ban them from launching they could just as easily launch from a different country out of the reach of the US.
Re: (Score:1)
You fucking dumbass. The man passed $500b. Other than a Martian City, there's like nothing he could want that he couldn't buy. The martian city is fast becoming within his reach.
Re: (Score:2)
...would be quite a feat to liquidate those 500 billion....
Re: (Score:2)
Unless the U.S. slaps export controls on its technology.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure he could launch over Mexico. He could also build it in Mexico. It's not like he doesnt have the people who believe in him behind him. If you think that is not true, you havent been to Starbase during a launch, with him there.
Re: What are the legal implications? (Score:1)
W0t? The man on the moon will sue them if they crash?
PR (Score:3)
At first I thought "no they won't", because why would you bother with the Moon if NASA's not going to pay for it?
Then, I thought that NASA has already paid for much of it, via the segmented nature of the HLS contracts, and even if Starship HLS doesn't line up with Artemis 3, you might as well run the mission if you've got the hardware. Ops and fuel costs relatively little.
Then imagine the PR boost to the first private company that lands people on the Moon and return them safely to the Earth. :D
Re: PR (Score:3)
How likely do you think it is that NASA can fly an emergency mission to the moon, and back with extra passengers, on short notice?
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, SpaceX has every motivation to do this. It allows them to test some of the tech that will take them to Mars and back.
irrelevant of NASA? (Score:2)
Irrespective...
To quote inspector Fowler, "You'll find the King's English will serve you just as well, provided you can use it properly."
Re: irrelevant of NASA? (Score:2)
Potato, tomato.
Drop tanks (Score:1)
I wondered why they want to refuel the tanks. Would a system of replaceable drop tanks not be easier to execute?
Re: Drop tanks (Score:2)
Absent a vast launch-it-all-in-one-go rocket, you would need to assemble the (full) drop tanks onto the main thing, so you would need to solve the boil-off and making-a-connector problems anyway. At that point it, topping up one vehicle may look easier.
Ouch!!!!! (Score:2)
> . And even if those expensive, cumbersome, and poorly designed boondoggles are ready for those first two Artemis landings, SpaceX is likely to quickly outmatch them with numerous other private missions to the Moon, outside of NASA.
Ouch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That's a pretty witty and funny insult (:
Ok Elon (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll believe it when Teslas can actually self-drive like you promised.
Re: Ok Elon (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't believe space x is self funded. If you went back and audited all the government handouts since their inception, Trump should be asking for majority stakeholder share with all his other socialist grabs he has going on with Intel and other companies.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Not one of musk's enterprises would survive without the tens of billions of government aid.
the pedo guy supports austerity for you, but has nothing against soshalism and government largess dumped on his garbage companies.
Re: (Score:1)
You really thought the /. crowd knows how government works? Really? The -1 is just proof not everyone's vote should be equal.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you be more specific about what SpaceX funding you consider a "government handout"?
As far as I'm aware, all the money SpaceX has received from the US government has been payment for services: delivering cargo/astronauts to the ISS, putting military satellites in orbit, etc.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, why do they keep reporting this shit?
Elon needs some more attention, wow, who would've thought -_-...