At noon on Monday, August 29, 50 years after the end of the historic Apollo program and ten years after the end of the Space Shuttle program, NASA test his new rocket for the first time.

Rocket Space Launch System (SLS) is the first step in the new Artemis program, which aims to return people to the Moon and explore Mars. The SLS is the continuation of the Space Shuttle and the successor to the legendary Saturn V rocket that was part of the Apollo program.

However, it is also one huge waste of money, according to The Economist. The concept and execution of this particular program is a perfect example of the “maze” of (micro)politics.

As the publication notes, the missiles they produce private companies will catch up very quickly SLS. And this is not the fault of NASA scientists and engineers, but of the American Congress.

America’s Space Odyssey

Let’s look back. Program space shuttle was canceled by George W. Bush in 2004. NASA announced its successor the following year: Constellation. His goal was to complete the construction of the International Space Station and return a man to the Moon by 2020, as well as the long-awaited first step to Mars.

In 2010, the cost of this program was so high that Barack Obama canceled it. However, contracts already signed with various space companies as well as NASA institutes. Thus, the SLS program was created that same year, as the contracts for the terminated Constellation were still in place.

SLS cost the American taxpayer approx. $23 billion last decade. Meanwhile, during the same period private space flights (for example, Elon Musk’s SpaceX) have shown that it is possible to use reusable rockets for the price $50 million to launch. In contrast, the corresponding cost of a trip on an SLS rocket is estimated at $2 billion (or even more).

Within the next six months, SpaceX will send it starship in space. It is Musk’s largest rocket and will be able to carry a payload similar to the SLS, with each launch costing several million dollars.

With increased competition in the private sector and the appearance of Jeff Bezos in the Blue Origin game. hard to find a place for an SLS rocket.

The Economist article notes that it would be better to cancel NASA’s new rocket program, which should buy rockets from individuals and focus more on the mission of the Artemis program. Moreover, since 2019, this idea has been expressed by the then head of NASA, Jim Bridenstine.

The columnist also suggests that the Biden administration will focus on what NASA can provide and that do not yet exist on the market: high-risk scientific research, technologies for space missions that will bring new discoveries, or even ways to better understand and capture global threats such as climate change.

“Only a fraction of the $32 billion spent on SLS could make a difference,” he notes, adding that NASA could “elude” congressional priorities if it were more independent and didn’t fall victim to “lack of foresight” politician.

“But if parliamentarians are not interested in approaching space with logic, so be it.. There is no reason for NASA to be so big,” the Economist pointedly concludes.