- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 8/29/22 at 7:59 am to LSUFanHouston
I don’t even understand the point of SLS. All it’s going to do is meet a SpaceX ship that’s already at the moon and let Elon fly the astronauts to the surface. All SLS is a huge example of proof that government simply cannot compete with private industry. What a waste of money NASA has become. It’s a shame.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:00 am to MoarKilometers
That's pretty well written stuff.
ETA: does he know anything about engine 3s?
ETA: does he know anything about engine 3s?
This post was edited on 8/29/22 at 8:02 am
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:01 am to TigerGman
quote:
Lol. I give it 7 years, tops
Have they even put a person in space yet on Starship?
I hope it all succeeds. I also wish it could all be combined into one big arse program with a asston of funding.
This post was edited on 8/29/22 at 8:03 am
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:03 am to GetCocky11
Scanned first page didn’t see anything so before I invest anymore time in this can someone explain what Artemis is and why I should care. Thanks
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:04 am to BottomlandBrew
quote:
God forbid we find an issue with a brand new piece of technology
Maybe you can point out the brand new technology? SLS is not ground breaking in anyway, the delays are all politics and incompetence.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:08 am to GetCocky11
We spent like $280 billion (in today's dollars) on Apollo.Seems like the current project is a bargain so far.
--I'm not so sure. That $ varies according to sources, one says $194 billion, but even the high number includes 1960-1973, all development, launches, failures, manned crews, 6 successful moon landings, Skylab....
Artemis is yet to get off the ground.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:09 am to DarthRebel
How far behind schedule is Artemis?
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:09 am to Pierre
quote:
explain what Artemis is and why I should care.
First launch of a new NASA program to get us to the moon
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:12 am to cypresstiger
quote:
We spent like $280 billion (in today's dollars) on Apollo.Seems like the current project is a bargain so far. --I'm not so sure. That $ varies according to sources, one says $194 billion, but even the high number includes 1960-1973, all development, launches, failures, manned crews, 6 successful moon landings, Skylab.... Artemis is yet to get off the ground.
Maybe Steven Spielberg can save us again
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:14 am to LSUFanHouston
I tried to find someone with a photo of one of the leaks, couldn't find one, so I replayed the footage and did screenshot:
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:29 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
First launch of a new NASA program to get us to the moon
shite in one hand and wait for NASA to get to the moon in the other.
Let me know which one fills up first.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:39 am to LSUFanHouston
We are at Daytona Beach and was hoping to see it from our balcony.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:49 am to AlwysATgr
quote:
How far behind schedule is Artemis?
quote:
First crew launch was supposed to be in 2016.
Officials in 2012 estimated that the SLS rocket would cost $6 billion to develop, debut in 2017 and carry a $500 million per launch price tag. But the rocket is only just now debuting, having cost more than $20 billion to develop, and its per launch price tag has ballooned to $4.1 billion.
NASA’s Inspector General, its internal auditor, earlier this year said Artemis is not the “sustainable” moon program that the agency’s officials say it is. The watchdog found more than $40 billion has already been spent on the program, and projected NASA would spend $93 billion on the effort through 2025 – when the first landing is planned.
While we want to see it launch, because rockets are cool. This program should have been killed so long ago.
SpaceX Falcon 9 was an initial $300 million to first launch. More has been spent since, but they have already started recouping development costs with working rockets for commercial use.
SLS uses existing technology, some dating back to 1970s. The goal to only make it to moon and 11 years in the works.
Starship is estimated to be $5-10 billion with a goal to make it to Mars. It really started in 2018 and should launch a rocket this year.
NASA needs to get out of rocket business and focus on the scientific side of space.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:54 am to DarthRebel
NASA is a theme park these days. Go to Houston, Huntsville, and Canaveral, they are just tourist spots.
Also a place to give shitty scientists a place to collect a pension.
Half of Canaveral is being taken over by private companies.
Also a place to give shitty scientists a place to collect a pension.
Half of Canaveral is being taken over by private companies.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:55 am to DarthRebel
quote:I wonder if that's where it was actually spent.
The watchdog found more than $40 billion has already been spent on the program
Posted on 8/29/22 at 8:58 am to GetCocky11
quote:
We spent like $280 billion (in today's dollars) on Apollo.
Seems like the current project is a bargain so far
Just because we got in a dick measuring contest with the Soviets 50 years ago doesn't mean we (the taxpayers) should pour that amount of money into bloated defense contractors today, especially when SpaceX can do it much faster and cheaper. I'm all for space exploration but there is no reason rocket development should not be 100% in the private sector now.
This post was edited on 8/29/22 at 8:59 am
Posted on 8/29/22 at 9:01 am to DarthRebel
quote:
First crew launch was supposed to be in 2016. Officials in 2012 estimated that the SLS rocket would cost $6 billion to develop, debut in 2017 and carry a $500 million per launch price tag. But the rocket is only just now debuting, having cost more than $20 billion to develop, and its per launch price tag has ballooned to $4.1 billion.
This is obscene. At some point there should probably be an oversight committee to get some answers on this. My guess is that it won’t happen because I’d bet money that politics, back room deals, and bullshite are the primary reason for most, if not all of this, so a lot of high profile players would get embarrassed.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 9:02 am to GeneralLee
Must be a lot of Huntsville baws in here with these downvotes that don't want to lose the federal money gravy train where you can be $20 billion over budget and years late without consequences. Sorry (not sorry) that SpaceX can make a reusable rocket for pennies on the dollar compared to the military industrial complex that wastes decades and billions on cost plus contracts for a one time use obsolete rocket.
Posted on 8/29/22 at 9:03 am to Nature Boy
quote:
This is obscene. At some point there should probably be an oversight committee to get some answers on this.
Richard Shelby, a former Senator from Alabama, basically kept funding for SLS in place to protect jobs in Huntsville, even though the program makes no sense anymore.
Page 6 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News