> either 15 full stacks (Booster + Tanker) ready to go, or a few with full-reuse and very fast turnaround

SpaceX is on track to launching satellites on a Starship this year. Given Artemis II is now bumped to 2025, that gives SpaceX 2 to 3 years to go from first orbital launch and recovery to a launch every 4 days (2 months for 15 launches), their launch cadence for the Falcon family in 2023 [1]. It took about a decade for the Falcon 9 to do that cadence, but it was first in its class. It seems plausible SpaceX will be able to repeat the feat in 3 to 5 years, which puts Artemis III within window.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_...

Current Blue Moon is also a Starship style lander, just instead of Superheavy, it'll launch on New Glenn. It's also a refueling heavy, orbital depot focused lander. Only major difference being that it's hydrogen fueled, and one of their project goals is to solve boil-off free storage of cryogenic hydrogren in orbit, which also seems like a tall order.

Kind of hard to believe you think it'll land before Starship when New Glenn itself hasn't even had a flight test yet.

> Kind of hard to believe you think it'll land before Starship when New Glenn itself hasn't even had a flight test yet.

Please put down your pitchfork. I said "I can't believe I'm saying this, but there is a chance."

A neutral reading of this would be that I believe Starship will land first.

Yeah that's fair, sorry if I came off as aggressive

Please think again what is the point of going back to moon if we cannot establish a base and stay longer ? It is not about just going to moon we want to stay there and establish a base

I am well aware of this. I think Destin's video was not nearly as cool as he thought it was.

I am just stating that Startship's full-reuse is not as close as I would like.