An old friend called my attention to this comparison in an email this morning.

Her email began: “We could have had a rocket to Mars instead of a fixed rail to Howard Hughes land !”

Then she linked to a Washington Post story about the “massive” funding needed to keep the NASA Mars aspirations alive.

… The powerful new rocket NASA has been developing for years in its quest to get to the moon and Mars will require a massive amount of additional funding that would double the initial cost of the project to nearly $9 billion, according to a scathing government report released Wednesday.

NASA’s Office of the Inspector General found that Boeing, the main contractor, has already spent $5.3 billion on the rocket program and is expected to burn through the remaining contract funds by early next year, three years ahead of time and without delivering a single rocket stage.

The rocket also is suffering production delays, the IG found. The first flight of what’s known as the Space Launch System rocket and Orion spacecraft was supposed to be a test mission without astronauts by the end of last year, with the first crewed mission expected in 2021. But those launches have now been delayed by 2½ years and may be set back further, the report said.

The report is a slamming indictment for a program that for years has suffered delays and cost overruns and has been derided by critics as a “Senate Launch System” that serves more as a jobs program in key congressional districts.

Despite those setbacks, NASA and members of Congress have stood by the project, saying it is vital for the agency’s long-term goals to get humans into deep space…

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/10/10/program-build-nasas-moon-rocket-could-double-price-billion-ig-says/?utm_term=.171b88cd4e09&wpisrc=nl_az_most&wpmk=1