Boeing Expects NASA to Cancel SLS Contracts, Signaling The Demise of SLS...

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, [e-mail].
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/

[@BKD70]

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.

[@steviegbcool]

yeah because SpaceX totally killing and are not years behind schedule.

[@kevinc-727]

Senate Launch System designed to send money to Senator districts, not to cost-effectively go to space

[@ellieinspace]

Nice rebranding haha 🤣

[@alanholck7995]

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

[@patrickdurham8393]

Best description yet!

[@gasdive]

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.

[@andrewtaylor940]

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.

[@MichaelP-g5n]

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out Boeing.

[@JohnJTraston]

Yep. You don't even need DOGE to figure that out. It had it coming for quite a while.

[@allanchurm]

LOL

[@THX..1138]

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.

[@Scanner9631]

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.

[@buenaventuralosgrandes9266]

5 years too late

[@JSfuckgoogle]

​@@Scanner9631UGH... permavictim grifters! 🙄🔫

[@StereoSpace]

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.

[@Wordsmiths]

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

[@tedmoss]

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.

[@ghost307]

Considering that SpaceX could build a booster in 6 months that Boeing can't build in 12 years, good riddance SLS.

[@BKD70]

More like 6 weeks....

[@Electrohawk_CopperCompass]

Boeing and NASA have dropped the ball. Give it to SpaceX and Blue Origin.

[@wyattnoise]

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!

[@rizizum]

@@wyattnoise ???

[@michaelmicek]

​@@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.

[@ralphwagenet852]

SLS is too expensive for the benefits it offers. Shut it down entirely.

[@pyrioncelendil]

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.

[@DSC800]

The sad state of Boeing. It's what happens when a bureaucracy achieves maximum stagnation.

[@douginorlando6260]

All they needed was to double the number of managers, meetings and MBA generated power point slides… again.🤣

[@wimbifarm8881]

No, it’s what happens when capitalism consumes a corporation entirely and focuses on profits over innovation

[@tedmoss]

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.

[@MrGaborseres]

SLS was a dinosaur 🦕 from the get go. Adiós 👋

[@ellieinspace]

I agree. NASA never saw SpaceX coming when congresss created the Artemis program..

[@otpyrcralphpierre1742]

@@ellieinspace I hope their eyes are open Now!

[@SebastianWellsTL]

Worse than a dinosaur in my mind. I feel like the Saturn V was a better rocket in every way than SLS.

[@Notbigbird]

@@SebastianWellsTLelaborate on “better in every way”

[@raytribble8075]

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.

[@RayCromwell]

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.

[@tedmoss]

Except Blue Origin isn't up to the task, unless Musk decides to help them.

[@zapfanzapfan]

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.

[@tedmoss]

That was known by many before any book was written.

[@SebastianWellsTL]

It's time for the NASA of the future!!!

[@PlanetEarth3141]

@@SebastianWellsTL There is and never will be a future minded NASA. That's like a forward looking lemming.

[@suchdevelopments]

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

[@Cape_Cod_Steve]

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 ☃️✌️

[@johnrday2023]

What the hell does building sewage treatment plants in Australia have to do with rockets and space programs ??? Really ?

[@tedmoss]

@@johnrday2023 A good engineer, even if not formally trained can build anything, just ask my Scottish ancestors.

[@TheTodd25]

Thanks Ellie, informative as usual.

[@ellieinspace]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for watching, I tried to keep it short on a Friday night

[@jonranper]

Thank you for the update Ellie!

[@Bionicbuddha_X]

If there's SLS hardware lying around, better use it for other missions like Dragonfly and Mars Sample Return.

[@stormselah]

Someone tell NASA that we want our money back. Fools.

[@regolith1350]

Cancel the USAID Launch System.

[@budyn1412]

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.

[@norrisbonson3795]

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

[@EricCumbee]

The flight hardware is mostly ready. If they dont fly 2 and 3 on sls they are going to be further delayed.

[@michaelmicek]

Best argument I've seen is to fulfill international agreements.

[@chrismac777]

Instead of layoffs, why do they not pivot to reuseability? I don't get it. Go SpaceX!

[@alesh2275]

You would need big leadership and cultural changes.

[@bryanhood9839]

They just don't know how

[@PlanetEarth3141]

Reusability - putting DEI workers into the nations Dumpster Truck unions. 😅

[@Notbigbird]

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.

[@PlanetEarth3141]

@Notbigbird Hey, slow down the common sense. You're overdoing the corruption pendulum effect. 🤔😁🏆

[@baarni]

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…

[@tedmoss]

This has been generally true since 400 years ago, maybe before that.

[@jamess.2599]

Great show, thanks for the hard work and fast reporting.

[@PlanetEarth3141]

SLS - Slower, Lower, Stupider Founded by bureaucrats for bureaucrats. 😮😑✅💯🐂💩

[@mirfjc]

worse than that. built by the senate and house for pork

[@cturdo]

The days of endless funding for failing programs are over. Unfortunately, Boeing continues their string of product failures into another year.

[@michaelmicek]

Nah, only the days of funding this failing program, and some other programs for which young commercial enterprises are competing.

[@MrPenguinLife]

Cancel SLS, it is and always has been a boondoggle, there is no reason to throw good money after bad.

[@douginorlando6260]

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.

[@bstraussatgmail]

You are confusing SLS and CCTS (Starliner). Related, but separate programs.

[@livergen]

Thank You Ellie...

[@cpm1003]

This channel is awesome!

[@ellieinspace]

Thank you so much! I'm glad you like it!

[@okletmejustsay3534]

hello starship and virgin galactic

[@allanchurm]

what about BO they will have another rocket ready in 2 years time.

[@dingo4288]

Thank you for keeping us informed

[@ellieinspace]

It’s my job!!!!

[@vironpayne3405]

And that's without the DOGE!

[@tedmoss]

Boeing has been DOGEing the issue for decades.

[@FandersonUfo]

excellent space journalism right here

[@boballen9095]

THe news just keeps getting better! Thank you for relaying this promptly. YAY!

[@bill9540]

It’s Friday night Ellie…thanks for the update…now get out there🥳

[@harmankardon478]

good riddance Boeing, a massive waste of money

[@michaelmicek]

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."

[@bimmergeezer]

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!

[@takashitamagawa5881]

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.

[@TheTikiMan]

Good. Now they can concentrate on keeping the doors on the planes.

[@tedmoss]

That's simple, just put the bolts back after removing them.

[@enigma51ted]

Ellie so awesome....god bless and God soed

[@midwestastro]

goodbye sls

[@ellieinspace]

Like, I expect an official cancellation any day now...

[@BackUp-z4t]

Thanks again Ellie.

[@Voncid]

Thanks for the updates Ellie.

[@jebediahkerman3946]

All those years of Boeing experience have come to this. What a shame. At least SpaceX is carrying the torch forward.

[@spacecadet35]

The problem with modern Boeing is that the management thinks that they have completed the job when the check clears.

[@johnrday2023]

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!

[@magsteel9891]

SLS rocket plus Orion capsule was going to cost over 4 billion per launch. It's insanity and it's unsustainable

[@zx1100a1]

Good, it's been a failure since its inception.

[@ellieinspace]

Unfortunate but true

[@Boofi-quat]

Thanks for literally nothing, Boeing. What a kingly price we paid for it.

[@tedmoss]

It kept Senators in office and kept people employed, so they fulfilled their mission.

[@FredDeArment]

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.

[@737smartin]

I disagree. Just shut it down… yesterday.

[@bryanhood9839]

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?

[@B1snyder]

Sls was a waste of money

[@sakismpalatsias4106]

Whatever gets us to the moon and mars faster. Artemis program and Aris program. Should be a priority.

[@MrDecelles]

At this time: The program should : a) calculate launch capacity of existing assets. b) analyse What to do with existing assets I assume that the SLS program is not ready for any launch. Boing should transfer their engineers to a new project that I will call: Modular united States Transporter. The MUST would be an interorbit transporter\hauler epair with a life expectancy of 5 years.

[@Tinman_56]

Moonbase Aloha!

[@sebastianb-v2887]

Balloons are not able to exit the atmosphere anyway 😒

[@sbelobaba]

There will be no return to the Moon on SLS... long live the new return to the Moon! This music will be eternal if NASA replaces the batteries.

[@coltendavison4351]

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.

[@jeezopeez]

Don't bank on it. It is a failed program and needs to be scrapped and focused elsewhere.

[@coltendavison4351]

@ 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.

[@maggots0007]

International partners can continue to work on SLS if they want, NASA (U.S.) doesn't need to.

[@Van_Liberty]

Not sad Boing. Sad for we TAX CATTLE...

[@brendan3556]

END IT

[@dks13827]

Fly the built items.

[@Wirmish]

From its inception in 2011 through the year of its first flight, the SLS program has cost approximately $23.8 billion. Initially, the development cost was projected to be around $18 billion through 2017. The total cost of the Orion program, from the beginning of the program in 2006 to the present is approximately $21 billion. NASA has indicated that the total expenditure for the Artemis program, which includes the SLS, could reach around $137.2 billion by 2025.

[@robertgillespie5121]

How did Boeing come to this? . How did they lose the knowledge they once had?

[@marvindebot3264]

I'm saddened by the balloon company's demise, that was a great concept and would have been a somewhat affordable flight for far more people than a rocket trip. While 100,000 feet isn't space, it's pretty darn high, higher than all but a few hundred people have ever been. As for SLS, it was always going to be the last of the big conventional rockets, the only doubt was if the very last would 1, 2 or 3.

[@FandersonUfo]

if they have SLS hardware 90% ready to go might as well use it

[@om617yota7]

Sunk cost fallacy.

[@leroyhidalgo6456]

we can't afford the last 10 %

[@benjaminrackley1893]

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.

[@THX..1138]

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.

[@timtrussell9278]

If NASA wanted to re-use existing technology, they should have just built an Apollo era Service Module, put a Dragon capsule on top, and launched it to the Moon on a Falcon Heavy. NASA could have sent multiple missions to the Moon this way in the past decade, for a fraction of the price.

[@Notbigbird]

Except a falcon heavy couldn’t get an Apollo service module to orbit the moon, it would weigh about 30 ish metric tons and falcon heavy can only get 45 tons to low earth orbit. You’d need at least 80-90 tons to low earth orbit to get one to orbit the moon. Falcon heavy just doesn’t have the payload capacity.

[@timtrussell9278]

@@Notbigbird Falcon Heavy can lift 70.5 tons to LEO. Yes, there would be challenges, but FH can lift a Service Module AND Dragon to LEO easily.

[@MrH786]

Whoa. 😲 👍

[@kneekoo]

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.

[@DLWELD]

I think the submersible tragedy makes folks a bit more cautious.

[@s10case]

Love it.

[@stevehevener]

Thank God!!!

[@weissguyvena]

Hi Ellie …The actual juxtaposition of Space Perspectives highlights the risks of high altitude endeavors. That in my mind is sad. Balloon tech I suppose is a great adventure travel concept. I think it would be crazy fun for the adventurous at heart. And a fairly affordable competitor to rocketry although that possibly is not realistic and of coarse could be debated. I really think SLS should fly and not be wasted but absolutely not until the heat shield is optimized. And then also depending on the costs and a value based exam a hard decision to cancel if other private enterprise progress…

[@connecticutaggie]

Charlie's comment about the power being with non-technical management is correct but it is even worse since the Engineers with the real detailed knowledge are at Boeing and it is super unlikely that they can do an objective assessment when they know their jobs are on the line. Also, with Challenger and Columbia, NASA recognized they needed to take safety seriously but Boeing is not there yet especially since NASA does not have the pressure to be profitable but Boeing does.

[@douginorlando6260]

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

[@mirfjc]

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…

[@jkleylein]

It's always been a white elephant, and what's the use of sending elephants to space?

[@waterboy181]

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.

[@gregarundale6106]

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.

[@charleslivingston2256]

Much of the cost of SLS 2 & 3 is already spent, so not $2B savings there. Given the current space race to (back, for us) the Moon, we are likely ceding that to the Chinese if we cancel SLS 2 & 3. I'm all for terminating the program after SLS 3 right now, but think it makes less sense to cancel those too.

[@wschmrdr]

If NASA takes any action with this, I guarantee there will be lawsuits citing DOGE and a conflict of interest.

[@dridout8028]

Cancel. The money that would have to be spent from here on out would be more than enough to fund a workable program.

[@alesh2275]

Just use Starship

[@victorpatalon4012]

How was this program ever kept going when these were leftover parts from the shuttle program!???? Boeing has NO vision! The SLS doesn't seem worth the cost/safety risk!!

[@lektwik]

Starliner was stupidly over budget for years with multiple delays and failures to launch. When it had to return to Earth without it's crew, that was the end of Boeing being in the space business. Just took a little time to announce it.

[@alesh2275]

I saw this coming …

[@per619]

CANCEL. Way too expensive.

[@amalfi460]

Boeing should be required to finish the entire project with their own money. I bet it would cost many times less than they were already over paid to do

[@bryanhood9839]

They would have to file bankruptcy

[@petercozzaglio6070]

I’m actually a bit sad about Space Perspective. I really thought that, that could have become a modern Zeppelin. And I personally thought that the capsule was a striking design.

[@keithwillis3761]

CANCEL IT! Just a waste with nothing to show for it.

[@RocketNerd2025]

😎 Cool 👍

[@tedsmith6137]

Ride a balloon to Space? Impossible! A balloon can only operate within the atmosphere. You could do just as well with a bunch of Swans or floating up on the rising Dew.

[@watertriton]

Weird time to cancel when it’s actually ready and a developed system now heat shield issues are pretty minor and should be able to be overcome

[@Wirmish]

Going back to the Moon. My idea using 3 different Starships: Pusher, Crew, and Tanker. (Similar idea to go to Mars.) 1. Launch the Crew and the Pusher in LEO. 2. Launch X Tankers to refill the Crew and the Pusher. 3. Mate the Crew on top of the Pusher. 4. Send some astronauts to LEO using a Falcon 9 and a Dragon, and transfert them to the Crew. (Security first!) 5. Turns on the Pusher's engines, and push the Crew toward the Moon, using the Oberth effect. 6. When the Pusher has used ~70% of its fuel, it separates from the Crew, and returns to LEO. 7. Using the speed momentum the Crew go to the Moon and use ~30% of its fuel to land on it. 8. Once the mission is over, the Crew takes off (with 70% fuel) and come back to LEO. 9. The astronauts transfert to a Crew Dragon and land somewhere in the Atlantic. (Security first!) 10. The Crew, which no longer has a crew, returns to land at Starbase. The _Pusher_ is a Starship _(but with larger tanks that also occupy the cargo area)_ with the -nose- top identical to a Super Heavy Booster, so the _Crew_ can be placed on it. _(On takeoff, it has a fairing that comes off before arriving in LEO.)_ The _Tanker_ is the same as the _Pusher_ but with a normal nose, so the _Tanker_ is recoverable. The _Pusher_ is not recoverable but it can wait in orbit until it is needed to push another _Crew_ to the Moon or Mars. The _Crew_ is a Starship with a pressurized area that replaces the cargo space of the current Starship. To reach LEO (17,000 mph) the _Pusher_ must use some of its fuel _(Same for the Crew. / I don't know the exact quantity),_ so some _Tankers_ must be used to fill it once in orbit. I'm talking about several _Tanker_ because if we used only one it could take several days, or weeks, before we could completely fill the _Pusher_ and the _Crew._ (If for example it requires 1 or 2 days per _Tanker_ launch.). And time is important if we want to avoid too much methane and liquid oxygen boil-off. If the calculations show that the gases losses caused by the boil-off are not really important, then a single _Tanker_ would be sufficient.

[@Notbigbird]

One starship even with larger fuel tanks would be nowhere near enough to get another starship to trans lunar injection, it is waaaayyyyy to much mass to get 3150 meters per second of DeltaV out of with just one starship. You’d need several, and that’s ignoring how you would even get a starship to safely push another without breaking. Using the pusher idea would also require dozens and dozens of tanker starships just to refuel 2 starships, as they use most of their fuel just getting into low earth orbit anyways. And it’s the same for the tankers too, just they have a bit better fraction of their propellant left upon orbital insertion. So unless they have at least a dozen tanker starships ready at any given time, you’d be looking at the two starships waiting months in low earth orbit before they could even get to the moon. Also to land on the moon you need at least 2700 meters per second of DeltaV and another 1800-1900 or so just to get into low lunar orbit, and then another 850-870 minimum to get back to earth.

[@johnm8224]

So approaching $27bn ($32bn cumulative in 2024-equivalent) of taxpayer funding for one, unmanned launch? Good skills, Boeing! 👏👏👏👏

[@jonesgeoffs]

Cancel SLS. Make HLS a 3 stage rocket 🚀 😊

[@Sendu7]

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.

[@fransahm1956]

I hear there are a lot of openings picking produce and also work in meat packing plants. Also lawn care and construction.

[@B25Mitchel-qy5kg]

Boeing "Didn't Earn It", full stop. What a slap in the face to the amazingly historic company and it's Journeyman. oops.

[@dirkbester9050]

Actually, the single launch cost $32b. Allegedly, who knows how much cheating went into that estimate. Good riddance, why fly more of it? It is, was, and always will have had been stupid. Lets be honest, Trump complained loudly about the cost of this dumb program in season one. His character arc demands cancelling it this season.