Should NASA sell space travel to civilians?

Yes, so long as the purchaser understands the inherent risks and limitations. This is a form of “privatizing”. NASA should look for reasonable yet inventive means of “selling” their services. As long as those activities do not jeopradize NASA’s main direction or endanger US militarily critical technologies and information, I think it is a great idea.

Remember, there was a time when only the military and a few wealthy citizens could afford air travel. Now it is common place.

The same applys to the Internet … the government (through military applications) developed the concept and basic infrastructure.

The microwave oven was developed for astronauts to reheat foods.

WD-40 (the spray lubricant) was developed as part of the Gemini Space Flights.

I’m sure there are other examples of the government spinning off entreprenurial enterprises.

There seems to have been a disconnect between government [including NASA] and the taxpayers, better know as “We the People…”

This is sad since it is “We the People” who have paid for all this technology NASA has used to advance space travel. It’s about time that those who pay for all this get a chance to experience the thrill of space travel as much as does anyone else, government or not.

The risk is just as great for NASA and others as it would be for “Joe the Plumber”. If NASA thinks that taking “civilians” along would be risky, then I am certain there is enough collective brain power in NASA to solve the problem, and get on with giving back to “We the People” what is rightfully ours: the ability to travel to space as much as does government.

We need to be spending trillions on space travel as opposed to war …

Michael Heit
Harrington, WA
AD7VV

No, I do not think so. Let’s wait until the cost and risk associated with space travel have decreased significantly.

No, Nasa should stick to advancing Science, in our litegation happy society we need to leave civilian space travel to private industry. There is a Civilian Space Port that will be built in New Mexico for that purpose. Let them assume the risk while providing space travel likely much cheaper than what Russia is charging.

Yes, allow them to spend the money, but they should also be made to pay for someone who couldn’t afford the trip.

Yes, as long as the money paid gives a bit of profit over the cost of the fuel, food, oxygen, and waste processing the tourists’ prescence requires, the person understands and personally accepts ALL risks, with a legal waiver to the effect, and as long as the person isn’t one of the SOBs whose money gives them super inflated egos who is going to demand special attention and interfere with the operation of the conveyance and the space station. If the person isn’t going to stay out of the way, he doesn’t belong, and ideally, would it be asking too much if the tourist could to some degree help out? Even if its just minor housekeeping?

If they paid NASA $30 million dollars and there was a mission catastrophe, how large would be their legal suitagainst NASA? $50 million? If there is a problem with a Russion spacecraft, who would they sue? Putin?

Yes, but with lots of requirements.
1) The fee must include a non-refundable portion to cover all of the necessary medical exams, training, etc.
2) A waiver of all rights regarding health and safety
3)… and so on …

If someone can afford the trip and is willing to take the risk then let them go into space. However, NASA needs to make it very clear “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”. NASA should not be required to take the risk with any passenger who might create a safety risk (i.e. for any reason; medical, physical, intellectual).

Yes, as long as a disenfranchised legal citizen was given the same opportunity at no cost to them. AND they didn’t have to do the dishes.

Certainly anyone willing to spend that kind of money to go into space knows the risks associated with space travel in it’s early stages.

If danger is the reason for not allowing space travel for non astronauts, only pilots would be flying in airplanes today. No risk, no reward.

No. There is no such thing in the US as “A waiver of all rights regarding health and safety”. The lawsuits resulting from even a minor injury would be just, ASTRONOMICAL! Why tie up the limited resources of NASA in providing such a service, then defending the US from the resulting litigation.

Yes but you sign away all right to legal action, space travel is still a dangerous profession - But I think there should be a nationwide lottery and sell tickets at $20 a shot, but the winner must pass the physical (Heart conditions) and mental exams.

Yes, as long as ALL the money goes to NASA and NOT back into that multi-trillion dollar black hole we all know and love, The Fedgov. As far as it being “too risky”, hey body bags are cheap. If someone dies along the way, that was their choice to make - and aren’t we all about “freedom of choice?”

I think the blogers above are getting closer to the real question which is, “what do you charge”? I would think that everyone agrees that it should cover at least the cost, but shouldn’t there be a multiplier factor and what should it be?

N-O, no. LCL at 12:43 has it right, if its a paid service this just invites lawsuits — lets see what damages would be claimed by the estate of the deceased on a 30 million dollar ticket?. Even if the government cannot be sued, what about the manufacturers of the vehicles? Remember Morton Thiokol’s o-rings? Who makes more vehicles after a couple of Billion dollar judgements?
Worse, inevitably, an untrained or suicidal passenger (doesn’t take a terrorist, just someone who thinks the “memory” of the first space suicide will last for a century) WILL cause the loss of life of others - the only people available to respond will be NASA personnel…

Ironic isn’t it; once our government gets involved, even the communist beat us at free enterprise.

No. NASA is a government research organization not a roller coaster manufacturer. Does NASA sell flights on their research aircraft? Should next the US Mint offer a “make your own money” day? Then what, pay enough and be governor/senator/vice president for a day?

No, taxpayers do not own NASA spacecraft just like they don’t own Navy fighter jets. Taxpayers pay for them and pay for all of the training. Taxpayers pay for everything, including recruitment, meals, clothing, housing - you get the picture. Taxpayers have no access to the equipment that they pay for. It is a fallacious argument to claim that because taxpayers paid for it, that civilians should be able to pay for rides. Rockets and spacecraft are not safe. There will be billion dollar lawsuits when the inevitable trajedy occurs.

Yes, anyone with the money should be able to buy a ride into space. The government already rents space at launch facilities for private unmanned satelites, a ride into space is just a manned satelite

No. This is not NASA’s place. Space tourism should absolutely be encouraged but flights should be sold by private organizations, not the government.

Yes. There are many dangerous things in the world. This is not a reason to forbid them. I agree it would be irresponsible for many people, but not all. It is imporant to keep in touch with the dream of exploration. If the taxpayer does not see this dream, then NASA just becomes an expense.

I believe that anyone with the disposable financial resources should be able to buy a ride into space, but not on a NASA vehicle. Let private enterprise develop space tourism and let NASA focus on the goal of long-term space flight and long-term ex-terrestrial habitation. If private enterprise happens to find a better way to do either, then NASA can and should adopt the better way. However, I think the investment required for long term space travel is sufficiently large that national commitment and funding are required.

No. But not for the reason that you might think. I would rather see the money that “space tourists” are willing to spend used for something like Scaled Composites Starship One and develop an orbital platform that is more developed than the ISS.

Nasa has enough issues with poor management and cost and time overruns that it does not need to get into the tourism business.

I think that some serious de-regulation of the “above 60,000 ft” air/space environment needs to happen, and that the government should do all it can to foster growth in the space industry in the private sector, as it WILL happen, and it is better if it happens HERE in the USA rather than elsewhere.

Hey, if a guy has the bucks and wants to go I say let him do it. A lot of folks here are saying the govt and NASA (which is a govt agency) shouldn’t be in this business. But it was govt actions which brought about the development of much of the technology we take for granted today.
I agree this should ultimately be a private venture but lets get the people who have the money, the vision, and the ability to establish a stake in it. Then let them create the slick marketing necessary to sell it.
As for lawsuits, sorry but if you go into space, you assume the risk. This means no suing the govt or their contractors on this. Like anything in life there is risk, so suck it up and either understand it or go hide under a rock.

When the cost curve of doing space tourism intersects the demand curve then private companies will fill this demand. NASA as a government agency should spend our tax dollars on science and technology that benefits a wider slice of the American people. If NASA goes into this business there will be times when the need to meet commitments or raise revenue will push public interest into the background.

Jon is so wrong. The spacecraft, the fighter jet, the facilities all belong to the American people. And Tom P. above said we must wait until the cost and risk associated with space travel have decreased significantly. The only way to reduce costs is to make it more common. The only way to make it more common is to use it more often with more people. We have become such a cowardly people that we want full assurance that all risks and dangers have been totally mitigated. And if not the first thing we look for is someone to blame. The next thing is to see how much can we make off of this, what’s it worth to us - financially. Did I mention the greediness of these same people. With this kind of thinking, would the early settlers have ever come? Would the “dangers” of crossing the vast Atlantic ocean have ever been braved? If you are afraid of it, don’t go. Don’t stop the rest of us in your fear.

Russ,
You think you own government property. I guess that’s because you helped pay for it, as we all did. For a reality check, go ask to borrow the keys to the fighter jet.

Should NASA sell space travel? In our litigious society? I think not!

Risk … sign a waver, traveler assumes all risks, bring your own lunch.
$$$ … NASA is glad to accept your money - fundraiser plus.

I’ll go in a heart-beat if some giga-buck sponser pays for the ride …

… what a rush !!!

If space is available, security is not an issue and the person is healthy & welathy enough to endure the trip without being a liability then YES..!!!!

Ha! We lose 40,000 Americans each year from fatal auto accidents. Maybe we should first use technology to insure us safe ground transportation before we even think of civilian space travel, no matter how rich that particular space passenger is.

Tammy Tate

Susie Tease

18 On Cam

Cartoon Copulations

Victoria Redd

Pierced Hoes

Cezar Capone

I Bang Pornstars

Pimp Porn

Sweet Dominique

Young Amateurs

Storm Squirters

Smooth Snatches

Lay The Kat

Spreading Girls

2 Big To Be True

Cam Sweetie Pies

Sandra Romain

Deep Throat Love

Squirting Files

Skinny Bitches

Cassandra Calogera

Naughty Lani

Girl Fucks Guy

Indian Stuffers

Sweet Monika

Hot Teen Girls

Aziani Xposed

Red Light District Live

The MILF Bangers

Sativa Rose

Angel Woods

Japan Dreams

Anal Town

Ass Fetish Zone

Ebony Kisses

Hung Like A Whore

ZrDysOSr