One of the SLS critics whom I most highly regard, and who is deeply plugged into Washington space policy and favors commercial space, has rationalized the rocket and Orion like this. While NASA will spend in excess of $3 billion a year for the foreseeable future on “pork” like the rocket and spacecraft, it now also spends $2 billion to $3 billion a year on commercial crew and cargo. That money goes to SpaceX and other companies that push forward more economical means of space transportation. My source views the agency’s payments on SLS and Orion as a “stupidity tax” that allows “good money” to be spent on commercial space.
This is probably OT, but...
At the same time, we're all free to share our knowledge and express our opinions, whatever they may be, in these forums. By and large, we even behave. I like to believe that's because there's a lot of respect here for the folks who get things done in space (some of whom are frequent commenters).
I don't see anything that will change my mind about this program for years to come.
One think that might change my mind is if they replace the solids with reusable kerolox boosters. Have them land back at the cape to refuel and fly again. Also, if they use a shorter reusable kerolox core, and add a second stage. I believe costs would come down with a mostly reusable boosters and core. Payloads would go up at the same time. Existing rocket is an expensive kludge with todays technology.
Quote from: spacenut on 07/27/2017 02:12 pmOne think that might change my mind is if they replace the solids with reusable kerolox boosters. Have them land back at the cape to refuel and fly again. Also, if they use a shorter reusable kerolox core, and add a second stage. I believe costs would come down with a mostly reusable boosters and core. Payloads would go up at the same time. Existing rocket is an expensive kludge with todays technology. So would be the vehicle you describe
Quote from: Jim on 07/27/2017 02:14 pmQuote from: spacenut on 07/27/2017 02:12 pmOne think that might change my mind is if they replace the solids with reusable kerolox boosters. Have them land back at the cape to refuel and fly again. Also, if they use a shorter reusable kerolox core, and add a second stage. I believe costs would come down with a mostly reusable boosters and core. Payloads would go up at the same time. Existing rocket is an expensive kludge with todays technology. So would be the vehicle you describeTheoretically, reusable rockets are cheaper if they fly often, but SLS will only fly once or twice a year. A reusable version of SLS would be more expensive to develop than the current design and would never fly enough to justify the cost.