I don't speak french and I'm in the US,
Ken
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:03 PM Matthew JL <prmattjl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In French a potato is an “earth apple,” I’d be wary of your analogies ;)
Best,
-Matt L.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 2:29 PM roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Apollo is apples and potatoes, it was never going to be a long term
program let alone reusable. Apollo 20 was going to be the end and didn't
even make it that far.
Mars was supposed to follow.
Ken
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 11:10 AM Matthew JL <prmattjl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Apollo was ~$90 billion adjusted for inflation for the Saturn V ($50
billion) and CSM ($37 billion) and yet we’re up in arms over the same
capability as that for about half the price (SLS being $27 billion and
Orion being $24 billion).
Need I add that NASA’s budget is still significantly less than half what
it was at the height of Apollo despite enjoying record public enthusiasm.
PS - contract cost divided by number of units always distorts the
marginal cost and it’s a mistake I see across the board.
Best,
-Matt L.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 1:42 PM Rand Simberg <simberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
It's now over twenty billion since 2010.
On 3/1/22 10:32, Henry Vanderbilt wrote:
SLS, presumably. Is anyone shocked? ~$4 billion a year program
budget, ~one flight a year, let's see, divide 4 by 1... However the SLS
establishment massaged the numbers, that's what it was always going to work
out to.
Ignoring the huge development costs, of course. I've lost track. How
many tens of billions have been sunk into this thing over the years? With
or without its Ares predecessor, it's a very large number.
Henry
On 3/1/2022 10:09 AM, George Herbert wrote:
Aahhhhhhhhhhhhhh….
-George
Sent from my iPhone
