3 ms·
> He was in exceptionally good health. Yes, but he was nevertheless more fragile than the majority of the overall population (all ages), which was the original
by jessriedel 3y ago
> He was in exceptionally good health.
Yes, but he was nevertheless more fragile than the majority of the overall population (all ages), which was the original concern you raised.
> The cost of a plane ticket is typically less than, say, a quarter of the total spending on a holiday (including hotel, food, attractions, souvenirs).
Agreed for LEO flights, but (1) I don't see why that difference matters much and (2) the cost breakdown of Mars tourism will similar to international travel now, i.e., 5-30% spent on transportation, and the rest spent on location.
> The only way space tourism might catch a break is if a space plane is ever actually successfully designed.
I don't really see why a space plane would be make a big difference here. Are you thinking of cost or the physical rigors? Space planes still require ~3 gees on launch (unless you're talking about something really exotic like JP Aerospace's Airship to Orbit").
- tsimionescu 3y agoMars tourism makes no sense, as there will be nothing whatsoever on Mars that you could even see for the next hundred years or more. An actual colony on Mars is way beyond our current technology, despite what some "futurologists" claim. And even IF a colony on Mars is ever created, the amount of tourism it could ever imaginably sustain would be tiny compared to, say, New York or Tokyo or Paris - and neither of those, nor even all three together, are 1/8 of global tourism. Not to mention, a colony on Mars would just be tunnels in a desert (except it's a very very cold and highly radioactive dessert). Only a tiny handful of people would even be conceivably interested in spending months on a cramped rocket to visit it.