If there's a cheap alternative to that massive boondoggle called the Shuttle, and we aren't taking it, I'd be irritated.

Not just the costs, but the risks inherent in such a large vehicle are a concern.

It would seem to me that one is not only multiplying the risks of catastrophic failure but multiplying the losses.

If there were something for the other 3 or 4 passengers to do which might mitigate risk or loss that might make sense. Otherwise they might be better off sending fewer people. I don't believe all those folks are busy with critical mission tasks all the time.

They might be, but I doubt it.

Arf