There’s a Star Man, waiting in the sky..

[Horsetan]

On the same day, various initiatives are launched to combat plastic rubbish in the worlds oceans, some dozy tw@t decides it's now time

 

to pollute space with yet mother human rubbish.

 

It would seem all the money in the world (almost) doesn't necessarily mean common sense.

 

...which might explain why some people want to go back to the idea that the Earth is flat, or regress to a new Stone Age.

[jonny777]

It would have been a bigger source of celebration if they had announced that Donald Trump was on board. 

[Coryton]

I don't know how that figure was derived. The article stated launch cost - not Apollo program cost so I would stipulate that the 'already done' argument is moot.

 

Falcon Heavy has more than twice the low earth orbit payload capacity as the Saturn 1B.

 

Were we comparing total program costs, then I would agree with the point you make. It would be more accurate to compare SpaceX program costs with the shelved* NASA project Orion.

 

 

 

Well if the Saturn V costs are just for the launch itself, that makes SpaceX come out even better because so far as I know launches are their main income stream so what you pay for a launch is covering their programme costs as well.

 

I find that cost hard to believe though if it really is the marginal cost of a single Saturn V launch, rather than - at the least - the cost of the entire Saturn V programme divided by the number of launches.

 

On the same day, various initiatives are launched to combat plastic rubbish in the worlds oceans, some

 

dozy tw@t decides it's now time to pollute space with yet more human rubbish.

 

It would seem all the money in the world (almost) doesn't necessarily mean common sense.

 

I don't know if you're arguing against launching the car or the launch itself. The point of the launch was to try out the new launcher without risking an expensive satellite if it all went wrong. If there hadn't been a car on it there would have been a lump of metal to give the it something to lift.

 

And given the orbit it's on, I don't think it will come near the Earth again for rather a long time. The real problem is all the rubbish orbiting the Earth.

 

Personally I can't think of much I'd rather he spent his money on.

 

That’s why I’ve never believed in the moon landings being “faked”. Given the US record of keeping secrets, the idea that an organisation THAT big, employing tens of thousands, could keep a secret of that magnitude and nature is inconceivable.

 

And it's not just the people directly involved....it also includes all the scientists who have studied moon rocks, the radio hams who picked up transmissions from the moon, etc.

 

 

Personally I can't think of much I'd rather he spent his money on.

[laurenceb]

At the height of the Apollo programme, NASA accounted for almost 0.8% of US GDP.

 

That’s why I’ve never believed in the moon landings being “faked”. Given the US record of keeping secrets, the idea that an organisation THAT big, employing tens of thousands, could keep a secret of that magnitude and nature is inconceivable.

Watched a programe about the claims that the landings were faked, it came to the conclusion that it was cheaper to put a man on the moon than to fake it

[rockershovel]

Watched a programe about the claims that the landings were faked, it came to the conclusion that it was cheaper to put a man on the moon than to fake it

“Kubrick, please.....”

[Ozexpatriate]

For anyone concerned that the Falcon Heavy isn't as big or have enough thrust compared with the Saturn V, there's always the SpaceX BFR.

 

No prizes for guessing what B-- F------- R----- stands for.

 

And yes, the low earth orbit payload is designed to exceed the Saturn V.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Ozexpatriate