billions of pounds have been spent on space project is it worth it?
110439
Many experiments that have help us advance in medicine are conducted in space. Our planet can be in danger of asteroids plunging into us, and can result in life on earth being destroyed, and by expolring space, we can find out and save us, so yes, it is worth it. And it's fun!
212075
Nasa does, apparently they made it work too.\n\nGo to your nearest hobby store, look at a model rocket , the one that actually work and the times that by a 100, add some heating and air tanks, etc .\n\nBudget for a couple of 100million dollars or take a VirginSpace flight at $200,000. He's selling tickets now. Cheapest way.
422214
Cost: $1.35 Billion so far\nTook: 3.5 years so far
1000614
NASA is not an Investment. An Investment is intended  to provide a return to the Investor. NASA does not return anything to the taxpayers that  fund it.\n\nIf all the high tech discoveries, that NASA caused, had been patented and then then royalties paid to NASA would make NASA a good investment. It would be self supporting and not cost us taxpayers anything.\n\nTechnology wise NASA  is a good thing. Investment wise it is lousy. It spends all the money it gets and gets no money in return. That is not an investment.
89920
Very good question.\nIt depends where you are and what are your talents.\nHowever money is not everything, happiness is.\n\nstart your open company and the sky is the limit. If you want to set the goals as space invest in your well being - SQ
215108
Good question but I have to say that messing with the universe is rather impulsive and risky. Perhaps we should look to simpler projects like over population or world peace?\n\n*wink*
26371
Actually yes, they are planning a "Space Elevator"\n(Warning, while source below is mostly acccurate, the scientific papers could take years to get through)
980946
I say this as someone who thinks space exploration is great and who doesn't mind that some of my money is being used to fund it:\n\nThe government has no business using money that it takes by force from the people (taxes) to explore space.  If the people of the US want to fund space exploration then they are perfectly free to do so voluntarily with their own money.  They shouldn't be able to vote to force other people to pay for it.  If enough money isn't given without people being forced to give, then it shouldn't be done.  \n\nThe long-term goal of American space exploration should be whatever the private space exploration groups can get people (and companies) to donate money for.
462500
To the first poster, last time I checked Worldspace's financials were rather ugly.\n\nNow, to answer the question.  Yes, both will survive so long as they continue to spend their money wisely and continue to advance their technology.
302436
Actually I believe they did... evidence exists and all the proof people give to say otherwise can easily be explained... space missions still go one today and people do still land on the moon. It's not impossible! We should be glad that people are making the effort to study the things around us - though perhaps my only qualm is that the money spent could be better used for something else... like helping the poor
649976
Such a technology is still under development, it is worth it if the satellite is extremely crucial to the task being performed. Unfortunately yes, as of now recovery is an expensive option. Satellites are deorbited because there is limited space up there and a lot of other satellites have to use it. In fact there is an international body which allocatess space for Geo stationary satellites.
453036
The Space Shuttle Tiles would work very well, but are really expensive.
619150
Millions of dollars. The fuel used is liquid hydrogen and oxygen. This fuel is very powerful but very expensive to maintain and store as well as use.\n\nQuote:\nWhile the Shuttle has been a reasonably successful launch vehicle, it has not met the goal of greatly reducing launch costs. There are various ways to measure per-launch costs. One way is dividing the total cost over the life of the program (including buildings, facilities, training, salaries, etc) by the number of launches. This method gives about $1.3 billion per launch[1]. Another method is calculating the incremental (or marginal) cost differential to add or subtract one flight — just the immediate resources expended/saved/involved in that one flight. This is about $55 million
1154272
In lieu of attempting to donate to NASA itself, I would strongly suggest that you instead donate to one of several established, non-profit space advocacy groups.  The budget with which NASA works is so vast that, unless you are a large corporation with a sizeable donation, your contribution would amount to less than "a drop in the bucket"... it would be more like "a drop in the lake".\n\nSpace advocacy organizations are a much better destination for your donation dollars.  Instead of trying to increase the NASA budget directly, you will try to increase it through legislation, lobbying, and/or the proliferation of public interest and awareness of the space program and its benefits.  Your few dollars can go a very long way if it is used to persuade just a few more members of Congress to vote toward expanding government funding for the agency.  And of course, your donations to any U.S. non-profit organization are fully tax-deductible in the United States.\n\nSome non-profit organizations that you may want to consider:\n\nNational Space Society - The National Space Society's vision is people living and working in thriving communities beyond the Earth. NSS members promote change in social, technical, economic, and political conditions to advance the day when people will live and work in space.  (This is one organization to which I myself am a member and to whom I donate.)  http://www.nss.org\n\nPlanetary Society - Founded in 1980 by Carl Sagan, Bruce Murray, and Louis Friedman, the Society's mission is to inspire the people of Earth through education, research, and public participation to explore other worlds and seek other life.  (This is another organization to which I am a member and to whom I donate.)  http://planetary.org\n\nSETI Institute - The mission of the SETI Institute is to explore, understand and explain the origin, nature and prevalence of life in the universe.  (Not strictly a "space advocacy" organization in terms of direct exploration, but noted here because I promote and donate to their cause.)  http://www.seti.org\n\nSpace Frontier Foundation - The SFF promotes increased involvement of the private sector, rather than governments, in the exploration and development of space.  http://www.space-frontier.org\n\nStudents for the Exploration and Development of Space - SEDS is a student organization founded in 1980 at MIT and Princeton.  It is dedicated to expanding the role of human exploration and development of space, and to educate the public in such a way as to attain this goal.  http://www.seds.org\n\nArtemis Society International - The ASI is dedicated to establishing a permanent and self-supporting community on the moon.  http://www.asi.com\n\nMars Society -  The Mars Society is an international space advocacy non-profit organization dedicated to encouraging the exploration and settlement of Mars.  http://www.marssociety.org\n\nSpace Studies Institute - The SSI's mission is to open the energy and material resources of space for human benefit by completing the missing technological links to make possible the productive use of the abundant resources in space.  http://www.ssi.org
72808
hmm..wasting money on what?....exploring? Yes maybe your right, maybe the monies should be used for Bush's wars...not enough suffering yet after all the hundreds of billions wasted on death and greed...\nmaybe its just time the U.S. brought in a new leader..a true leader..wasting money going to Pluto..is certainly more noble than going to war
63217
My personal opinion is much less optimistic. My feeling is that manned space flight has already peaked. It is too expensive. The economic benefits are there, energy, mining and the like, but only if there is a sufficient infrastructure already in orbit.\n\nIn my opinion it is making that infrastructure during the time before space is economically useable - which is certainly the case now - is the critical time.\n\nIt would be very easy (unfortunatetly) for the US to let manned space travel go on a haitus...and then a a vacation...and then forget about it. The US nows owes a tremendous amount of money (and we know whoses fault that is).\n\nAs for other countries I am not optimistic that, say, China will leap to the forefront. They will encounter the same problem. Human space travel is very expensive, dangerous, and there is a lot left to learn.\n\nSo I am afraid that the hurdle needed, the jump from where we our now to something even moderately self-sufficient in space, may be too high.\n\nThose who watched the moon landings (as I did as a kid) may have seen the farthest extent of humans in space.\n\nI hope I am wrong, but I just don't see a great future for humans in space.
96109
It depends on your goal. From your extended question it sounds as if we should be terra-farming extra solar planets. i'm not sure we'll be at that point in another 1000 years, even if we put our minds to it.\n\nOne could argue quite reasonably that our CURRENT space program hasnt achieved much. the space shuttle never accomplished a fraction of what it was designed to do. The space station just kinda goes around and around. \n\nTo type out the statement  "All our efforts so far has yielded no result" on your hyper-fast micro computer connected to a planetary data network is a bit short sighted. Nearly 50 years of space exploration has produced a wealth of technological advancements. \n\nYou also have a few billion years to worry about a place to go when the sun and earth die out. Maybe less for the earth, that's probably addressed in another question.