Dialogue: To exorbitantly go where no tourists have gone before

By ELISABETH EASTHER

Where was I when holidays turned so high tech? When was reading on a tropical beach or careering down rapids superseded by space travel? And when did space travel become so accessible?

Quick trip to the Moon anyone? You won't get much change from $50 million - but what the heck, it might be fun.

Dennis Tito, a 61-year-old millionaire and former engineer with Nasa, thought it would be fun enough.

No more a cosmonaut than me, his money's hurtled him into space with a pair of Russians. His first-class fare is making the entire trip possible.

But I'm still not sure why he's done it or how he can justify the expense. He was bitten by the space bug when Sputnik took off in 1957, but so were a lot of people. I just don't know if the universe needs exploring or whatever it is he's doing.

Normal first-class air travel makes me wonder how people justify spending four times as much as me for a seat. Naturally, as I'm herded through to economy, I wish I did have the means. But even if I was stinking rich, couldn't I just splash out on valium and save the cash for a rainy day?

The space race has enjoyed a renaissance lately. It has again become one of the most chic branches of science, as it was in the 1960s and 1970s. The achievements then were world-shaking news and made a whole planet feel united against bigger forces.



Space is the setting of some of the most epic stories and, while it may not be the last frontier, it is the next one which, since the 1950s, has taken the place of the Wild West.

I have an inherent dislike of grand spending, so when I heard how much money Nasa burns through in a year - around $US3.7 billion ($8.6 billion), about $US500 million of which can be spent on sending a single mission into space - I got a bit twitchy. I'm all for research and finding out what makes things tick, but doesn't a line have to be drawn?

Obviously not, because the race to find life on Mars and send civilians to the Moon has been getting more intense.

In 1997 a United States aerospace engineer launched the X-Prize, hoping to jump-start space tourism.

Peter Diamandis figured he had a one-in-1000 chance of becoming an astronaut so, to boost his odds, he offered $US10 million to the first person to successfully test a passenger vehicle that could fly 100km above Earth. To win, the vehicle has to complete two flights in two weeks, proving itself rapidly reusable. From the 19 registered entrants, organisers expect to have a winner by 2003.

If a commercially viable option became available, space travel would take off. Sir Richard Branson would offer Virgin Space Tours and there would be no hotter honeymoons than on Mars. I mean, how cool would that be?

Dennis Tito should be checking into his space house right about now, despite Nasa's strong objections to his going up at all.

A Russian space agency spokesman said it was because Americans didn't like amateurs up there.

Russia also says that, as a full partner in the project, it has the right to send anyone it likes, especially if that anyone is paying for the gas. The Russians prefer to think of Tito as a tourist, not a civilian, a differentiation that could change the face of holidays forever.

So, what is the true justification for space travel? I suspect there's a lot of money to be made, because it can't just be for kudos or thrills.

Tito says it's because he's learning to be alone. He's learning that he doesn't need all his wealth, that without it he would still be happy.

Still, that doesn't exactly answer my question of what might make it worth the the enormous price tag.