oops. $100 billion for the moon. Thanks ajay
no realistic costing model would allow a $10 billion mission; you need, after all, to develop a heavy lift launcher, at least two entirely new spacecraft, a new class of nuclear reactor, and a whole new array of techniques for entry descent and landing which will have to be tested on Mars before the people go.
Meanwhile the cost of a single space telescope is $4.5 billion (latest figures for JWST).
Current estimates for the return to the moon are in the $100m range; missions to Mars a good bit pricier. (Many would argue that all this could be done cheaper if it wasn't being done by NASA; but to the extent that it will be done, it will be by something pretty like NASA, so that's not an argument that compels)
BTW, MRO better last more than two years -- its the primary telecoms link for the MSL rover to be launched in 09 -- a nuclear powered rover with laser-zapping-things capability that will really give the MDF something to worry about...
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 3 |
Total: 3 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Oliver Morton:
Show all comments by Oliver Morton.