SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
Popeidol writes:
"In November, India took the next step in their space program by launching their Mangalyaan Mars orbiter. The orbiter won't arrive for a while yet, but they've managed to get some public attention for a different reason: the fact that the entire mission costs only 75 million dollars, substantially less than the budget for the hit movie 'Gravity.'
While the question of wages is bound to come up (it was only 15% of the budget of the project), I think we can all agree that bringing down the cost of interplanetary space travel to a level attainable by the ultra-rich is a good step forward."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
India Goes to Mars for Less Than 'Gravity's' Budget
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 61 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
A Smith & Wesson beats four aces.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by mcgrew on Wednesday February 19 2014, @01:52AM
I prefer cooperation to competition.
As to TFS, Gravity may have been more expensive but it paid off in spades. Lets hope India's orbiter does, as well.
OTOH 2001: A Space Odyssey cost less than the orbiter (although I can't find the figures) and was initially a box office flop.
You'll see the ads when Virgin Galactic finishes tests and goes online. I wish I had a spare $200k.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 1) by quacking duck on Wednesday February 19 2014, @02:55PM
To be fair, it was international competition and politics, not cooperation, that got people into space and landed them on the moon. Obviously you need some level of cooperation within a large enough entity to make it work (e.g. large contractors within the US building different parts of the project), and cooperation has resulted in things like the ISS, but competitive tribalism drives people emotionally in a way cooperation can't.
(Score: 1) by mcgrew on Wednesday February 19 2014, @05:07PM
Well, yes, competetion got us to the moon, but cooperation got us a big permanent space station. How long did MIR last?
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 1) by quacking duck on Wednesday February 19 2014, @06:40PM
Mir lasted 10 years, Skylab just over 6 years.
The ISS is not "permanent", it was only recently that they announced discussions and funding to keep it up and running past 2020 [space.com].
In any event, the longevity of the ISS that in no way negates the idea that competition between peers did and can do a lot in a much shorter period of time.