• AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Wow, no. Look at what nasa is producing with Artemis. Business as usual is $2B/launch, way over budget, and years behind schedule. There is no path to launch more than 1-2/year and they depend on reusing old components with very limited supply.

    In contrast Falcon 9 cost nasa less than one Artemis launch has an unmatched record of reliability, drastically reduced launch costs, made reusability practical, and has earned its place launching 80% (by mass) of the world’s payload to orbit. Nothing matches its record

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t know why you’re being downvoted, but you’re right. SpaceX made a lot of advancements on its rockets and in lowering the price per launch.

      This is objective. This isn’t sentimental or arguable.