- #1
hamster143
- 911
- 2
Someone locked the original topic for no obvious reason, but I have to comment on this:
Fortunately, today is 2010 and not 1960, and if there's one thing that we learned in all this time, it's how to make lots of launches relatively cheaply and safely. We could've launched about 2000 tons into low Earth orbit (the equivalent of 6 International Space Stations) using Protons, and possibly three times as much if SpaceX comes through with their promises, with money that was originally allocated in NASA budget just to develop the new Ares V megalauncher.
Even though LEO launches are still incredibly expensive compared to the cost of fuel, launch costs are just a tiny portion of any sensible Moon/Mars budget. Most of the costs, I believe, are salaries of engineers who design and test new technologies and new spacecraft .
Earth orbit rendezvous is one of the most expensive ways to go and requires an enormous number of launches. NASA rejected this option fairly early on in the Apollo program. Mass reduction was one of the key drivers in the selection of the lunar orbit rendezvous approach that was used in the Apollo program.
Fortunately, today is 2010 and not 1960, and if there's one thing that we learned in all this time, it's how to make lots of launches relatively cheaply and safely. We could've launched about 2000 tons into low Earth orbit (the equivalent of 6 International Space Stations) using Protons, and possibly three times as much if SpaceX comes through with their promises, with money that was originally allocated in NASA budget just to develop the new Ares V megalauncher.
Even though LEO launches are still incredibly expensive compared to the cost of fuel, launch costs are just a tiny portion of any sensible Moon/Mars budget. Most of the costs, I believe, are salaries of engineers who design and test new technologies and new spacecraft .
Last edited: