Has the 130 BILLION spent on ISS worth it?

Just watched a show on the technology of ISS, the largest constuction
project ever. Said by 2016 it will have cost 130 BILLION.

That number astounds me.

I don't know how you weigh whether something of that sort is worth its
cost. A point worth considering is that, for long-term expansion in
the solar system and beyond, we have to know how to build complex
structures in space (an example is the assembly of colonization
vessels in Earth orbit). There is no way to learn this other than by
doing it.

Matt Bille
author, The First Space Race: Launching the World's First Satellites
www.mattwriter.com

On Feb 12, 6:28�pm, Matt wrote:
I don't know how you weigh whether something of that sort is worth its
cost. �A point worth considering is that, for long-term expansion in
the solar system and beyond, we have to know how to build complex
structures in space (an example is the assembly of colonization
vessels in Earth orbit). �There is no way to learn this other than by
doing it.

Matt Bille
author, The First Space Race: Launching the World's First Satelliteswww.mattwriter.com

well it appears that when ISS is abandonded there wouldnt be any big
follow up programs to replace ISS.

does this mean ISS is not a viable concept??

On Feb 12, 7:41*pm, " wrote:
On Feb 12, 6:28 pm, Matt wrote:

I don't know how you weigh whether something of that sort is worth its
cost. A point worth considering is that, for long-term expansion in
the solar system and beyond, we have to know how to build complex
structures in space (an example is the assembly of colonization
vessels in Earth orbit). There is no way to learn this other than by
doing it.

Matt Bille
author, The First Space Race: Launching the World's First Satelliteswww..mattwriter.com

well it appears that when ISS is abandonded there wouldnt be any big
follow up programs to replace ISS.

does this mean ISS is not a viable concept??

It means wars even if they aren't in the homeland are
expensive and that they tend to end empires and weaken the
warring nations. And the de-industrialization of the homeland
hasn't helped either.

The mastering the high ground for war will remain a
priority until the funding runs out.

The ISS is in something
of the ultimate holding pattern...........................Trig

a écrit :
Just watched a show on the technology of ISS, the largest constuction
project ever. Said by 2016 it will have cost 130 BILLION.

That number astounds me.


Of course not. Instead they should have saved Lehman Brothers
or started a new military undertaking, or further reduce taxes
for poor U.S. billionaires.

THAT would have been much more productive since it would have costed
much more!

On Feb 13, 3:33�am, jacob navia wrote:
a �crit :

Just watched a show on the technology of ISS, the largest constuction
project ever. Said by 2016 it will have cost 130 BILLION.

That number astounds me.

Of course not. Instead they should have saved Lehman Brothers
or started a new military undertaking, or further reduce taxes
for poor U.S. billionaires.

THAT would have been much more productive since it would have costed
much more!

its the millions or perehaps billions of government paid for programs
that are any of these.......

useless, inefficent, not necessary, just to help a conressional
district, just to help a corporation, etc etc.

you can trivalize the cost of ISS, nasa is a small piece of the
budget, but when taxpayers combine all those small costs they come up
to a killer combined cost.........

wrote in message
...
Just watched a show on the technology of ISS, the largest constuction
project ever. Said by 2016 it will have cost 130 BILLION.

That number astounds me.


It's just now being completed. They have the next 10 years to make it worth
the money.

It's just now being completed. They have the next 10 years to make it worth
the money.

If it produces little to nothing will that kill Future US station
follow ups?

" writes:

It's just now being completed. They have the next 10 years to make it worth
the money.

If it produces little to nothing will that kill Future US station
follow ups?

I don't think so, because I'm speculating that future US station development
will not share the political and scientific goals of the ISS, and will likely
be smaller and more focused on a specific engineering oriented goal rather
than a science oriented goal. And you have to consider the real possibility
that it will *not* involve NASA directly.

Dave

And you have to consider the real possibility
that it will *not* involve NASA directly.

Dave

yeah i think were about to watch nasa as a agency die, perhaps
deservedly so