NASA鈥檚 enormous rocket, the Space Launch System (SLS), seems to be in danger. It has been controversial for decades thanks to its high cost and many delays, but now there are hints that it may finally be on the chopping block. The trouble is, there aren鈥檛 any comparable alternatives 鈥� no other rockets can carry as much mass as SLS can into space 鈥� and the only operational backup is built by Elon Musk鈥檚 firm SpaceX. Given Musk鈥檚 current position embedded within the US government to cut spending, this is cause for concern.
The SLS began development in 2011, just as the US Space Shuttle was retiring. Its primary goal in the coming years is to shuttle astronauts to the moon as part of NASA鈥檚 Artemis programme, which aims to land humans on the moon for the first time since the end of the Apollo programme in 1972.
Concerns over cuts to SLS are largely due to a 7 February internal announcement made by Boeing, the primary US aerospace firm contracted to build the rocket. In a statement, a Boeing spokesperson said: 鈥淭o align with revisions to the Artemis program and cost expectations, today we informed our Space Launch Systems team of the potential for approximately 400 fewer positions by April 2025.鈥� Boeing is the primary contractor building the spacecraft, and that would be a layoff of about half the team working on it at the company.
Advertisement
A NASA statement in response to Boeing鈥檚 announcement provided little additional information: 鈥淣ASA鈥檚 SLS rocket is an essential component of the agency鈥檚 Artemis campaign鈥� NASA defers to its industry contractors for more information regarding their workforces.鈥�
SLS is a type of rocket designated as super heavy-lift, meaning it can carry more than 50 tonnes to orbit 鈥� a capacity that is necessary for crewed missions to the moon and beyond. But so far, it has only flown once, for the uncrewed Artemis I mission in 2022. That flight was originally planned for 2016. The original budget has been similarly overshot, with spending on the SLS programme as a whole expected to exceed $90 billion by the end of this year. So far, each part of the campaign 鈥� the rocket, the capsule and the ground services 鈥� has exceeded original budgets by around 40 per cent.
From a purely financial perspective,聽it is easy to see why SLS would be targeted for cancellation. Critics have long been vocal about its exceptional costs and continuous delays. It has frequently been referred to as a 鈥渏obs programme鈥� more than an effort to actually build a sustainable path to deep space, and the objections have gotten louder as the capabilities of private launch companies have skyrocketed over the last decade.
Perhaps the most notable of those ascendant launch companies is SpaceX. Its Falcon Heavy rocket is the only other operational super heavy-lift vehicle in the world right now. There are a few other companies that can launch a bit less mass to space, but Falcon Heavy remains the natural backup for SLS.
That鈥檚 where things get complicated. Elon Musk, the CEO of SpaceX, now also runs the US task force known as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has been authorised by the administration of President Donald Trump to slash government spending across the board. Musk鈥檚 government efficiency push could look at SLS and simply see a line item that is much too expensive and should be cut. But ending SLS could leave the US space programme relying almost entirely on one company 鈥� run by the very man making the cuts.
To call it a conflict of interest is an understatement. Musk has already snagged unprecedented power for a private citizen within the US government, and giving him sole control over the country鈥檚 access to deep space is a move that warrants hard scrutiny.
