Which will launch first, SLS or Starship?

[StarshipTrooper]

A month ago SpaceX was fixing superheavy exploded bits while was NASA was counting down to launch the SLS. Now both of the superheavy contenders are back in their assembly buildings, and are looking at a likely November flight date. Oh how the worm (logo) turns.

It's a new race! Who will launch first?

Please vote, and provide your reasoning.

[AS_501]

SH has to pass a major milestone:  Successfully firing all 33 Raptors for full duration, and do this several times.  I'm pro-SLS and pro-SH, but give the edge to SLS for the moment.

[neoforce]

when i see these types of questions i always think the more interesting poll is how many times will Starship successfully make it to Orbit in between Artemis 1 and Artemis 2?  less than 5?  6-15?  16-30?  more than 30?  (I'd probably pick 16-30 in that poll)

[whitelancer64]

Voting SLS.

Looking forward to a 33 engine static fire and a full WDR from the Starship stack. Pending both of those milestones, SLS is still in the lead.

Maybe there will be a Thanksgiving miracle and both will launch in November.

[StarshipTrooper]

when i see these types of questions i always think the more interesting poll is how many times will Starship successfully make it to Orbit in between Artemis 1 and Artemis 2?  less than 5?  6-15?  16-30?  more than 30?  (I'd probably pick 16-30 in that poll)

That's a good idea, I'd be interested in that. You should create that poll.

[rpapo]

Voting SLS, but I don't expect SLS to hold on to its title very long.

[AmigaClone]

when i see these types of questions i always think the more interesting poll is how many times will Starship successfully make it to Orbit in between Artemis 1 and Artemis 2?  less than 5?  6-15?  16-30?  more than 30?  (I'd probably pick 16-30 in that poll)

For me, the number of orbital Starship missions between Artemis 1 and Artemis 2 will depend on the following factors.

1) When Starfactory Florida comes online;
2) When the Crew Access tower on SLC40 is certified for use (needs to be built first);
3) How fast SpaceX is able to start recovering the booster;
4) How fast SpaceX is able to start recovering Starship;
5) Number of months between Artemis 1 and Artemis 2.

I agree that the 16-30 seems a reasonable number of orbital Starship missions. It might be slightly optimistic, but doable is there is no serious delays in those five items.

[DanClemmensen]

I voted for Starship because I'm an eternal optimist. Starship is a fundamentally simpler system, so there are fewer things to go wrong and those things are easier to fix.

But I really want both of these system to succeed and launch soon. The Artemis III lunar landing depends on both.

[high road]

It's getting harder and harder to guess. I can easily see both of them slipping to 2023.

[Asteroza]

Didn't SLS/Artemis 1 burn one of their two remaining rollbacks to escape from hurricane Ian? NASA is going to be very hesitant to roll back out unless they utterly check everything in the VAB again, because hitting another problem at the pad that requires a rollback is going to be painful.

Starship on the other hand is free to roll whenever. There's also the implication that even if SS24/B7 flies and goes explodey too early, Elon could still get SS25/B8 to fly before SLS.

[octavo]

I think you need to be Muskian in your optimism if you think Starship will launch before SLS.  I'm no fan of SLS, but I think SpaceX has a long testing path ahead of them - the tower and chopsticks are valuable infrastructure that they're not going to risk until they're fairly comfortable that all the procedures and GSE is locked down and well characterized.

I'm not sure if I turn out to be wrong, whether I will be pleased at SpX progress or annoyed at SLS delays.

[giulioprisco]

Of course SLS will launch first, Starship won't receive a final launch authorization before the first successful launch of SLS.

[edzieba]

SLS is far ahead in terms of readiness, but it also has a far longer issue resolution loop and constrained launch opportunities. If there are no further bugs found when SLS next rolls out then it will very likely launch first, but it would only take one or two more instances of "huh, that's odd..." for Starship to pull ahead.

[Jim]

Of course SLS will launch first, Starship won't receive a final launch authorization before the first successful launch of SLS.

That is without merit and ill-informed

[DanClemmensen]

Didn't SLS/Artemis 1 burn one of their two remaining rollbacks to escape from hurricane Ian? NASA is going to be very hesitant to roll back out unless they utterly check everything in the VAB again, because hitting another problem at the pad that requires a rollback is going to be painful.

Starship on the other hand is free to roll whenever. There's also the implication that even if SS24/B7 flies and goes explodey too early, Elon could still get SS25/B8 to fly before SLS.

The poll question is "Which will launch first?", not "Which will succeed first?". If "SS24/B7 flies and goes explodey", then it has launched.  Of course, if it just explodes before leaving the pad, then SLS will probably launch first.  Similarly, if SLS launches and then overstressed, overaged SRBs fail and cause a RUD, it will still have launched first.

[Hog]

Quoted from NSF.com member Steven Pietrobon, though I, for some of our North American brethren, have included the converted pounds/force thrust figures.

"Two more days to liftoff! Wow. What a journey this has been. Through Ares V, "We've been there before", Direct and finally through all the controversy to SLS.
Hopefully, we can add it to this list as the second most powerful launch vehicle in the world at 38.37 MN/8,625,919 lbs/force.

Vehicle                  Thrust (1st stage)
N-1            41.36 MN/9,298,097 pounds/force
Energia        35.10 MN/7,890,793
Saturn V       33.85 MN/7,609,782
Space Shuttle  30.90 MN/6,946,596
Falcon Heavy   24.68 MN/5,548,284
Atlas V 551    12.27 MN/2,758,405.
GSLV Mk.III    11.66 MN/2,621,272
Ariane 5       11.40 MN/2,562,821
CZ-5           10.64 MN/2,391,967
H-IIB           9.98 MN/2,243,593
Proton-M        9.94 MN/2,234,600
Angara A5       9.61 MN/2,160,413
Delta IV Heavy  9.41 MN/2,115,452 "

SLS will have the most powerful 1st stage of any rocket the US has ever launched. N-1 had the most powerful 1st stage to "ever launch".

I voted for SLS, even though it's at a major disadvantage due to its launch constraints.  SS/SH can launch whenever the vehicle is ready, SLS must wait for the planets to align and avoid certain eclipses for Orion. Heavy rests the crown for a launch vehicle at the end of it's development period.

[DanClemmensen]

I voted for SLS, even though it's at a major disadvantage due to its launch constraints.  SS/SH can launch whenever the vehicle is ready, SLS must wait for the planets to align and avoid certain eclipses for Orion. Heavy rests the crown for a launch vehicle at the end of it's development period.

If SLS is ready, it can launch in October, so it's not a "major disadvantage." NASA chose not to launch in the October window, but that's not because of the window, it's because SLS needs lots of gentleness and loving care.
If it makes you feel better, then if Starship launches in the "Artemis I cannot launch" period (Nov 1-11) and SLS launches on one of the first two available days of the window (Nov 12 or 14) , you can count it as a tie as far as I care. I want to see both of them launch.

[ZachS09]

I think you need to be Muskian in your optimism if you think Starship will launch before SLS.  I'm no fan of SLS, but I think SpaceX has a long testing path ahead of them - the tower and chopsticks are valuable infrastructure that they're not going to risk until they're fairly comfortable that all the procedures and GSE is locked down and well characterized.

I'm not sure if I turn out to be wrong, whether I will be pleased at SpX progress or annoyed at SLS delays.

Didn’t I hear a rumor that SpaceX was thinking about doing a booster catch attempt on the first orbital test flight?

My point is to further on octavo’s statement of the tower and chopsticks being valuable infrastructure. And in the event of the potential catch attempt failing, it can cause a setback of who knows how long.

[AmigaClone]

I think you need to be Muskian in your optimism if you think Starship will launch before SLS.  I'm no fan of SLS, but I think SpaceX has a long testing path ahead of them - the tower and chopsticks are valuable infrastructure that they're not going to risk until they're fairly comfortable that all the procedures and GSE is locked down and well characterized.

I'm not sure if I turn out to be wrong, whether I will be pleased at SpX progress or annoyed at SLS delays.

Didn’t I hear a rumor that SpaceX was thinking about doing a booster catch attempt on the first orbital test flight?

My point is to further on octavo’s statement of the tower and chopsticks being valuable infrastructure. And in the event of the potential catch attempt failing, it can cause a setback of who knows how long.

One thing I learned in the aftermath of CRS-16 (the only time a return to launch site landing attempt failed) is that the reentry burn for the Falcon 9 initially either targets a site just a bit offshore, or to one side of the drone ships. It's only during the landing burn that the first stage booster moves above it's targeted landing location.

My understanding of the FCC documents where SpaceX proposed to make a catch attempt is that SpaceX wants to have the ability to decide to make the catch attempt depending on how much control they have over the Super Heavy booster..

[laszlo]

when i see these types of questions i always think the more interesting poll is how many times will Starship successfully make it to Orbit in between Artemis 1 and Artemis 2?  less than 5?  6-15?  16-30?  more than 30?  (I'd probably pick 16-30 in that poll)

"a Starship" or "the same Starship"?