They somewhat apply because the lunar variant still needs to be fueled up in LEO with ~ 6 additional launches , all in relatively quick succession.
This seems unfeasible without rapid reuse actually working.
This seems unfeasible without rapid reuse actually working.
I suspect Spacex will develop cooling systems to re-liquefy any gaseous propellants as this will be more of a concern for the ~6 month mission to Mars.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant_depot#Feasibility_o...
That said, this contract has astronauts boarding Starship in lunar orbit, not Earth orbit.
In SH+SS, the "Starship" part is the second stage, with the revolutionary goal that it can deliver a payload to orbit and then skydive back to earth and propulsively land itself. That has major risks and is unlikely to succeed the first number of attempts, with the loss of the stage and the 6 raptor engines.
The "Superheavy" portion is very much equivalent to a scaled-up F9 booster, and the risks to landing it should be much lower (Elon's crazy catch ideas notwithstanding).
tl;dr I think Starship system can mostly work if it's partially reusable to a similar extent as F9. Losing a half-dozen second stages to do a full orbital refueling for a Moon or Mars mission should still be a fraction of the cost of a single SLS launch, and they can continue working on full reusability while performing missions and cashing checks.