commercial space travel

[jasonchild]

I live in New Mexico, in the town of Alamogordo to be exact. Recently the town has been all aflutter with news of the commercial space travel "industry" and the X-Cup. It seems that this area has been selected for these projects.

I was wondering what the rest of the "world" has to say about this. Does the idea of a small handfull of companies exploiting orbital vehicles appeal to more than just complacent Americans looking for The Next Big Thing (tm) ?I am also interested in heard what others have to say about issues such as:

* Safety. Most of the vehicles produced today for this end would be more or less harmless if gravity were to win out, so to speak. But with the advent of what could be considered the "jumbo-jet" of space travel (and when I refer to "travel" I mean low orbit only..) would any of us feel safe knowing there is a large hunk of metal and plastic looming overhead?

* National Security concerns. Not only for the USA, but for EVERY nation. Is it a "good idea" to let anynone with enough cash orbit anything they want around the globe? The practicality of this isnt my point, but more the philosophical nature of it. In this modern age of "terrorist" threats and whatnot it seems the ultimate weapon would be one that could descend from the heavens.

At anyrate, I look forward to hearing the opinions of individuals far more informed than myself...

jCc

[Stargazer]

Originally Posted by jasonchild

I live in New Mexico, in the town of Alamogordo to be exact. Recently the town has been all aflutter with news of the commercial space travel "industry" and the X-Cup. It seems that this area has been selected for these projects.

I was wondering what the rest of the "world" has to say about this. Does the idea of a small handfull of companies exploiting orbital vehicles appeal to more than just complacent Americans looking for The Next Big Thing (tm) ?

The X-Prize had teams from USA, Canada, UK, Romania, Israel, etc. so it's not just an American thing. Richard Branson recently started up the Virgin Galactic which will begin suborbital flights in a few years, and probably orbital soon after that.

I don't see this as just another fad, if that's what you meant by "The Next Big Thing". It's the beginning of something fantastic.

I am also interested in heard what others have to say about issues such as:

* Safety. Most of the vehicles produced today for this end would be more or less harmless if gravity were to win out, so to speak. But with the advent of what could be considered the "jumbo-jet" of space travel (and when I refer to "travel" I mean low orbit only..) would any of us feel safe knowing there is a large hunk of metal and plastic looming overhead?

There are already thousands of objects in orbit, though most of them small there are some big ones too, such as the space telescopes, the ISS and soon again the shuttle.

And don't forget all the aeroplanes, civilian and military, flying above us all the time. Huge hunks of metal swooshing above our heads is surely not a new issue, and I don't feel unsafe about it.

* National Security concerns. Not only for the USA, but for EVERY nation. Is it a "good idea" to let anynone with enough cash orbit anything they want around the globe? The practicality of this isnt my point, but more the philosophical nature of it. In this modern age of "terrorist" threats and whatnot it seems the ultimate weapon would be one that could descend from the heavens.

Indeed. That's one reason the Americans got worried about the Soviet Union launching the Sputnik. Theoretically they could then launch nuclear weapons and aim at the US and its allies. It never happened, but now we know about military projects in space during the cold war, both US and Soviet. They usually never left the planning or prototype stage.

The terrorist threat is complicated and I won't get into a discussion about the factors behind it, but I don't think that's an issue more than civilian aeroplanes is a problem when it comes to terrorism, that is, of course there are risks, but not necessarily more than before.

In countries that will regulate civilian spaceflight, there will be laws and regulations and agencies, the usual stuff when the government is involved, and so that will keep the standards at certain levels. This means security and safety will be constantly made sure to meet the standards, including things such as the security measures at the spaceport.

What is more worrying is theocracies and other dictatorships developing their own abilities to launch ICBM's and satellites.

[UncleAl]

The lamentable Space Scuttle, originally designed as a low orbital nuclear bomber, costs $(US)30/gram to loft mass into low Earth orbit. Check out the price of gold (and remember - it's troy ounces). A real booster has lower costs overall and much larger payloads/fuel mass. Even so, specs for a seriously large booster given current NASA or ESA technologies,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/nasa3.htm

are flat out silly for commercial exploitation. There is nothing imaginable you could make or obtain that would justify transportation costs at any scale.

Going the Scaled Composites route you could be very clever with a reusable system. Even if that cut costs tenfold, there is still no reason to go into space except to drop very large warheads. Recreational transport is marginal. The Concorde illustrates the futility of expensive hardware catering to bulk carriage trade alone. You cannot make it turn a profit in the long run.

There is an awesome amount of crap in low Earth orbit - down to paint chips.. Adding more is not a good idea. Anything that hits you at up to Mach 25 is gonna be bad news.

[Boerseun]

I agree completely.

Then again, there seems to be this universal compulsion to go to space, to colonise the planets, to explore, basically to keep doing what we've been doing for the last couple'o thousands of years.

Which is an admirable instinct, to be sure, but if we're going to do it, it's gonna cost. BIG bucks. And as long as we force capitalism with a cost/profit consideration built into the very fabric of the enterprise down the World's collective throat, we won't go anywhere save for low Earth orbit.

So maybe the fault lies not so much with the risks etc. involved, but rather with our political and economic systems?

The only reason I can see for venturing further into space or even colonising the planets, is national prestige. Which takes the whole issue out of the realm of economic viability and technical possibility, and drops it with a blunt thud in the Political world. Where it'll probably die a sad, lonely death whilst Capitalism rules the planet.

[Stargazer]

Of course lots of people don't want to go to space, don't think it will ever be possible and when it was proven possible they think it will always be extremely expensive, etc.. Ok, they don't have to participate in this great adventure. Others are more than willing to do so, and they are doing it right now. It will begin with suborbital flights, then orbital flights, orbital space hotels, trips to the moon. Of course it will be expensive at first, but lots of things are too expensive for most people in the beginning. Now everyone has a car, a computer, TV, and they fly across continents and oceans. And why would low Earth orbit be the only place we can go? Is it suddenly impossible to go to the Moon or Mars? No, but expensive. But that will change with time.