In sci.space.policy message M4KdnXJCk6kGmA_NnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@earthlink.
com, Thu, 1 Nov 2012 01:16:10, "Greg (Strider) Moore" mooregr@ignoreth
isgreenms.com posted:

Maybe. The awful truth is astronauts are cheaper to replace than a
multi-billion dollar payload.

Astronauts are cheaper to supply.

Astronauts are inexpensively written off for disease and for accidents
independent of spacecraft, especially off-duty ones.

But the aftermath of losing astronauts in or near spacecraft is
extremely expensive - just for Senate and Congress time alone it
probably costs more than what had been the remaining expected lifetime
pay of the deceased.


Deploying large energies in lightly-built craft venturing into a
slightly lumpy vacuum away from hands-on professional emergency services
is inherently dangerous. Space will not have been conquered until space
fliers can die on duty with no more fuss than is the case for military
test pilots.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.