Fly me to the moon....

[ozzy72]

As the song goes, well what with Richard Branson and Burt Rutan offering sub-orbital flights for a fairly hefty sum the Russians have upped the ante...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/article ... 18,00.html

[Boomtown Rat]

Who would pay for an orbit around the moon? Well...  ::)  But I think it'd be worth it more to actually walk on the moon, plus, besides the tourist, there'd be the first Cosmonaut(s) on the Moon.

[ozzy72]

I'd like to go down in history as the first person to moon the Earth from the moon
Sometimes I really have to say I'm having a bad day...

[RichieB16]

I think it would be an amazing trip myself (I wish I had an extra $100 million lying around).    ::)

But, I would be very suprised to see NASA not throw a fit over this.  It was a big enough fight by Russia to convince NASA that is was OK to send a tourist for a couple days to ISS-but a week and a mission that would involve a large moon booster to dock to the spacecraft at ISS might be to much.  I know it is an International Space Station, but the majority of it has been payed for and assembled by NASA and as a result that might be a problem.

It would still be a sweet trip.  

[beaky]

I think it's a great idea, and if I had the bucks, I'd definitely go. NASA has to wake up and smell the coffee; public funding of any kind of space venture, especially manned flight, is becoming less popular by the minute. In fact. in the USA, public funding of science in general is becoming less popular... I say if somebody wants to pay megabucks to hitch a ride, give 'em a ride... all that purity of principle and "science with a capital S" stuff won't count for much if they can't come up with the money to stay in space. And it's great publicity.
 Imagine where aviation would be today if it hadn't been for the thrill-seekers and entrepeneurs!

[RichieB16]

all that purity of principle and "science with a capital S" stuff won't count for much if they can't come up with the money to stay in space. And it's great publicity.

I remember when the first space tourist (Dennis Tito) flew to ISS NASA was not happy.

[Pinchaser...]

Mir...wow. i havent heard that word in years.

[RichieB16]

Mir...wow. i havent heard that word in years.

Probably because it hasn't been in orbit for a couple years, its new home is at the bottom of the ocean.  

What is sad is it that when most people think about Mir they laugh or look at it as a failure.  In fact, Mir was the most successiful space station in history by far.  Much more successiful than ISS has been so far.  

[Hagar]

I believe Mir is the Russian word meaning Peace. There's a square-rigged sailing ship of the same name. I saw it at the Festival of the Sea at Porstmouth a couple of weeks ago. http://www.tallshipmir.ru/foto.html

[H]

$100 million !!
Shoot, to think that as a kid someone threatens to send you there for free. Oh, well , promises, promises...

[Antei]

$100 million !!
Shoot, to think that as a kid someone threatens to send you there for free. Oh, well , promises, promises...

LOL

[beaky]

I remember when the first space tourist (Dennis Tito) flew to ISS NASA was not happy.  The original plan was to send him to Mir, but when Mir was deorbited the Russian manned space program became strictly involved with ISS.  NASA's big concern was that Tito (and any other tourist) is not an astronaut.  They have not gone through the same multi-year training course.  The tourists go through a short (6 month?) training couse before the mission.  NASA's big concern (or at least, the concern they made public) was an under trained crew member could be a danger to the rest of the crews if something bad happened.  I think to some extent, that is a warrented fear.

Although, I like I said before-if I had the extra money lying around a space flight is exactly what I would spend it on.

I absolutely agree that that's a legitimate concern, but the Russians seem to have figured out how to train the average millionaire well enough in the time alotted to at least not be a handicap to mission safety and efficiency... and as I recall, Tito did just fine in his role as "tourist". I think they even gave him some minor chores to do...
 I think NASA is just a  too stuck-up to even consider it. and that annoys me.

[RichieB16]

[quote]

I absolutely agree that that's a legitimate concern, but the Russians seem to have figured out how to train the average millionaire well enough in the time alotted to at least not be a handicap to mission safety and efficiency... and as I recall, Tito did just fine in his role as "tourist". I think they even gave him some minor chores to do...

[RichieB16]

I think the same thing could be said of NASA quite easily, I should think that not having a death for 30 odd years should be fairly applauded. NASA's recent accidents could quite easily put down to carelesness and neglegence. I seriously don't get your reasoning behind this point.

I completely agree that Russia should be applauded for not having a fatal accident in 30 years, that is a great accomplishment.