Artemis: the abandonment of NASA's SLS rocket in favor of SpaceX's Starship under discussion

The equation that Donald Trump must solve is complex, and let us remember now that he is the political father of Artemis, decided during his first term (2016-2020). The missions of this space program provide for the human return to the Moon, the establishment of a permanent base at the South Pole of our satellite (NASA also needs your help here) and the putting into orbit of a permanent lunar station.

The further we have to go into space, the more powerful we need a rocket, which is easy to imagine. SO ? Who is the strongest pitcher currently? The Starship, of course! But this SpaceX rocket is only on its sixth test and is not really operational. However, the SLS has already successfully launched an Orion capsule to the Moon in November 2022.

After the incredible success of the Starship booster catch-upaka Super Heavy, in October 2024, rumors reported a total questioning of the Artemis mission. It would seem that we have gone down a notch in disruption and that thoughts are focusing more on the legitimacy of this or that launcher to carry out these flagship NASA missions.

A Starship launch would cost 200 times less

According to the publication MIT Technology Revieweach SLS launch would cost $4.1 billion. The cost of launching the Starship, partly reusable unlike the SLS – and intended to become completely reusable at the end of the current development phase – would be around $20 million, according to its boss Elon Musk. The calculation seems quick, but it's much more complicated than that…

Indeed, the SLS is operational, the Starship not yet. However, the Artemis II mission, which involves a manned flight over the Moon, is fast approaching, still being announced for fall 2025, almost tomorrow! The human return to the surface of our natural satellite is still planned for 2026. So, certainly, the Starship's progress is dazzling, but we are very, very far from a habitable launcher and waiting too long would introduce another unknown into the world. the equation: the resolute presence of China in this space race, whose lunar program announces 2030 as the horizon. And if NASA sometimes revises its schedule, which SpaceX is used to proclaiming urbi et orbi an ultra optimistic agenda, China is on the other hand known to be cautious, and therefore credible.

A single SLS shot towards the Moon, 18 for the Starship

There are other problems with the Starship. Thus, there is no emergency module in the event of a problem when taking off from Earth, a time of all dangers and an essential concern for NASA since the Challenger disaster. Another major point, it would take a whopping 18 launches to supply the vessel destined to reach the Moon with propellant. The Starship is indeed almost twice as heavy as the SLS and this in-orbit refueling maneuver has never been attempted at the time of writing. It will undoubtedly be in 2025, too tight for a crew launch in the fall of 2025. In any case, using the Starship would not be 200 times cheaper, but around 11 times taking into account the 18 launches . Of course, this would still be remarkably more economical.

Another element and not the least: when we talk about Elon Musk and his desire to save 2000 billion dollars for the American federal state, we think of space in which he is known for having precisely cut costs. This would nevertheless pose serious problems of conflicts of interest if the tycoon imposed SpaceX in place of Boeing, the main manufacturer of the SLS. This is why journalist Eric Berger, openly pro SpaceX, estimates the chances of SLS cancellation at 50/50.

The SLS will ultimately have a good chance of launching Artemis II and III

Indeed, all the constituent elements of the SLS for Artemis II have already been delivered and the sidelining (immediate or not) of this launcher would require a vote of the United States Congress, knowing that Boeing is very popular among Republicans as well. than the Democrats.

Nothing is decided, but the most likely in the current state is that the SLS will be maintained for the Artemis II and III missions. For the future, it is more uncertain, but the creation of the lunar orbital station would require the SLS which is adapted to this task, not the Starship. “If you cancel the SLS, you also cancel the broad support for NASA's budget at its current levelexplains Mr. Tripathi to the newspaper MIT Technology Review. Once that budget is cut, it's hard to imagine it will ever return to current levels. We have to be careful what we want.”