Yes, because it competes with the other space program. You know, the one that put people on the Moon and flew 120-tons spaceplanes.
That space program no longer exists. The people who built Apollo and the Shuttle have long since retired and the institution they left behind has done little beyond twiddle it's thumbs for close to 30 years. Thorsten correctly observes that NASA hasn't made space flight a priority a because the US population hasn't made it a priority.
As a such, being a US taxpayer who's enthusiastic about spaceflight, I'd much rather see my tax dollars go to ULA, SpaceX, Boeing, Sierra Nevada, or anyone else who looks like they might spend that money on genuine spaceflight rather than thumb twiddling.
---------- Post added at 08:42 ---------- Previous post was at 08:38 ----------
I see 100 passengers as a liability, during transit and after landing. What are they going to do, when they get there? How are they going to be screened ? A few bad apples could be disastrous.
No more so than similarly sized crews of maritime vessels or submarines. Worst comes to worst, having 100 bodies (vice 3) means you can afford to loose a few to "accidents" without endangering the overall mission. :leaving:
Last edited: