[bonesmccoy]

Just to add a few comments to yours on costs of shuttle launches.

There are so many ways to account for things that it is very difficult to describe the costs per mission and effectively compare Apollo to Shuttle.

For one thing, the technical differences in the mission profiles has a dramatic impact on costs. Saturn 5 was a huge vehicle and used different fuels than STS.

For another thing, the processing at KSC is dramatically different. The main issue is that the STS does not require assembly lines to manufacture the booster with each mission. The only elements manufactured for each flight are the ET's components.

So, no, I would not agree with your memory. STS is less costly than the Apollo program on a per astronaut or per flight basis.

[GeronL]

The only elements manufactured for each flight are the ET's components.

Actually the boosters are totally rebuilt for each mission. very costly.

[hopespringseternal]

STS is less costly than the Apollo program on a per astronaut or per flight basis.

That is misleading. A direct comparison is hard to do because the mission for each is so different. The shuttle has far less lifting capability as far as payload goes, but it is a mini-space station in itself. Not that such a thing is a good idea.