@cyberlyra it's a different approach to development than present day NASA's.

NASA has taken 11 years and over $20B to get one successful launch of SLS. A launch that resulted in the entire vehicle except for the capsule being dumped into the ocean. With luck there will be a second SLS launch in 2025. And another billion dollar vehicle at the bottom of the ocean.

About 4 years ago SpaceX started from zero on the Booster/Starship combo and have now flown, if ever so briefly, the largest and most powerful rocket ever made.

While I'm no fan of Elno, the SpaceX approach is closer to the way that put Americans on the moon in less than a decade. If you were around or read up on that era you'll find a lot of rocket explosions back then, too.

@cyberlyra I did 10 years as a NASA contractor at JSC a few decades ago. Was there when Challenger blew up. Doesn't make me an expert but I have seen how the sausage is made. It was pretty disillusioning.

NASA's biggest problem is Congress, mostly not NASA people. Or maybe more correctly, being jerked in a new direction every time there's a political change.

SpaceX has a focus and drive that is missing at NASA now. The tail end of that drive was trickling away when I was around.

@HalDe Cool. What were you working on at JSC?

The problem with fiscal and political continuity is a big one. It produces uncertainty and funding asynchrony and causes a lot of downstream issues. I’m writing a book about this right now so I’m thinking a lot about these questions.

Maybe SpaceX benefits from being sheltered from the boom/bust cycle somewhat? There is a lot of enthusiasm, but my understanding from the people I know there, a lot of burnout too.