![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Aug. 23rd, 2006 01:51 pmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5277736.stm
Hm. 13 years to get back to the Moon. (And that's *if* it runs to schedule/isn't rebudgeted which I don't think the history of the space station would make a plausible hope). Or about double what it took doing it for the first time, 40 years ago!
So much for progress!
Still, better than nothing I guess. And about time too!
Hm. 13 years to get back to the Moon. (And that's *if* it runs to schedule/isn't rebudgeted which I don't think the history of the space station would make a plausible hope). Or about double what it took doing it for the first time, 40 years ago!
So much for progress!
Still, better than nothing I guess. And about time too!
