We are going to Mars and its not the choccy bar factory visit either
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/biggest-ever-rocket-man-mars-160357782.html
“….Nasa administrator, and former astronaut, Charles Bolden said: “President Obama challenged us to be bold and dream big, and that’s exactly what we are doing at Nasa.
“While I was proud to fly on the space shuttle, tomorrow’s explorers will now dream of one day walking on Mars.”
The new rocket programme is expected to cost US taxpayers $35bn (£22bn).
Since retiring the shuttle earlier this year, Nasa has commissioned commercial companies to design and operate cargo rockets to service the International Space Station.
It will concentrate its own resources on deep space exploration.”
Yipee says me:D I am going to hope I stay around to see it while as a bean counter recognising that humanitarian schemes also are adequately funded.
My listening avidly to Arthur C Clarke’s lectures are going further than I ever dreamed.
Virgin Galactic are going to try for Gold in the Olympic year too.:) Maybe marketing hype but it is do able for rich wallets (not mine). Give Richard his due.:)
By: Lincoln 7 - 15th September 2011 at 15:43
SH. Pete, Have any number crunchers thought out how much this will cost the US Taxpayer, and as we all know, the “Quote” is always exceeded, massivley, at the end of the day, very few quotes are spot on and cost no more than the initial quote.Just a thought, why do we need to go into space in the first place?.There are one and a half billion stars in our own galaxy, let alone the millions more.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: Sky High - 15th September 2011 at 15:25
Linc – I suppose it depends how important one’s view of space exploration is. To put it in perspecticve the total stated cost to the US taxpayer is the same as 10 F35 Lightning fighters. So if they reduced that programme to 2,433 instead of 2,443 aircraft there would be no extra cost!;)
By: Lincoln 7 - 15th September 2011 at 15:12
S.H. and Jay. I am all for Space exploration, 100% in fact, however, wouldn’t it be better for the States to get their economical problems sorted out first. Secondly, we have all the Seas and Oceans on this planet that should be explored first.Not that this has anything to do with us directly, the Mars project, but I am surprised the States admit their finances are a mess, but can find billions to throw into space.
I am interested in photography, and was told recently, there are several Hassleblad cameras left on the Moon, and believe me, these are not cheap.if the story is true.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: nJayM - 15th September 2011 at 15:10
Pete your last sentence sums it up
Pete your last sentence is the key and sums it up.
2012 there’s the Olympics for us and Richards bid for ‘Gold’ with Virgin Galactic and the White House race on 06 November 2012
I think you chose the words aptly “Thrashing around” as opposed to FLOUNDERING – same blooming expense though and same result
The American Accounting body has asked for at least an extension until 2017 to harmonise with the EU Accounting body on unifying reporting standards for Public Companies and we have decided against initial thoughts in the UK to foolishly allow ring fencing the banks to be delayed until 2019. IMO it should have been no later than 2015.
Will they (Politicians) ever learn? Again in UK it smells of campaign funds and second term.
By: Sky High - 15th September 2011 at 14:43
I think Virgin Galactic has deposits from 6 or more passengers for the first flight – hopefjully next year, as you stated.
I am 100% behind further space exploration and, correct me if I am wrong, but NASA and previous administrations have been “planning” Mars for years. No doubt the present incumbent is thrashing around for markers in case his quest for a second term fails!;);)
Sign In
September 15, 2011 at 2:34 pm