this post was submitted on
2,011 points (52% like it)
21,515 up votes 19,504 down votes

funny

subscribe2,592,970 readers

8,646 users here now

Please take our newest poll about facebook posts

Reminder: Political posts are not permitted in /r/funny. Try /r/PoliticalHumor instead!

NEW! No gore or porn (including sexually graphic images). Other NSFW content must be tagged as such

Welcome to r/Funny:

You may only post if you are funny.

Please No:

  • posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor. Click for an Example.

  • Screenshots of reddit comment threads. Post a link with context to /r/bestof or /r/defaultgems if from a default subreddit instead.

  • Posts for the specific point of it being your reddit birthday.

  • Politics - This includes the 2012 Presidential candidates or bills in congress. Try /r/politicalhumor instead.

  • Rage comics - Go to /r/fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu instead.

  • Memes - Go to /r/AdviceAnimals or /r/Memes instead.

  • Demotivational posters - Go to /r/Demotivational instead.

  • Pictures of just text - Make a self post instead.

  • DAE posts - Go to /r/doesanybodyelse

  • eCards - the poll result was 55.02% in favor of removal. Please submit eCards to /r/ecards

  • URL shorteners - No link shorteners (or HugeURL) in either post links or comments. They will be deleted regardless of intent.

Rehosted webcomics will be removed. Please submit a link to the original comic's site and preferably an imgur link in the comments. Do not post a link to the comic image, it must be linked to the page of the comic. (*) (*)

Need more? Check out:

Still need more? See Reddit's best / worst and offensive joke collections (warning: some of those jokes are offensive / nsfw!).


Please DO NOT post personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder.


If your submission appears to be banned, please don't just delete it as that makes the filter hate you! Instead please send us a message with a link to the post. We'll unban it and it should get better. Please allow 10 minutes for the post to appear before messaging moderators


The moderators of /r/funny reserve the right to moderate posts and comments at their discretion, with regard to their perception of the suitability of said posts and comments for this subreddit. Thank you for your understanding.


CSS - BritishEnglishPolice ©2011

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]holley3020 593 points594 points ago

No Red Bull?

[–]Italian_Barrel_Roll 878 points879 points ago

Wings don't work in space.

[–]MadeSenseAtTheTime 250 points251 points ago

True but most of that surface area is used in breaking atmosphere anyway, so long as the Red Bull decal was on the breakaways and not the shuttle itself, it would totally still work.

[–]Italian_Barrel_Roll 106 points107 points ago

I like the way you think.

[–]tudborg 47 points48 points ago

So... your username? I must know! how?!

[–]Italian_Barrel_Roll 120 points121 points ago

[–]tudborg 19 points20 points ago

Oh u :p

[–]sotoj159 8 points9 points ago

Couldn't those companies end up influencing how NASA operates in the end? Couldn't they say, "do this or this way or else we'll pull our sponsorship"? Can't they?

[–]xxLurker 2 points3 points ago

Yeah... But we would still have NASA :D

[–]Gengar11 7 points8 points ago

Upvotes for this entire conversation.

[–]tha_ape 14 points15 points ago

The surface area just needs to be big enough Solar Sail

There ARE particles there, they are just few and far between.

[–]Italian_Barrel_Roll 32 points33 points ago

Although I'm down with the concept, like the name says, I'd call this a sail as opposed to a wing. This operates on the principle of capturing the energy of latent particles and transmuting them to thrust through types of pressure perpendicular to the sail, rather than creating a system of lift and drag through pressure system differentials parallel to the wing.

TL;DR: Cheeseburger.

[–]projectedhate 7 points8 points ago

could redbull not simply change it to, DRINK RED BULL, IT GIVES YOU SAILS.

?

[–]KungFuHamster 21 points22 points ago

Red Bull gives you plasma engines!TM

[–]slyphox 28 points29 points ago

I'm honestly surprised they havent picked it up.

I think the orbiter would look amazing in the typical blue/silver scheme.

[–]accidently_a_femur 45 points46 points ago

I always thought of these launches as one big viagra commercial anyway... "If your boosters don't fall off after 4 minutes, call your Rocket Scientist immediately."

[–]b0w3n 15 points16 points ago

Just as an aside, they reduced the ET's weight by 600 lbs by not painting it.

Hope those sponsors pick up the additional fuel costs for launching because of their decals and paint.

[–]jared030858 22 points23 points ago

you're right, they're a big air/flight advertising company.

[–]jared030858 28 points29 points ago

They're going through a recession, they had to cut some of the guys on R&D

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points ago

hey my name is Jared too! Hi!

[–]jared030858 15 points16 points ago

Don't downvote the man we both lost 300 pounds from eating subway! =D

[–]HimTiser 4 points5 points ago

no I will not make out with you

[–]capseaslug 2 points3 points ago

Made this for a similar post about a month ago. http://i.imgur.com/Wyy5F.jpg

[–]nanzinator 725 points726 points ago

Then we get the NASCAR fans interested in NASA. 1. Move launch command to Daytona. 2. Sell tickets to the rednecks. 3. Spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace!

[–]Patagucci 1086 points1087 points ago

NASACAR

[–]OdessaOracle 346 points347 points ago

the ultimate space race

[–]Exducer 123 points124 points ago

This will only work if the shuttle orbits where it's making a permanent left turn.

[–]Szarkan- 64 points65 points ago

Well the earth is round.....

Alert the rednecks. We are going back into spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace!

[–]hgpot 34 points35 points ago

ATTN: Graphic Designers.

Someone please make a poster of "NASACAR // the ultimate space race". Citing Patagucci and OdessaOracle would be nice, too.

[–]Willbo 46 points47 points ago

[–]silent_p[!] 8 points9 points ago

I like it, but I think it would be better if the rockets looked more like dicks.

[–][deleted] 135 points136 points ago

DALE EARNHARDT JUNIOR JR. LESS THAN 20,000 KM TO JUPITER CAN HE MAKE IT

[–]delta_epsilon_zeta 145 points146 points ago

NASA will merge with NASCAR long before you get rednecks to use metric

[–]skynxx 32 points33 points ago

Brilliant>>>>

[–]Italian_Barrel_Roll 13 points14 points ago

To be fair, all an object orbiting our planet is doing is driving in a circle as well. Should be great fun for the NASCAR crowd.

[–]ETL4nubs 33 points34 points ago

SO WE'RE GONNA GO STRAIGHT THEN TURN TO THE LEFT

[–]jackd90 18 points19 points ago

...it's ok, I was planning on getting new speakers anyway.

[–]Trapped_in_Reddit 65 points66 points ago

[–]rabidfish91 19 points20 points ago

Damn... that article was a few years before Dale Earnhardt's accident

[–]jaxspider 15 points16 points ago

Get yo ass back in reddit.

[–]Trapped_in_Reddit 10 points11 points ago

[–]dhaft88 11 points12 points ago

That's some finely-aged internet right there.

[–]ass_munch_reborn 12 points13 points ago

You can't spell NASCAR without NASA!

[–]wanderer11 5 points6 points ago

We would need too many crashes to keep people entertained.

[–]VGChampion 6 points7 points ago

Just goes to show how far Reddit is out of the loop. People don't watch NASCAR for the ads on cars and suits. They go for the high speed race / crashes. It's basically a modern day chariot race.

[–]ChristmasGT 314 points315 points ago

Maybe we can then promote Diet Coke and Mentos as a cheap propulsion system.

[–]euphoriac 110 points111 points ago

How has this not been posted yet!

[–]Sumwhat_Happy_Ending 9 points10 points ago

gasp hes found NASA's new blueprints!

[–][deleted] 60 points61 points ago

this... this guy is on to something

[–]jscoppe 3 points4 points ago

[–]Socrates2 131 points132 points ago

How old is this picture? Sun doesn't even exist anymore.

[–]heart_of_a_liger 122 points123 points ago

"Intel inside: Pentium"

[–]higherbeing 31 points32 points ago

MMX Technology yo!

[–]jaxspider 27 points28 points ago

Hit the turbo button for more speed, yo!

[–]Lerker01 44 points45 points ago

R.I.P. Sun Microsystems

[–]flooded 22 points23 points ago

May it be remembered as a good company and not the evil that is Oracle.

[–]Brewster-Rooster 14 points15 points ago

as someone who doesn't know, whats wrong with oracle?

[–]Gbcue 25 points26 points ago

Everything.

[–]Brewster-Rooster 29 points30 points ago

oh right. wow, that's pretty bad :O

[–]EatingSteak 2 points3 points ago

I don't have a particularly detaioed answerl but I'll give you a better one than Gbcue did. What pissed off the tech community was that they picked them up cheaply as they were failing, with an adamant promise "oh yeah we definitely won't cut funding to their projects or kill off their products". Then did just that.

[–]TheRealHortnon 2 points3 points ago

"oh yeah we definitely won't cut funding to their projects or kill off their products". Then did just that.

What? SPARC roadmap collapsed to about 1/4 the timeline it was and Solaris 11 was released when Sun didn't even have a plan to release it. MySQL, Glassfish, and Java have continued development, even the start of JRockit into the core JVM.

So I'm confused what was cut?

[–]fanifan[S] 5 points6 points ago

lol its pretty old, way before the good old appropriated government funding days.

[–]HeHeHeGS 1197 points1198 points ago

I have no problem with this.

[–]aggrazel 327 points328 points ago

Certainly not. We've had advertising based funding for scientific research for years, just look at some of the vehicles entered in the DARPA grand challenge.

[–]sexybobo 132 points133 points ago

All those cars are privately funded though entering to win government funding vs this which is publicly funded.

Not that i would have a problem with this though would be funny watching a launch at Verizon Wireless Presents Kennedy Space Center

[–]thehero29 118 points119 points ago

I would love to stay in the Hilton on the Moon.

[–]bearsaremean 14 points15 points ago

Mad men?

[–]special_t 16 points17 points ago

"When I say I want the moon, I expect the moon."

[–]kinboyatuwo 43 points44 points ago

Me to. I get friends and family rates on earth. Not sure it carries over to the moon.

[–]thehero29 28 points29 points ago

It should be company wide, but I'd call ahead of time. I'd hate to take the Greyhound shuttle all the way there and find out I wouldn't get a deal.

[–]pasmeme 35 points36 points ago

Fuck if Greyhound shuttles to the moon. They can't even function properly within the Toronto area and southern Ontario.

[–]deathcapt 10 points11 points ago

honestly I wouldn't give a shit if it was publicly funded or simply publicly subsidized, as long as a government non-profit entity controls all the patents that come out of it.

Treat it like any crown corporation. If it can sell stuff to help fund itself without breaking it's mandate or functionality then why not.

If they can sell a giant sticker on the back of the shuttle for $10 million, maybe it'll keep nasa running for another couple days or whatever.

[–]velociredditer 33 points34 points ago

The only problems I see in this scenario are that the shuttle is grossly outdated and even if it weren't, all that paint would grossly reduce the payload capacity, wasting millions and millions of dollars each flight. That's why they stopped painting the main fuel tank.

[–]chetstovepiper 9 points10 points ago

the ads are projected onto the shuttle from the ground and follow the trajectory of the launch. boom.

[–]VTFD 28 points29 points ago

Who cares what it costs when it's being privately funded with ad dollars? Just price that into the cost of the advertisement.

[–]velociredditer 21 points22 points ago

That's a very valid point in most cases, but with numbers that astronomical (or rather, LEOical) the companies will have to square with the question of how many millions of dollars they think a single well placed ad might return in revenue. If the companies want to brand themselves as promoters of space flight/exploration, they would be better off just starting their own space program so they have the branding (which would be much more effective this way) by default, as well as the potential to tap into all sorts of markets with the program like mineral extraction or space tourism. Not surprisingly, people have figured this out and this is one reason we have an ever growing private space industry.

[–]mmtrjh01 12 points13 points ago

It would be tragic if the Exxon tank exploded while the shuttle was launching. Wouldn't be the first time they shattered the dreams of many.

[–]blahblahblahdkjdfgj 183 points184 points ago

Seriously. Do people really care that much if something is covered in crap if it's properly funded? I see nothing wrong with it.

[–]blackmailedchef 105 points106 points ago

When deep space exploration ramps up, it'll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks.

[–]ambisexterous 147 points148 points ago

Samsung's gonna get all up in Microsoft's shit about that one.

[–]ObtuseAbstruse 41 points42 points ago

I hope to Sun that Samsung doesn't own the common word galaxy.

[–]AndrewNeo 44 points45 points ago

I think you mean you hope to Oracle.

[–]Ambassador_throwaway 15 points16 points ago

George Lucas owns the word 'Droid', don't be surprised.

[–]brian1987 55 points56 points ago

God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off

[–]I_CAPE_RUNTS 32 points33 points ago

i haven't been fucked like that since grade school

[–]formfactor 14 points15 points ago

Fun fact: originally she was supposed to say "I want to have your abortion!".

[–]Sawdust_Prophet 8 points9 points ago

Pitt's decision to answer the door with a large rubber glove on was brilliant.

[–]fanifan[S] 247 points248 points ago

for science!

[–]asphyxiate 162 points163 points ago

This is probably one of the few times that this phrase is relevant.

[–]windsostrange 5 points6 points ago

It's not about what covers the blank parts of the spaceship. It's about the source of funding, and how that source can grow to dictate the future plans of a department over time. There is no place for naked commercialism in a field devoted to scientific discovery.

[–]asphyxiate 7 points8 points ago

Hell, I would have greater respect for those companies if they're putting money into real scientific research. If only everyone valued space travel / research more, it would actually be more feasible.

[–]just_wrong 24 points25 points ago

It's pretty depressing that we, as a species, can't even agree on something as universally positive as funding for space programs or sufficient scientific research.

[–]Renmauzuo 33 points34 points ago

The problem is that these things do not exist in a vacuum. Yeah, space travel is cool, but every dollar spent on space travel is a dollar not being spent on healthcare or infrastructure improvements or something similar. I love space shuttles, but they don't fill potholes in roads or put food in front of hungry people. It's pretty understandable that some people have different priorities than a bunch of science nerds like us, heh.

[–]bhtitalforces 28 points29 points ago

I can see your point but it's kind of hard to use that as justification for NASA's poor funding while we piss away so much money occupying the Middle East.

[–]phonedump 6 points7 points ago

Until space exploration involves obtaining massive amounts of oil, this will never change.

[–]DesignDecay 5 points6 points ago

Well massive amounts of hydrogen.

[–]redwall_hp 9 points10 points ago*

And yet we give the wars a blank check...

[–]cancercures 11 points12 points ago

Your excuses do not include 'defense spending.' I assume you are not American.

[–]TheMeddlingMonk 8 points9 points ago

This is not a valid excuse. Space exploration is a small spender. If people want to bitch about not having the money they need to look at the $683.7 billion spent on the military.

[–]mrmailbox 39 points40 points ago

Anyone else reminded of the monologue at the opening of Fight Club? "When deep space exploration ramps up, it'll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks."

[–]luciuspecker 3 points4 points ago

Was the first thing that came to my mind.

[–]HerpingtonDerpDerp 43 points44 points ago

Nice try, Weyland and/or Yutani.

[–]CeruleanOak 6 points7 points ago

I would like to super-size my space program, please.

[–]MortalJohn 12 points13 points ago

If it works for NASCAR...

[–]fdebijl 376 points377 points ago

The paint would weigh too much.

[–]defrndr 210 points211 points ago

How about having holograms/laser of the logos being projected on the spaceship till the last moment possible?! Just a thought.

[–]warox13 87 points88 points ago

SPACE LASERS!

[–]i_cry_evrytim_ 72 points73 points ago

SPASERS!

[–]asmosdeus 50 points51 points ago

Mr. Worf, Set phasers to PROFIT!

[–]F2a 15 points16 points ago

defrndr : Expert problem solver.

[–]wetshrinkage 25 points26 points ago

The photons would weigh too much.

[–]ukiya 5 points6 points ago

That would work, but modern launches are done only in daylight.

[–]NotoriousSpoiler 2 points3 points ago

To deter ninjas

[–]MagicalTrevor09 45 points46 points ago

Can someone explain this a little more, please? I understand what you mean, that the weight the paint adds would affect fuel consumption, but how? Does the paint really weigh that much, considering how heavy the ship is in the first place? Just curious.

[–]Flying_D_80[!] 66 points67 points ago

The first couple of shuttle flights had External Tanks painted white for aesthetics, but when they didn't paint the tanks they saved ~1000 lbs (455 kg) which can then be added to the payload or not used at all for propellant cost savings.

Source: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/spacecraft/q0285.shtml

[–]seeasea 38 points39 points ago

I guess then, if someone is sponsoring, we could afford the paint weight/cost.

[–]IrritableGourmet 21 points22 points ago

Current cost to orbit is something like $10k-30k/lb. That's an extra million dollars just to lift the paint.

[–]Duramax159 56 points57 points ago

If companies are willing to pay 3.5 million for a 30 second super bowl ad, they'll pay an extra million for their name on a space ship.

[–]aphexgt 7 points8 points ago

Over 100 million people watch the Super Bowl. Do you really think there are that many people watching a space shuttle launch?

[–]deepblueeverything 29 points30 points ago

There would be if it was the first manned mission to Mars.

[–]HoboRobo 18 points19 points ago

*McMars

[–]Retawekaj 6 points7 points ago

But wouldn't you think that the money that they would make by allowing advertisements would outweigh the cost of the paint?

[–]rspeed 16 points17 points ago

At $10,416 per kg., you make the call.

[–]kactus 8 points9 points ago

They calculate the fuel they need based on how far they need to go and how much weight they need to carry. The fuel that they are carrying needs extra fuel to carry that weight. Adding that massive amount of paint (think of the size of the ship) would require more fuel, and more fuel to carry that fuel.

[–]biggbuckz 2 points3 points ago

It's more the fact that any weight used on paint, cannot be used on more import things (like equipment to deliver to the space station and what not). Thank about how much a normal paint can weights, and how many cans you'd need to coat the shuttle (it's big). And then think about how they're probably use something more heavy duty (and heavy) than your standard house paint.

Someone up there said the excess paint when they used to paint the parts of it was 600 pounds.

[–]Vermal 53 points54 points ago

I'm glad I wasn't the one to burst the bubble.

[–]jrsherrod 6 points7 points ago

Who said the images have to get there via paint?

[–]DeFex 2 points3 points ago

I'm sure the extra which the sponsors pay would make up for the payload weight lost.

[–]fr3shjive 24 points25 points ago

Why do you guys ignore what SpaceX is doing? You make it seems like space exploration is dead simply because the government isn't funding it anymore.

If I remember correctly, SpaceX is going to be launching an IPO in the next year and Elon Musk, the CEO, has stated that his goal with SpaceX is to put a man on Mars.

[–]danman11 2 points3 points ago

"You make it seems like space exploration is dead simply because the government isn't funding it anymore."

False. NASA is SpaceX's biggest customer. They also provided a good chunk of the development money for the Dragon and Falcon 9.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Orbital_Transportation_Services

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Crew_Development

[–]dontbeadoofus 71 points72 points ago

Actually something like this has been on reddit before and everyone thought it was brilliant till some guy pointed out that they don't paint the fuel tank because all the paint would add like 600 extra pounds and the paint would come off in launch anyway. Corporate sponsorship would be still work great though with the right marketing and should happen more.

tl;dr The paint on the fuel tank would add 600 pounds of dead weight

[–]4chan_regular 119 points120 points ago

Just remove one of the american astronauts, That'll even it out.

[–]tike0rz 38 points39 points ago

ZING!

[–]danman11 2 points3 points ago

The Space Shuttle could put 55,250 pounds into orbit.

[–]rediculousam 4 points5 points ago

Highly adhesive stickers then?

[–]H_E_Pennypacker 5 points6 points ago

It's 2012, there has to be a better way to do it...

[–]Diels_Alder 35 points36 points ago

Lack of federal funding for NASA - suddenly everyone loves big business. Let's let them draw a big McDonalds logo on the surface of the moon so it becomes a giant billboard. For space science funding.

[–]HotwaxNinjaPanther 14 points15 points ago

Exactly. I don't know why everyone is jumping for joy over the thought of profit-driven entities being the sole benefactor of space travel. Next thing you know, you'll have Monsanto sending rockets into space to go dump GMO seeds on a planet just to see if shit will grow there. Who cares about discovering if life already existed there first? They've patented the DNA in the seeds, now once they have stuff growing there they'll own the patent rights to an entire planet's ecosystem.

All those dreams that people had about Star Trek and the Enterprise going forth with a prime directive to seek out new life, not get involved in undeveloped civilizations and chart the stars? Not gonna happen. It's more likely that our space program will entirely consist of steamrolling new planets for monetary gain.

"Hey look, a planet with little blue people who only know how to bows and arrows. Let's teach them how to grow only one kind of extremely fast-growing crop, ruin their ecosystem and exploit the crap out of them. Then we'll put a KFC in every village so the little economy we've created there can be funneled back to HQ."

[–]You_and_I_in_Unison 6 points7 points ago

Who would you have do it then? If you are totally convinced the government will not regulate private companies in space, why would it regulate itself?

[–]ShawnDaley 20 points21 points ago

Crayola could sponsor the two rockets on the sides. Nothing like watching giant crayons shooting into space.

[–]redjello 44 points45 points ago

TIL Reddit hates corporatism except when its stuff they like.

[–]fiercedeity1[!] 6 points7 points ago

Or maybe Reddit thinks that corporatism is better than very little space flight.

[–]Trapped_in_Reddit 166 points167 points ago

Yes it is - the space shuttle is a dangerously outdated piece of technology.

[–]TheBlackHive 230 points231 points ago

We'll let you design the next one.

[–]SniperGX1 107 points108 points ago

The next one will look similar, but with speed holes.

[–]jaxspider 38 points39 points ago

For each speed hole you gain +100 mph.

[–]All-American-Bot 13 points14 points ago

(For our friends outside the USA... 100 mph -> 160.9 km/h) - Yeehaw!

[–]Neebat 23 points24 points ago

We have no friends outside the USA.

Ah who am I kidding? We're redditors. We have no friends anywhere.

[–]theskabus 17 points18 points ago

Don't forget flame decals.

[–]PandaGoggles 8 points9 points ago

Flame decals add at least +5 HP each

[–]BigDaddyShitstain 35 points36 points ago

Ah, my favorite logic- you can only say something's bad if you can personally do better. Hope you've never complained about a pro athlete/musician/artist.

[–]pumpkindog 9 points10 points ago

ah the old "I'd like to see you do better"

an air tight come back.

[–]dustin_the_wind 8 points9 points ago

We'll let you make the next comeback, since the first one wasn't good enough.

[–]Xyrec 2 points3 points ago

He'll fund it with his comment karma.

[–]skintigh 34 points35 points ago

It is a dangerous piece of technology that is also 30 years out of date.

FTFY

It never lived up to any of it's promise (be cheaper than a Saturn V, fly dozens of times a year, etc.) and if anything goes wrong it's a death trap. Unlike a capsule/vehicle on top of a rocket which can launch away from the main rocket if something goes wrong, the shuttle is strapped to 3 huge bombs.

To continue flying the shuttle would all but guarantee more disasters with no survivors.

Besides, clinging to the past is not a path to the future.

[–]sejkorat 8 points9 points ago

thank you, i always have to explain that phasing out the shuttle isn't a bad thing. we can do it cheaper and better, why wouldn't we?

just because it's iconic of space exploration doesnt mean that it IS space exploration

[–]lemonpjb 2 points3 points ago

I have learned this from playing lots of Kerbal Space Program.

Also, I'd like to plug r/KerbalSpaceProgram.

[–]iloling 21 points22 points ago

Yeah, McDonald's sponsors my gas too.

[–]tacojohn48 20 points21 points ago

The added weight of the paint might not be the best ideal.

[–]rabidfish91 15 points16 points ago

Unless the income from advertisers outweighs the extra cost of added launch weight. I'd expect that to be some of the most expensive advertising space in history

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points ago

Probably not more expensive than your average superbowl ad spot. I'm actually curious now, how much weight would that paint realistically add to the shuttle, and how much would it end up costing per square foot? /r/askscience?

[–]H_E_Pennypacker 2 points3 points ago

the most expensive advertising space in history

Also, the most expensive advertising in space history.

[–]bpwnz 14 points15 points ago

corporate space travel is the future of the industry and has always been. Space tourism will be a huge market in the next century, and already exists at some levels today. I look forward to the day when I can buy myself a ticket to orbit the earth, heck maybe even a quick swing around the dark-side of the moon.

in b4 the flames : obviously there's still room and need for government space agencies. All i'm saying is I look forward to the day when private companies are putting more people in to space a year than government space agencies have put into space ever.

[–]cliftron 3 points4 points ago

NASA is for exploration into the unknown not routine. Thus spaceX.

[–]dzkn 3 points4 points ago

[–]jacks_wasted_life 4 points5 points ago

“When deep space exploration ramps up, it'll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks.”

[–]Puffy_Ghost 2 points3 points ago

I'd be amazed if this could actually happen. There'd probably be a lot of red tape involved, given that NASA is government funded agency.

Still, if it meant more money for NASA and space exploration, I'm all for it.

[–]drmischief 5 points6 points ago*

I too would not mind this. Billions are spent in advertising through NASCAR, why not use some of that money toward something important and useful to mankind?

EDIT: Guess I should look for similar comments before submitting...

[–]TrainOfThought6 5 points6 points ago

When deep space exploration ramps up, it'll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks.

[–]tsenaku 2 points3 points ago

Fight Club saw this coming over a decade in advance.

[–]jrhallman 14 points15 points ago

im all for this actually

[–]lunastella 4 points5 points ago

Sun doesn't exist anymore Oracle bought it. Other than that not bad...

[–]SantosLHalper 5 points6 points ago

I have a SERIOUS problem with this. Once the Space Shuttle Corporate Sponsorship gets to Mars, McDonalds is going to negotiate with the other companies and buy out their stake in the mission. Mars, being the red planet, will become one giant intergalactic McDonalds drive thru.

[–]mateslikerabbit 28 points29 points ago

Appropriately, McDonalds is the biggest cock of the bunch.

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points ago

After months of travelling foreign countries, stricken by sudden hunger, needing occasional shelter from the elements, a place to put my feet up or empty my waste, I disagree. McDonalds isn't a cock, for me personally, it's a checkpoint. A safespot... oh, and free wifi.

[–]mateslikerabbit 9 points10 points ago

Your wisdom astounds me, Great Buddha.

[–]bpwnz 35 points36 points ago

meaning in this hypothetical world they've chosen to take the most privately earned (notice not seized by force like tax revenues) money and put it towards human enlightenment? What terrible people.

[–]bastocrat 2 points3 points ago

Reminds me of a very old joke... "Sir, sir, the russkies are painting the moon red!" "Don't worry... just wait 'till they're done then send some of our boys up there and have them write 'Coca Cola' on the surface."

[–]ryjohva 2 points3 points ago

I had the ex-director of NASA come give a talk to us about NASA (Mike Griffin) at my university, I remember him saying something about how NASA is not allowed to advertise as an entity. That is why we don't see adds like "NASA, to the future and beyond" or whatever. I really wish they could run some inspirational adds.... I'd prefer them over the damn Geiko Gecko commercials any day of the week.

[–]ass_munch_reborn 2 points3 points ago

Sun Microsystems is back bitches!

[–]flattop100 2 points3 points ago

We're about to have it. Haven't you heard that SpaceX is launching their first resupply rocket to the ISS soon?

[–]soccer_7470 2 points3 points ago

You really can't get more more American than a McDonald's space shuttle

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

I for one am very against this. We should double our budget for NASA from .6 pennies to 1 penny on the tax dollar. I'm sure everyone would not want this if it weren't necessary. Am I wrong? If NASA did not need further funding would anyone really want this stuff all over our beloved space craft?

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]SnifflyWhale 4 points5 points ago

It's a TERRIBLE idea. Do you know why the shuttle programme was cancelled? It wasn't due to budget cuts. It was because the shuttle was the most dangerous manned rocket system of all time. It was expensive, couldn't carry much compared to what came before it, and could not leave low-earth-orbit. It was a beautiful piece of technology, but it was also old, obsolete, and dangerous. Time to move on.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

True endearment requires necessary compromises. I would hardly qualify this as a compromise though. I wanna see shit go into space, science! Science! Science!

[–]bigjo66 1 point2 points ago

Even if it were allowed, I'm not sure that major companies would want to have their name emblazoned on something that has a fair chance of exploding or burning up killing people.

[–]LessLikeYou 1 point2 points ago

No Carl's Jr.?

[–]discoinfidel 5 points6 points ago

Carl's Jr.: Fuck you, I'm eating!

[–]Dockle 1 point2 points ago

The paint weighs too much. That's why the normal ones are so plain and the big one looks so crappy and rusty.

[–]Epershand 1 point2 points ago

The rocket, you know, a symbol for the inadequate male.

Alan Watts

[–]Justavian 1 point2 points ago

Each shuttle launch cost around half a billion dollars. While i have no complaints about selling advert space, i'm not sure if it would be enough to really offset the cost dramatically. Would McDonald's spend 100 million for each launch? Every penny counts, but the key is to reduce the cost in the first place...

[–]kroatia04 1 point2 points ago

3 tons worth of paint seems like a bad idea.

[–]TomatoManTM 1 point2 points ago

Change the main one to Apple and it's all good, though.

[–]charol_astra 1 point2 points ago

Heh, Trojans...amirite?!

[–]aebler 1 point2 points ago

To be honest, this is a great idea. If we let all these businesses pay for exploring space and having their logo printed on the shuttle, it would be fine with me. I can't see why some people draw advertising out to be some evil thing.

[–]jimbo91987 1 point2 points ago

Is this ne of those "funny because it's true" type things?