Using 1 (Saturn) or 2 (Constellation) mega multi-billion dollar heavy lift rockets is totally NOT necessary to go to the moon and beyond. ISS was build in several small launches. We need a safe (liquid fuel, engine clustering, crew escape system) , reliable, low cost rocket (that cost less than 100 million) like Falcon9. Even if it took 10 launches it still a fraction of the cost of one Ares 1 million.
America's space program is in just the state they wanted it - full of propaganda and empty promises. And I'm not talking about hiding little green men. This Ares I & V business is truly a step backward. But who can blame them with the horribly low budget they now have to work with!
seems to me despite 3 reusable rockets there is still alot of stuff thrown away.
I suppose i was hoping for more from nasa when it went down the shuttle route before. I suppose its logical but i still dont like the built for one mission thinking its still going to cost a fortune to replace the hardware lost every mission to space... Where's my cheap space flight?
I agree - a terrible waste of resources. Why didn't they put the Saturn V system into mothballs in 1972 and gradually upgrade the electronics etc as and when new technology arrived? Why scrap a "bridge to the moon" after spending $ 135 billion?
Saturn V was perfectly adequate launch vehicle and cost billions to develop. And whats the big deal about 4 men on the moon for a week instead of Apollo's "2 men for 3 days"?
NASA is a very thirsty US taxpayers' dollars beast
to the 2 above comments,how would they know anything about nasa?they know nothing about and they know it,and you know it, and 4 the guy#2 so when did nasa because a 2 class space system? he know as guy #2
Using 1 (Saturn) or 2 (Constellation) mega multi-billion dollar heavy lift rockets is totally NOT necessary to go to the moon and beyond. ISS was build in several small launches. We need a safe (liquid fuel, engine clustering, crew escape system) , reliable, low cost rocket (that cost less than 100 million) like Falcon9. Even if it took 10 launches it still a fraction of the cost of one Ares 1 million.
ti994apc 1 year ago
America's space program is in just the state they wanted it - full of propaganda and empty promises. And I'm not talking about hiding little green men. This Ares I & V business is truly a step backward. But who can blame them with the horribly low budget they now have to work with!
jimmyclerk 2 years ago
seems to me despite 3 reusable rockets there is still alot of stuff thrown away.
I suppose i was hoping for more from nasa when it went down the shuttle route before. I suppose its logical but i still dont like the built for one mission thinking its still going to cost a fortune to replace the hardware lost every mission to space... Where's my cheap space flight?
c00kieallan 3 years ago
I agree - a terrible waste of resources. Why didn't they put the Saturn V system into mothballs in 1972 and gradually upgrade the electronics etc as and when new technology arrived? Why scrap a "bridge to the moon" after spending $ 135 billion?
Saturn V was perfectly adequate launch vehicle and cost billions to develop. And whats the big deal about 4 men on the moon for a week instead of Apollo's "2 men for 3 days"?
NASA is a very thirsty US taxpayers' dollars beast
michaelstmark 2 years ago
to the 2 above comments,how would they know anything about nasa?they know nothing about and they know it,and you know it, and 4 the guy#2 so when did nasa because a 2 class space system? he know as guy #2
Conservativepacheat 3 years ago
all lies nasa has technology far beyond ares rocket systems nasa is just hiding things for the government
darkemachine 3 years ago
I hope this works. America has got to do something or its going to be left in the dust by the likes of China, Russia, the EU, and even India.
tamiasthechipmunk 3 years ago