The thing is. SLS is ludicrously more expensive then Space X rocket because congress basically strong armed NASA into re-using shuttle hardware to keep jobs. And SLS can put about 100t, twice as much payload to orbit compared to Falcon Heavy.
Shuttle was supposed to be a lot more reusable, with a reusable 1st stage, as well as the shuttle we know. But, post Apolo budget cut (and quite frankly technological limitations of 1970s), killed the design. NASA had to compromise further to keep the program going, by offering to allow the air force to use a shuttle for satellite capture (which it never did). And skipping technical details, it made the shuttle even less reusable, and also gave it it’s iconic look with the wing in the rears.
If I may extract one point: it got expensive because of politics, and that’s mostly why politics should stay out of these kinds of developments. That should be true of either publicly or privately funded ventures.
The thing is. SLS is ludicrously more expensive then Space X rocket because congress basically strong armed NASA into re-using shuttle hardware to keep jobs. And SLS can put about 100t, twice as much payload to orbit compared to Falcon Heavy.
Shuttle was supposed to be a lot more reusable, with a reusable 1st stage, as well as the shuttle we know. But, post Apolo budget cut (and quite frankly technological limitations of 1970s), killed the design. NASA had to compromise further to keep the program going, by offering to allow the air force to use a shuttle for satellite capture (which it never did). And skipping technical details, it made the shuttle even less reusable, and also gave it it’s iconic look with the wing in the rears.
I forgot my point so take the info dump for free
If I may extract one point: it got expensive because of politics, and that’s mostly why politics should stay out of these kinds of developments. That should be true of either publicly or privately funded ventures.