ChatterBank4 mins ago
Who decided Britain will not fund humans in space?
The ESA (European Space Agency) recently announced it will be seeking new astronauts.
It said it will welcome men and women from Britain, even though Britain refuses to help fund human beings in space.
Why is this? Who made the decision and when?
Thanks,
Cal
It said it will welcome men and women from Britain, even though Britain refuses to help fund human beings in space.
Why is this? Who made the decision and when?
Thanks,
Cal
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Caladon. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
We are one of the few counties that actually fund the EU so we are funding whatever it does already so I imagine that is the basis for Britain not agreeing to further funding, I think a billion quid a month for them to pi55 away on inneficient froggy farmers, bent commisioners and general corruption is enough don't you?
Britain has been against manned space flight since the 60s.
A number of prominent scientists agree with this for example Lord Rees, the astronomer Royal thinks such money is best spent on unmanned projects
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7349610.st m
And I have to say I agree with him.
It is hard to justify manned missions when you look at the science they come up with compared to the Science from unmanned projects.
I know Hubble has been placed in orbit and occasionally maintained by manned flights but it's essentially an unmanned project and has produced some of the most important results.
Likewise Pioneer, Voyager, Cobe etc. These cost a tiny fraction of manned flights.
The only thing that I could think of really reversing this would be if fossils were found on Mars.
A number of prominent scientists agree with this for example Lord Rees, the astronomer Royal thinks such money is best spent on unmanned projects
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7349610.st m
And I have to say I agree with him.
It is hard to justify manned missions when you look at the science they come up with compared to the Science from unmanned projects.
I know Hubble has been placed in orbit and occasionally maintained by manned flights but it's essentially an unmanned project and has produced some of the most important results.
Likewise Pioneer, Voyager, Cobe etc. These cost a tiny fraction of manned flights.
The only thing that I could think of really reversing this would be if fossils were found on Mars.
well we are in the ESA and pay 239 million quid:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Space_Ag ency#Budget
so we are funding it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Space_Ag ency#Budget
so we are funding it!
1 to 7 of 7
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.