Starship vs SLS Debate

The cluster focuses on debates comparing SpaceX's Starship to NASA's SLS, Starliner, and Artemis programs, discussing development status, reliability, cost, reusability, and suitability for lunar missions.

➡️ Stable 0.5x Science
3,519
Comments
18
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#5268
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2009
1
2010
14
2011
31
2012
31
2013
22
2014
76
2015
30
2016
56
2017
79
2018
96
2019
126
2020
315
2021
474
2022
456
2023
499
2024
728
2025
480
2026
5

Keywords

US IMO LES arstechnica.com OceanGate IDSS LEO FH F9 IFT starship sls falcon orbit moon spacex dragon payload launch vehicle

Sample Comments

fiddlerwoaroof Nov 18, 2023 View on HN

SpaceX can reliably deliver payloads to orbit at much cheaper prices than anything before. The Moon program had its share of disasters, near-disasters and other failures (Apollo 1 burned with all its crew on the ground). Starship is a vehicle in development and will obviously have all sorts of bugs and edge cases to be worked out.

shkkmo Aug 8, 2024 View on HN

Starliner is stupider than Artemis and SLS?

loourr Oct 21, 2025 View on HN

Starship is more flight ready then SLS and new Glenn. It's just not fully reusable yet, so it's not ready by Spacex standards but far ahead of anyone else in the world. They could also use falcon heavy but might as well use Starship, unless they need dragon.

iknowstuff Nov 21, 2025 View on HN

Starship can fly to orbit, it's just not cheaper than a reusable falcon 9 that way

onethought Sep 18, 2023 View on HN

Starship is substantially bigger than falcon 9, with significant more mass to orbit capability. And runs on a cheaper propellant. Also Elon has publicly stated starlink s long term viability requires starship.Which data are you looking for?

firesteelrain Aug 19, 2024 View on HN

Starliner /could/ be a backup however it does not have those Moon requirements

zizee Jan 1, 2025 View on HN

Which mission profiles does Starship not make sense for?

ClumsyPilot Nov 13, 2020 View on HN

The plans for Starship are haisy, not scrutinised and it has not been delivered. So far design has changed massively, it was scaled down a lot, and it's stil a vehicle looking for a purpose.I have significant doubts that we will see it launch at that price-point withing the next 10 years.All the best luck to spaceX, but you can't base the entire national space programm on something that flaky.SLS solidly gets you to the moon, and you van make real plans on it. If it turns out

jltsiren Nov 16, 2022 View on HN

Three things:1. Efficiency is not an American value. The society almost always chooses decentralization over efficiency. For good and ill, the SLS project looks like America.2. I don't think SpaceX is lacking talent at this point. Their primary constraint is time, not money. The Starship will fly when it's ready.3. Three Falcon Heavy rockets can't launch the same payload as a single SLS. Cost per payload mass is only one factor. Maximum payload and the physical dimensions

lamontcg Aug 18, 2023 View on HN

Starship is still entirely unproven.There's a possible world where the cut corners and the Dear Moon mission winds up with the vehicle burning up on reentry or slamming itself into the ground, killing Tim Dodd and everyone on board, with the resultant investigation looking something like OceanGate.SLS is big, dumb and stupid and has a LES and a capsule that lands via parachutes. If SpaceX fails as a company after some accident like that, the SLS will just continue to plod along.