Boeing Expects NASA to Cancel SLS Contracts, Signaling The Demise of SLS...
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.พ. 2025
- Boeing Braces for NASA to Cancel SLS Contracts, Signaling The Demise of SLS...
Thank you for supporting my channel.
My channel started as a way to keep people up to date on the world of SpaceX's Starlink, the satellite internet service. The channel has grown to include the broader Elon Musk universe.
#SpaceX #starship #elonmusk #starbase
Your support for my channel means a lot. Thanks for watching and if you have any video ideas, shoot me an email, eliana.sheriff@gmail.com.
Find me on instagram, @elianainspace
Order your own 3D printed Starship at:
stardesk.peach...
Want to support Ellie in Space?
Join my Patreon here: www.patreon.co...
Logo creator: www.tonybela.com/
Here's the thing: at the glacial pace that NASA operates at, if the SLS program isn't cancelled now, we're just going to be asking the same question of ourselves in 4-8 years when no progress will have been made but we'll be under a different administration with likely the same concerns.
At whatever cost the United States should be a free and fair society with elections leading the way to who controls us once someone with too much power has control. There will be no more innovation. People do not understand what a great opportunity. The United States has to offer every single one of us with this country has to offer. Is anybody within of hard work determination can make millions of dollars if you do not believe that then you should no longer live here and move to China or Russia.
and the biggest issue is Musk
In the meantime, SpaceX will have weekly flights to and from the moon.
More like 20 years in the future.
SLS could launch the Artemis 2 mission probably this year, within 18 months at the latest, once Orion is ready to fly. How long will it be before Starship TLI?
That was the worst performance of an aerospace company on a major project I've ever seen in my life. What a fiasco. Boeing should be ashamed.
Oh, I thought you meant the luxury balloon company! But yeah, post-merger Boeing should not be allowed near the pooch… for the pooch’s sake
This is not true, they should be proud of what they have done, they set out to burn the peoples money and they did and are.
*Shut down
Federal Agency NASA micro-managed, corrupted, screwed up, rendered wasteful/inefficient/incompetent every contractor it worked with…
Until SpaceX came along & said “FU NASA, we’ll do it ourselves, our way”.
@@tedmossthat’s one way to look at it I guess. The entire aerospace and defense industry has been looking for more efficient ways to waste taxpayer money for decades.
The sad state of Boeing. It's what happens when a bureaucracy achieves maximum stagnation.
All they needed was to double the number of managers, meetings and MBA generated power point slides… again.🤣
No, it’s what happens when capitalism consumes a corporation entirely and focuses on profits over innovation
Not correct, this is what happens when the government bureaucracy reaches maximum stagnation. Boeing is but a small sample of it. We could save 70% of the peoples money, not a paltry 4 trillion.
It's just capitalism. Defeat the competition by whatever means. Then sit back and take profits while allowing quality to crash. When the customer has had enough, declare bankruptcy. In the mean time, skim off as much money as possible in the form of bonuses, stocks, etc. (Not dividends.)
@@januslast2003 yes. That aspect of capitalism was the whole rationale for the game Monopoly. Once you get a monopoly you double the rent
Boeing is what happens when a company evolves to survive on maximum government bureaucracy. They were all set to hang on like a leach, until SpaceX came along, and all of a sudden, they had to produce a product in a couple of years that they had really anticipated never having to produce at all.
yeah because SpaceX totally killing and are not years behind schedule.
What's your estimate on what SpaceX has received in government (public) subsidies? (Psst … it's now more than US$19 billion.)
@AndrewJens I'm guessing that's about to get a lot bigger... Musk wants a return on the 300 million he spent to help keep trump out of jail .
@@AndrewJens and if it weren't for all the other things delaying Arthemis, it would be delayed because there is no human landing system, which depends on SpaceX spaceship.
Boeing has been going for pure profit for a long time resulting in airlines cancelling purchases or going to alternative options.
Senate Launch System designed to send money to Senator districts, not to cost-effectively go to space
Nice rebranding haha
🤣
And another thing it was designed to do is keep as many rocket engineers employed for as long as possible. Actually flying was lower on the list
Best description yet!
It's been a very successful program for its intended goals.
Welfare for Boeing that don't break the international agreements banning aircraft builder subsidies.
If they would let us vote on which Senators to stick on each rocket it could easily be self funding. $5/vote. 4 Senators per trip. One way only.
The problem with modern Boeing is that the management thinks that they have completed the job when the check clears.
or are on cost+ contarcts still which nevber need to end........ Bieing skimped on starliner testing, just used lawyers to say ... obviously it works.
@@tonyug113 cost ++ actually for most of history, thankfully SpaceX shamed NASA to back off to only cost+, but SpaceX just does cost.
Yep. You don't even need DOGE to figure that out. It had it coming for quite a while.
LOL
Yeah I don't remember if it was NASA or a CBO report that came out before the election, but it was pretty damning. So this was probably coming no matter what.
Trump wants to be the President that takes the U.S. back to the moon so unless there is an alternative to Artemis that gives him what he wants he will back Artemis. But probably only white men will go.
5 years too late
@@Scanner9631UGH... permavictim grifters! 🙄🔫
I have a book from about 2011 that described how SLS is an inefficient jobs program. Took a while for that to percolate through the collective consciousness.
That was known by many before any book was written.
Can you post something about that book on the internet? We all know the state of the SLS program for years, but until very recent there was a collective denial about it. As if it was a matter of opinion. It will be very beneficial to the public discussion if proof is displayed about how this was known at least 14 years ago and thus how deliberate officials were in pretending it was a real viable program.
@@mennol3885 Oh yes, excellent idea!
@@mennol3885 The Plundering of NASA: an Exposé, Paperback - April 14, 2013
by R.D. Boozer
we all knew that's what it was the whole time
Ten years over due in my options. It was nothing but a MASSIVE waste of money, corporate welfare. And yes, I was saying this ten years ago, this is not hindsight.
You are completely wrong. SLS worked on its first launch, putting a man-rated capsule into orbit around the moon. What has Starship accomplished? Iterating on a design with one failed launch after another might work on a medium size vehicle like Falcon 9, but it will be an economic disaster for SpaceX. It will take them 10 years to man rate that thing, and I predict they will go bankrupt in the process. People will look back in 2035 when SpaceX is Penn Central turning into Conrail, and wish we'd pushed forward with the proven SLS system.
@@geocam2behind schedule and over budget with outdated technology isn't a success. The heat shield is problematic as well. More delays
SLS is too expensive for the benefits it offers. Shut it down entirely.
Bowling an ass to corrupt and they are paying too many people off enough for them to be completely successful. This is why the communist party of China is going to fail and us. The people of the United States should not let free speech and good ideas fail because they don’t support the right party
The problem is people in the United States. Don’t realize how good they have it. This country is based on anybody who has good idea and hard-working can make really big in this country and just because everybody is not wealthy without doing any hard work is not a good capitalist society it rewards nothing. I immigrated to this country because it was the land of opportunity and it is as long as you’re willing to work hard think for yourself and advance yourself. Just because you don’t wanna work hard or do anything does not mean you should have the same amount of things and possessions somebody that works really hard.
🎯 ✔️ Exactly. This has gotten way "over the top", and for too long.
Yup; not even meaningfully reusable.
@@wotireckon Exactly, SLS is based on decades old 'disposable tech' concept. imo
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out Boeing.
Boeing is two top heavy. This is why United States is great country because if you have the right skills, you will succeed in United States is not a country that rewards people for doing nothing other than employing the right colored people or the right sexual orientation of people. A good business owner knows that whoever your employee as long as they’re smart and tell Ted, who cares about the rest, the rest will also be more appreciated when success follows not only their sexual orientation or beliefs, but their skills is what’s more important this is why DEI will never work. It’s a completely novel skill to promote people based on their skills not on their skin race or pronouns. It’s a totally new novel idea, but it will always work.
Considering that SpaceX could build a booster in 6 months that Boeing can't build in 12 years, good riddance SLS.
More like 6 weeks....
Boeing and NASA have dropped the ball. Give it to SpaceX and Blue Origin.
SLA first launch sent the capsule around the moon and back.
7th launch of starship left a massive debris field over Turks and Caicos.
But hey, hope Elon sees this and you get that digital head pat you so desperately need!
@@wyattnoise ???
@@wyattnoise of course they're not comparable.
Starships are supposed to blow up at this stage in development.
SLS exists because Congress says it should for political reasons, and a big part of politics is looking good.
SLS - Senator Lobbiest Slushfund. The project was a step back 50 years, made no progress for space launch vehicles and simply absorbed US Tax Payer money to benefit contractors who had no incentive to make it a success. RIP SLS.
SLS has survived because Senators wanted to keep the gravy train going for their respective home states. It kept the contractors for the retired Space Shuttle going with government money. Enough with the expensive and safety compromised solid rocket boosters. The idea of Artemis being an initiative to create a sustainable presence on the Moon was always a fallacy if it included the extremely expensive SLS. I don't know if SpaceX and Starship are the best alternative, but as far as SLS is concerned, the Congress should stop throwing good money after bad.
Much as I despise what Musk has become, SpaceX and Starship Superheavy are the best option for heavy lift to orbit. I'm not sure that it's the best for the full round trip to the moon, but if it can put 100+ tons in orbit, it could support lifting a lunar transfer vehicle and a smaller moon lander as two separate components, possibly with enough delta V to return to Low Earth orbit if you leave the lunar lander in Low Lunar Orbit. Then the LTV could be refuelled by Starship in LEO.
First lunar flight would be unmanned, carrying the reusable lunar lander and some propellant. Subsequent flights would carry a crew capsule, possibly Orion or an upgraded Dragon, plus additional propellant for the lunar lander. Add infrastructure by sending one way landers with payload, engines and propellant to make a soft landing. Even if it costs $200 million a launch, you could get more than 10 flights for the price of a single SLS launch.
@@stainlesssteelfox1 I'm starting to think that the objective of beating China back to the Moon shouldn't be the primary focus. Creating a sustainable pathway for making repeated flights to the Moon while avoiding stupendous costs should be. Let China get back to the Moon first if need be, given all the time that's been lost on the U.S. deep space crewed program. The U.S. might then be able to position itself to build infrastructure in lunar orbit and the lunar surface more readily than China will be able to do it.
@@takashitamagawa5881 I agree completely.
Im no Bezos fan, but hes gonna be pumping out a lot of New Glenns within the next year. Neutron isnt far behind. In 36 months were back on the moon.
@ Neutron isn't really a contender for manned moon missions. It only has a TLI payload of 1500 kg. New Glenn does better with a TLI payload of 7000 kg, which would allow for a small crew capsule direct to Lunar Orbit, though that is realy scraping the low end.
Both systems use a more efficient hydrolox upper stage rather than the larger Starship, and are expendable. TBH, only New Glenn is really anywhere near practical for it, and like Starship, only as the LEO delivery vehicle.
45 metric tons to LEO would be enough for a Lunar Transfer Vehicle, or just 5 tons under the mass of the old Apollo Stack (CSM+LM+fairings). So you could put a lunar mission into LEO in two launches, though the margins would be tight.
I'm not sure you'd get a reusable LTV or CSM/LM combination out of it either.
The days of endless funding for failing programs are over. Unfortunately, Boeing continues their string of product failures into another year.
Nah, only the days of funding this failing program, and some other programs for which young commercial enterprises are competing.
The SLS worked on its first flight. Starship is a disaster.
@@geocam2 it is politically necessary that SLS look good.
Also, it's not doing anything new.
Starship as a concept is something that's never been done before, and it's very difficult... but that's not directly why Starships that have been launched blow up.
All the ships so far have been prototypes, tests to see how little weight and complexity they can get away with.
I predict that Starship will cost way more, and take way longer, than anyone anticipates.
What's the point of launching 2 and 3 and then cancelling? Unless it can be made viable (unlikely), it should be cancelled right away.
Because suffering though any other 2-4 years of delays is a lot cheapest and faster than developing a way to get astronauts to lunar orbit and provide a reentery vehicle
It’s easier to just use the rockets we have to beat China while we work on a way to do what sls did using starship or otherwise
The flight hardware is mostly ready. If they dont fly 2 and 3 on sls they are going to be further delayed.
Best argument I've seen is to fulfill international agreements.
@@EricCumbee I'm just a fanboy, so what I think carries zero weight, but seems like putting the effort into finding a viable system for it would be better than spending money on a rocket you know you don't want to use for the actual mission. Mating the flight hardware to another rocket will probably require retesting everything anyway.
@ I know everyone talks about chasing China, but what's the point? The moon is a pretty big place, so I don't think staking claims is going to be a problem for the foreseeable future. And in any case, we've already beaten them by 60 years or so.
SLS was a dinosaur 🦕 from the get go. Adiós 👋
I agree. NASA never saw SpaceX coming when congresss created the Artemis program..
@@ellieinspace I hope their eyes are open Now!
Worse than a dinosaur in my mind. I feel like the Saturn V was a better rocket in every way than SLS.
@@SebastianWellsTLelaborate on “better in every way”
@@SebastianWellsTLEvery way except the RS-25 engines intended for (and some used on) Shuttle flights.
Of course, SLS takes the reuseable RS-25 and downgrades them to disposeable.
I remember being in college in 2004 when W proclaimed we’d be going back to the moon and the shuttle program would be wound down. Now it is nearly 21 years to the day and there’s nothing to show for it.
Inside the span of 8 years, Apollo basically started from scratch and completed the goal.
Which should tell you something and really start questioning either they faked it or that deliberately don't want to go back and if it's the latter, you should ask why
Apollo spent about 330 Billion in today’s dollars, with freedom to get pretty much anything it wanted as a national strategic initiative. 400,000 people were employed on the program. SLS has spent less than one tenth of that, with about 1200 current Boeing employees. Not really comparable.
@@rdspam the early days, the space programs were on the bleeding edge and had to learn. Not so much now for Boeing, right?
Blue Origin and their Luna lander along with Starship HLS backed up and both will be necessary to maintain the posture of the United States in space exploration. As for SLS… It’s a great opportunity for hitting the reset button. Another awesome video Ellie.
Basically, China is going to land first now. There is no way HLS will be ready by 2030. A strategy of using many Falcon Heavies, assembling an Apollo-like lander combo with Orion would work. But the idea that given the current state of SpaceX Starship today, they're going to be putting humans on the moon with an HLS in 2030 is absolute fantasy. Musk *always* misses deadlines and cost estimates.
They're on the 8th test flight of a ship that costs about $150 million (by Musk's own claims) per flight. They haven't recovered the ship once. They've recovered the booster, but heavily damaged and not immediately reusable. They damage Stage 0 everytime. The chopsticks need repair everytime. The heat tiles don't work yet. They haven't made it to orbit. They don't have a tanker. They haven't demoed refueling flights. They haven't demo'ed cold restart after days say, in lunar orbit. They haven't even met their thrust levels required yet. Raptor V3 hasn't even flown yet.
By cancelling SLS, which did make it to the moon with Orion, and successfully returned, they're cancelling pretty much the only guaranteed path in the short term to getting people there. Choosing HLS as a "lander" never made sense. It's better as the "transport truck" to carry a base to the moon, but the actual lander to take people up and down from lunar surface should be super simple and safe and built on rock solid proven technologies.
Unfortunately, given the Musk fanboy base, which does not completely overlap with the Space fanboy base, they won't see it until it's too late, that this reckless-bull-in-a-china-shop approach is simply going to delay the return, put lives in danger, and hand China the win.
Except Blue Origin isn't up to the task, unless Musk decides to help them.
@@tedmoss That is total BS. Just because Blue does things differently to X, doesn't mean they are useless. BE4 engines worked well on two rockets on their respective first flights. With every Falcon 9 crash, some people said they would NEVER land a rocket, but now they have many units that have landed over a dozen times. In the same way, Blue may not have stuck their first landing, but the launch was a success and there is more to come.
Well said Martin. From a spacex fan rooting for blue origin too
Musk will cancel all non SpaceX contracts.
Thanks for literally nothing, Boeing.
What a kingly price we paid for it.
It kept Senators in office and kept people employed, so they fulfilled their mission.
A lot of startups never really expect that their concepts will make it to reality. But the founders and directors always get paid exceptionally well while the company has plenty of investor capital…
This has been generally true since 400 years ago, maybe before that.
SLS rocket plus Orion capsule was going to cost over 4 billion per launch. It's insanity and it's unsustainable
Per LAUNCH?!? That's insane. SpaceX has only spent between $5M and $10M on the total development of Starship.
@@calebfuller4713 lol that not true, Starship Program is at least $2B now
@@MrWayne976But spacex use there own money,
@@terencereeder9830 There may be government money involved, as in $4 billion for the Human Landing System variant of Starship.
@@MrWayne976 As of May of 2023 it looked like they were approaching $5 billion in terms of money spent on Starship development, as in; "SpaceX will have spent $5 billion or more on its Starship vehicle and launch infrastructure by the end of this year, according to court filings and comments by the company’s chief executive."
Thanks Ellie, informative as usual.
Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for watching, I tried to keep it short on a Friday night
If NASA takes any action with this, I guarantee there will be lawsuits citing DOGE and a conflict of interest.
A lawsuit alleging massive government corruption, fraud and waste, if the program is continued, would be more successful.
It's been obvious for a decade or more that SLS was too expensive, taking too long and it's technology was outdated. Most people knew cancelling it was probably inevitable, regardless of which political party is in power.
Someone tell NASA that we want our money back. Fools.
In fairness, NASA never wanted SLS. It was forced on them by Congress.
Continuing SLS sounds like giving in to the sunk cost fallacy.
Planning to terminate it sounds like *deliberately* giving in to the sunk cost fallacy.
"If we keep spending money on this maybe we'll get something out of it" vs "Let's keep funding this even though we know we're not getting anything out of it."
Instead of layoffs, why do they not pivot to reuseability? I don't get it. Go SpaceX!
You would need big leadership and cultural changes.
They just don't know how
Reusability - putting DEI workers into the nations Dumpster Truck unions. 😅
Because you would need to entirely redesign an already designed, tooled and tested rocket that would end up costing potentially tens of billions of extra dollars for abysmal return. Because why spend extra billions making a rocket reusable when it’s only going to launch once or twice a year at most? Falcon 9 and Starship it makes sense since falcon launches sometimes every few days, and they intend to do the same with starship. SLS was just never designed to have the launch cadence to take advantage of reusability.
@Notbigbird
Hey, slow down the common sense. You're overdoing the corruption pendulum effect. 🤔😁🏆
Any Aerospace company that has managers that are only MBA bean counting accountants instead of actual Aerospace, Mechanical, Electrical, and Computer Engineers making their long term decisions will not last long in the Aerospace business. Bye Bye Boeing. You are a far cry today from the company that helped make Apollo in the 60's.
Thank you for the update Ellie!
If there's SLS hardware lying around, better use it for other missions like Dragonfly and Mars Sample Return.
This honestly makes the most sense. The more I think about it the more I like it.
I'll say let a smaller agile company develop such missions. Give them access to all the leftover shuttle derived and sls hardware.
Basically, recreate the apolo 13 scene where they throw shit on the table and say, "Make this, using that."
I am willing to bet that there are teams out there more than capable of Frankensteining some systems to pull this off. The best part is we dont have human lives on the line.
So a lot could be learned from it. Good idea.
good riddance Boeing, a massive waste of money
THe news just keeps getting better! Thank you for relaying this promptly. YAY!
Thank you for keeping us informed
It’s my job!!!!
excellent space journalism right here
Apologizing for two videos in one day?!?! Are you nuts girl? I am sure all 178,000+ of us have no problem with that, I sure don't!
hello starship and virgin galactic
what about BO they will have another rocket ready in 2 years time.
I hope that NASA does not cancel the contract because most contracts are written so that if it is cancelled the government pays all costs. Make Boeing default so they eat the overages.
We appreciate the info. Please never apologize for making more videos. We'll take em all!
goodbye sls
Like, I expect an official cancellation any day now...
Great show, thanks for the hard work and fast reporting.
Good day from Goonellabah, NSW, Australia. SLS should be cancelled, yes. I applied to NASA in 1974 to be an astronaut in the Apollo Space Program, and I became an engineer. SpaceX does more with less capital. I was the project manager and civil engineer. I worked as an engineer in Singapore from 1999 to 2005. We designed and constructed twelve-kilometre tunnels with two boring tunnel machines and five stations. I also managed 160 engineers and architects. I have been a contract engineer since 1975, Constructing sewage and water treatment plants from Melbourne to Cairns. 🤗Cheers, Ian Cleland
Ian, I believe NASA made a mistake not following up on you . Marvelous career . Aussie Aussie Aussie Oi Oi Oi 🇦🇺 🇺🇸 Getting ready for snow here tomorrow ☃️✌️
What the hell does building sewage treatment plants in Australia have to do with rockets and space programs ??? Really ?
@@johnrday2023 A good engineer, even if not formally trained can build anything, just ask my Scottish ancestors.
Something fishy here..Just how.old are you today
Hi Ian
I’m involved in a sewage project on Oahu, converting an injection type well into something far better. I’m not an engineer, but the plans look something like an interplanetary shit ship!
I just retired from Boeing. People like me (critical of our company) were saying this for years. Cancel SLS. Boeing is the most sick among all of the government’s PRIME contractors. The government will put up with a lot for the commercial division because it’s the biggest US exporter. But the Defense side has been whittled down to skin and bones. If they don’t win a critical classified program, they could be gone within a decade.
Thank You Ellie...
As I remember it, the SLS in a way started in 2004, It was then called the Ares 5! That was over 20 years ago! Let that sink in! Billions upon billions wasted on that program.
Tens of billions. And you're right. The name changed, but the basic SLS configuration has been around for 21 flipping years.
I will let Boeing dig their own grave re SLS Programs/Missions. The fact is it was a dated concept and out of date design (that could only ever launch one or two SLS Rockets per year - and at huge cost that NASA could never justify or pay), that NASA was part of the problem (& NASA should own up to and admit their responsibilities and guilty of project mismanagement) - part of which was political, to share and spread money around certain states, and not to produce up to date rocket designs for space missions!
This channel is awesome!
Thank you so much! I'm glad you like it!
Is it really happening? So far SLS has been like the beast in hotel California …
Mirrors on the ceiling, the pink champagne on ice
And she said, "We are all just prisoners here of our own device"
And in the master's chambers, they gathered for the feast
They stab it with their steely knives, but they just can't kill the beast
as much as we might all love impoundment, this beast only arose from the ashes of constellation due to congress and over the desires and against the wishes of the obama white house. let’s see how placid the congress is now…
All those years of Boeing experience have come to this. What a shame. At least SpaceX is carrying the torch forward.
It's time for the NASA of the future!!!
@@SebastianWellsTL
There is and never will be a future minded NASA. That's like a forward looking lemming.
2 Ellie in Space videos in one day? What could possibly be wrong with that?
Keep up the good work!
Cheers from Alaska
I think this one is kinda a sure thing.... They wouldn't have had this meeting if the Whitehouse hadn't already informed them SLS was being canceled. If there was wiggle room they would be lobbing contacts in DC, not preparing employees for the worst.
I said about 10 years ago that 13 Saturn Vs were launched and I doubted that SLS would ever reach that number.
Does anybody trust their reentry shield? It came back with huge chunks missing and they weren’t gonna change it. Instead they were gonna see if it would survive a more intense reentry with astronauts inside.
You are confusing SLS and CCTS (Starliner). Related, but separate programs.
it would have been a LESS intense reentry...and yes, still quite dangerous.
@ steeper angle of descent to shorten the duration
Balloon to space would have been sooooooo dangerous!
Not sad Boing. Sad for we TAX CATTLE...
Leadership by MBAs and accountants is great for shareholders. Just don't expect timely results or staying under budget when govt money is flowing in.
Someone needs to investigate why that tower isn't done.
This is what happens when they kept getting those cost-plus contracts. They were literally incentivized to make no progress.
Balloons are not able to exit the atmosphere anyway 😒
Artemis is the definition of re-inventing the wheel
Whatever gets us to the moon and mars faster. Artemis program and Aris program. Should be a priority.
The funding bill required SLS to use technology from the space shuttle era, so the representative's constituents would keep their jobs. I'm all for keeping people employed, but in the world of rapidly advancing space/rocket technology this is insane! Particularly when tax $$$ are involved.
We can easily adapt New Glenn to launch the Orion capsule, SLS is obsolete. Fly it till they use up the boosters in stock and then move on to something new.
I disagree. Just shut it down… yesterday.
It's supposed to cost something like $2 billion per launch and the next one isn't scheduled until '27 or something, why drag out the pain and waste?
Are you guys that keep saying this aware that if you want to send something to the moon you need a superheavy rocket capable of doing so??
New Glenn is designed to transport ONLY cargo and ONLY to low earth orbit.
It's sad that SLS is such a failure, but as of right now, it's the only option to complete the scope of Artemis missions.
No starship is nowhere near.
It still need to do A LOT of successful flights before putting humans on it, plus it needs an 8 starship refuel to go to the moon.
NASA spended waay to much on SLS and Orion to just throw everything into the garbage.
I Agree it needs to be canceled, but not right now, it needs at least to complete Artemis II and Artemis III, Maybe bring some Gateway modules and then be cancelled, so that all that money can be at least justified.
@ Starship is MUCH nearer to launching ten times a month than SLS was to launching two times a year… With the one SLS launch costing more.
SLS has gone on for a decade with everyone asking, how is it that they always keep their dumpster project going? USAID gets stuttered. "Hey everybody we are sutting down."
I think upgrading Delta IV to 100 tons would have been far cheaper and it probably would have gone to the moon back in the 2010s
Thing is it’s an international collaboration, which makes it very hard to cancel. I think some part will be canceled in the future but I think at least Artemis 2 and 3 will happen. Maybe they do the other missions as well but keep with block 1.
Don't bank on it. It is a failed program and needs to be scrapped and focused elsewhere.
@ like what I said though, it’s an international collaboration. If NASA tried to cancel it that would also require all the international partners involved in SLS to agree with canceling SLS, which I don’t see happening.
International partners can continue to work on SLS if they want, NASA (U.S.) doesn't need to.
Great coverage of all things SpaceX. Love your work.
Everyone knows they should have been canceled years ago, and my twin brother worked for Boeing.
If NASA has no plans to use SLS in the future, there's no point in doing test flights with it. It just has to go completely.
Good, it's been a failure since its inception.
Unfortunate but true
One over budget and behind schedule launch
Kinda happy that means a few of those shuttle engines will be saved and hopefully they get to fly again on a reusable booster. Most amazing piece of engineering in both the shuttle and SLS program and they were willing to just dump them into the ocean after burning them up.
SLS is a perfect example of what DOGE was built to combat. SLS is a multi billion dollar program developing a rocket that is competitive to a 60 year old design and is soaking up NASA dollars. I believe that NASA's purpose is to trailblaze and lead the way to the impossible. Build super expensive systems that companies can't afford to develop with multi national cooperation. Giant research programs like the supercollider, fusion reactor research, radiation shielding, how do you assemble a Mars base, advanced deep space communications networks. Built the interstate highways and transcontinental cables of space. Plan on sending a small group of test articles and letting commercial space take over the mass production.
any competitor using cost plus should be cancled
And that's without the DOGE!
Boeing has been DOGEing the issue for decades.
I would be sorry to see it go, being a space nerd I want to see everything work but I wouldn't be surprised if it is cancelled...
Moonbase Aloha!
With all of that talent being suddenly released by Boeing, McDonalds should see a flurry of new applications.
Just use Starship
I've been following Space Perspective since their early days and have met plenty of people involved with them. I was hoping they would work out, but haven't had a good feeling about them for a long time now.
Cancel the USAID Launch System.
Not singling out Boeing here but any spaceship/rocket company not prioritizing and optimizing for reusability has no business being in the space industry. Period.
Sls was a waste of money
Makes no sense at all to cancel the overall program but still to continue with the next 2 flights. What for?
Cancel SLS, it is and always has been a boondoggle, there is no reason to throw good money after bad.
Great decision to post an additional video. I think we all saw the writing on the wall at Boeing with their ticket fiasco.
SLS - Slower, Lower, Stupider
Founded by bureaucrats for bureaucrats. 😮😑✅💯🐂💩
worse than that. built by the senate and house for pork
Thanks for the updates Ellie.
When SpaceX can do this in 1/500th the time, for about 1/100th the cost, and do it better, good riddance to SLS.
It's a crisis in leadership. This is everywhere. Government, military, law enforcement, teachers... Everywhere.
Whoa. 😲 👍
Great video, Ellie...👍
Thank you for watching! Glad you enjoyed it.
@ellieinspace >>> You're Welcome.
if they have SLS hardware 90% ready to go might as well use it
Sunk cost fallacy.
we can't afford the last 10 %
@@FandersonUfo More like 90% done with, 90% yet to go.
Well…. All I can say is….. about bloody time!
Starship can't even deliver anything to the orbit. And probably never will.
Even if that's true, Falcon Heavy is a vastly better option than SLS.
It's always been a white elephant, and what's the use of sending elephants to space?
This doesn't make any sense. Starship has not even made it to orbit and is not human rated. Yes, Crewed Dragon works, but still suffer from delays and improvement changes.
Good reporting.
Still think its a mistake to cancel it. I know, its a dinosaur and its nowhere near as good as it could've been... BUT... it WORKS RIGHT NOW. And its the only rocket like it that actually works right now.
Ellie so awesome....god bless and God soed
I'm sure SLS is in the good hands of President Musk who has absolutely no conflict involving the future of NASA.
There is no sane argument for SLS.
I’m glad to see you have a voice young lady. Cancel it cut our losses and run. Save the lives so we can the Highlander.😊