Slashdot Mirror
Tourist-Class Soyuz Spacecraft Seats Open
brandido writes "Put another notch in the belt for space tourism - Space.com is reporting that: "If you're looking for the ultimate in get-up-and go, take note: Tourist-class seats will be available on a Soyuz spacecraft bound for the International Space Station in 2004-2005. This off-planet trek comes courtesy of a deal struck between Space Adventures, a U.S. adventure travel firm, Russia's RSC Energia and the Russian Space Agency (Rosoviakosmos)." However, NASA has yet to be officially notified or to give formal approval, so there are still some speed bumps in the road map."
This is certainly a lot more dangerous than going by airlines. I hope they give a good life insurance bonus plus full refund of your ticket money if you happen to be on the wrong shuttle and get blown up into smitherbits.
-N
The Cycle of Violence is to be seen as the invisible hand that maintains the balance of Man and Nature on earth.--M
Holy shit.
Las Vegas odds makers are giving 2-to-1 that NASA will find a way to much it up
Hmm, the shuttle aint launching for another 6 months, at best. I'm guessing they'll be a crew changeover before then - and Nasa needs to stay in Russia's good books.
Of course, for $20 million a person, you could launch 7 people - the compliment of a shuttle - for $140m. The average shuttle flight costs $500m.
Ever read the Ben Elton novel Stark?
Basically, in the novel, the Earth is nearing ecological meltdown and the food chain has become compromised. To escape from hell on Earth and certain death on a dying planet, the filthy rich implement a plan to launch themselves into space and self-sustainability in space.
However, in a cruel twist of fate, they find that although they can escape the pollution on Earth, they can't escape the pollution in their souls.
Senator Hatch, Hilary Rosen and the SCO board spring immediately to mind (as well as a raft of other political figures, from the US and around the world), when I think of people I'd launch into orbit now so that the rest of us can live more freely and cleanly today.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Just out of interest, does NASA have to ask anyone's permission to visit the ISS? Do they give the other countries involved in the ISS the same courtesy?
Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
1. Invesnt product
2. Sell product
3. Repeat (2)
4. Profit
5. Hitch a ride on Soyuz?
If I had that sort of money, I'd be there in a heartbeat. I'm one of those people who doesn't believe it unless he's seen it, so to speak.
As for NASA...meeehhhhhh! Is NASA's "approval" really relavent these days? I don't just mean the Space Shuttle disasters, but their slow-moving government oriented ways, way of accountability, etc.
Seriously, I think the Russians and Chinese are far more commited to serious space programs than us North Americans. And you know what? Good for them.
-psy
Someone should tell them that, then. They're still learning more about these effects right now with the crews on the ISS.
Did you know that kidney stones form faster up there than on the ground? Know why? Neither do the people currently running the Renal Stone experiments up there right now. I'll have to tell them that you already know all the answers, and they're wasting their time.
I want to support space exploration, and right now NASA's only objective is to make certain that the only way to space is through them.
NASA has no control over who goes into space. Their charter dictates who NASA is allowed to send up on their vehicles.
The FAA dictates who is to go into space, not NASA. NASA gets their permission before launches.
If you wanted to go build your own rocket right now, you'd need the FAA's permission, not NASA's.
NASA has plenty of money. If the Shuttle and Space Station were mothballed, we could have a Mars mission in 10 years for 1/10 the budget.
Too bad NASA doesn't make that kind of decision. Go read NASA's charter. Congress dictates what types of missions they do.they are destroying any competitor that looks like they could seriously threaten their manned and heavy-launch capabilities.
What kind of fantasy land are you living in?
/sig
My point re: the studies about long-duration space travel is this. We know enough to send explorers to other planets. This is one of the fake dragons that short-sighted people use to justify a far-too-conservative approach to space operation.
/livelihood/. I know what NASA is doing, and the environment they're operating in. Yes, Congress has them totally hamstrung as far as what missions they can do. However, that doesn't excuse their failure to nurture and develop new technologies, which is in the final analysis what NASA has done best.
Do we know everything? Of course not. Columbus didn't know about Cuba either. Let's quit putzing around in low earth orbit and GO SOMEWHERE.
You might need to get FAA's permission, but just try to launch a spacecraft without jumping through NASA's hoops too. You won't be allowed to.
As far as destruction of competitors, look no further than Beale Aerospace. They had a superb rocket engine design with a lot of successful development behind it. NASA wrote a couple briefs alleging that the motor wouldn't work (although it did), and eventually the company went bankrupt.
Same thing has happened with several other non-establishment space businesses.
Look, this is my
They've lost focus, they've lost drive, they've lost direction. Now they're just a misguided bureaucracy, which exists only to propagate itself.
It needs to either be reformed, or destroyed. Don't much care which.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
I don't think the rich should be rewarded for being rich. Instead, I think a lottery would be more appropriate, with tickets in the range of $100 and made available to anyone in the world. I would certainly buy one. And why shouldn't I be on a space flight instead of Lance Bass or whatever the hell his name is? This would generate a much larger revenue than any single ticket.
And as for the overhead of actually conducting the lottery, we could just use the existing infrastructure in most countries that already exist for the purpose of monetary lotteries. Then, a winner from each country could be chosen, and from those, a final winner would be picked. It really wouldn't be that difficult.
If you're seriously interested about Mars and the fake reasons we don't go there, check out marssociety.org and/or Dr. Robert Zubrin's book "The Case for Mars". It lays out, in detail, how to go to Mars for a small fraction of NASA's current budget, how to create a sustainable presence on Mars, and debunks all of the "dragons" of long-term space travel you reference.
A space exploration program absolutely does require the public's support. However, that public support comes from a plan with vision, not from messing around doing the same ol' science in low earth orbit.
I don't care if it's not any worse than any other government organization. That's hardly a good barometer! I don't think the government should be involved at all, except as a research and development technology incubator.
NASA used to be an organization with a vision and a mission. Now, they run ferries to a can floating in space. I think it's a poor testament to the people who risked, and lost, their lives to explore space.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
I dont think rocket propellants are really classified as explosives.They burn to produce all gases, and so can provide thrust but their burn rate is not very high (atleast solid propellants). You can safely hold a lit stick of solid propellant stick like a roman candle.
Or maybe I didnt understand your joke.
.ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
Personally, I've given up hope that NASA will do anything big or dramatic again, and I'm hoping that somebody manages to get in space seperately. I don't care who. Rutan, Armadillo, whoever; I WANT TO SEE PEOPLE IN SPACE! If it becomes cheaper, then we can get some real stuff done in space.
As for going to mars, having nuclear propelled spacecraft would be, IMHO, the only hope of sending actual people to mars. I'm also a bit bitter that people recoil whenever "nuclear" is mentioned.
But let's do something! Not just sit on our butts!