![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Fred J. McCall wrote: Note that if NASA figures are to be believed, it would cost MORE now (in constant dollars) to put a couple men on the Moon than it cost us the first time we did it. Even stipulating that's true -- and I see there's some disagreement -- that means it would cost *NASA* more to do it now than then. Which is not too surprising, given the sad state of today's NASA. Getting to LEO has become cheaper (although not as much cheaper as one would expect) because LEO is a commercially viable place and because we were putting stuff there for a long time. Actually, it's GSO that's the commercially viable place. Non-government interest in LEO is slight at the moment. And interestingly enough, getting to low lunar orbit is no more difficult than getting to GSO. When it comes to getting to the Moon -- as opposed to doing things there -- Moon-specific systems basically become important only for the last few kilometers of the trip. -- "Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Neil Armstrong talk: Dublin, Ireland, November 17th | Brian O'Halloran | History | 6 | October 9th 04 08:38 PM |
Neil Armstrong Endorses Bush's Space Proposals | Steven Litvintchouk | Policy | 13 | April 3rd 04 09:47 PM |
Neil Armstrong - Support Bush Space Initiative | BlackWater | Policy | 59 | March 24th 04 03:03 PM |
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago? | Paul R. Mays | Astronomy Misc | 554 | November 13th 03 12:15 PM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | [email protected] \(formerly\) | Astronomy Misc | 11 | November 8th 03 09:59 PM |