Re: And the passenger in the shuttle ?!
I think Bahboh's point was about the missing comma:
"Also, unlike the SpaceX's reusability approach, NASA intends to dump the engines, which would have previously glided back attached to the rear of a Shuttle into the Atlantic."
should rather be:
"Also, unlike the SpaceX's reusability approach, NASA intends to dump the engines, which would have previously glided back attached to the rear of a Shuttle, into the Atlantic."
As for myself, I keep mind-boggling over the fact that this fancy new NASA rocket is being built with first stage engines derived from 1970s designs; good ones for sure: there's a lot to be said for sticking with tried-and-tested technology, and I'd happily bet it'll turn out reliable and perform as expected given the lessons learnt from the Space Shuttle programme. But surely there's got to be something better they could do by now? I don't know, something cheaper, something which can be re-used more conveniently than the Space Shuttle launch engines? Oh yeah, there is, and SpaceX is flying it...
I'm sure the SLS will fly and that it will work properly, but I'm not at all sure it'll see a lot of service, not given the cost advantage SpaceX has.