Win the X-Prize Cup

fitten writes "CNN is reporting that the X-Prize competition may become an annual event. From the site: 'Hoping to build on the momentum sparked by a private rocket plane's dash into space, supporters of opening the heavens to civilians are turning the winner-take-all race into an annual competition that might further fuel imaginations.'"

Comments

Bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

I think each year would water the thing down. Much like any other contest that is expensive.

Why not every 4 years? Even 3 would work. This way, it would give people more time to work on even better designs, perhaps even alternative fuel methods for reaching space.

And that would rock.

Re:Bad idea

[zenofjazz]

Actually, the idea at this point, I think, is to give the other teams, (some of whom were VERY close to being ready to fly) a reason to keep working towards the goal.. if you delay it 3-4 years, then what does Davinci have, to keep them going? Motivate the other teams to launch, and prove their technology as soon as possible, and show that they're better (or equal to) Scaled Composites. Of the 20 odd teams that were competing for the X prize, 2-3 are more or less ready to try... and several more could be, within another year. The more space-related stuff stays in the news, the more "commercial utilization" of space is going to be top of mind. Tourism... Microsat launches, you name it.

Re:Bad idea

[stormfish]

It's all fun and games until someone reaches escape velocity.

Re:Bad idea

[JQuick]

You claim that this is not a stepping stone toward any useful goal, that's it's "just advertising and a joy ride". Nothing less than cheap access to orbit is worthy of interest.

I agree with you that short, sub-orbital flight is only directly good for joy rides, and advertising. Beyond this however I disagree with you entirely. No offense, but I think you're missing the point.

Why? Because advertising and joy rides are the key to unlocking a revenue stream which can move us toward more useful goals.

Currently the only significant source of direct income from the private sector comes from launching satellites. This is a large source of revenue, but one which is neither very elastic, nor one which places demands on those who provide lift to significantly change the status quo. The cost of launching most satellites is but a fraction of the total cost. Adding together insurance, interest payments and other opportunity costs for capital, they are extraordinarily expensive objects even if launch costs are ignored. The market is narrow and capital intensive.

The result is that the market puts little pressure on firms to lift significantly larger payloads, either measured in volume or in mass. Incrementally reducing cost per pound on existing orbital launch systems would not be likely to increase the demand significantly. The risk of modifying these systems incrementally is simply not justified by the risk or the return on near term capital investment. Worst, no private income stream currently encourages development of manned missions at all.

The X-prize cup goal is provide direct incentive for innovation in manned space transport. It does so by providing a mechanism for directly infusing private capital into manned vehicles in ways that are much more flexible, much more elastic, and which result in pressure on potential space transportation designers to increase both aggregate and per launch lift capacity. The first prize was designed to promote competition in developing an inexpensive re-usable sub-orbital vehicle for carrying passengers. This will generate income in 2 ways. Advertisers will pay to be associated with the product and services provided by commercial users. Passengers able to afford a the ride will provide a significant on-going stream of revenue.

The passenger revenue is highly elastic. at the price of $200K per head, about 6,000 have already expressed serious interest in riding Virgin Galactic. 1.2 billion is nothing to sneeze at. If the price were $100K, that number would rise rapidly. As the price continues to lower, more and more passengers will be able and willing to afford even a sub-orbital jaunt. I'm not wealthy, but I would certainly drive crappy used cars for 5-10 years in return for a trip to space.

The X-prize cup is an annual event, Competitors will vie each year to travel greater distances downrange, achieve higher altitude, launch the most times during the event, carry the largest payloads, etc. The organizers expect that an X-prize competitor will achieve orbital capability in 5-8 years. That apparently would interest you.

In the past 30 years we've gone backwards not forwards. Aside from X-prize vehicles (both Scaled Composites and the 20 or so other contenders), the only manned space vehicles we have are based on designs form the 1960s and 1970s. Huge lift capacity died with apollo.

Without advertising and joy rides to both fund that development and promote competition, how do you propose we get there?

Not as interesting as the Bigelow $50 mil prize

[mOoZik]

Bigelow's $50 Mil Space Prize

The Slashdot editors refused to publish my submission, but I think this is much more interesting than repeating the X-Prize year after year, despite the innovation that will come from such an endeavor.

What about safety?

[BrewerDude]

Does anyone else think that this is a high-profile accident waiting to happen? A lot of the events mentioned there are about pushing the evelope in terms of speed or capacity. Once enough teams start participating, I'm wondering whether some will sacrifice their safety margin in an attempt to one-up the competition.

The last thing we need is a catastrophic accident that causes a knee-jerk overregulation response from congress.

Re:What about safety?

[kfg]

I'm wondering whether some will sacrifice their safety margin in an attempt to one-up the competition.

Of course, hang gliders, surfers, rock climbers, downhill mountain bikers, blue water sailers, et al do it, and die, every day.

So long as they're privately funded and aren't a danger to the general public, 'tain't nobody's business but their own.

God protect us from NerfWorld(tm).

KFG

Novelty will wear off

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people watched Big Brother 5?

Next Stop, Orbit?

[tpconcannon]

I guess earth orbit would be the next logical step in this venture, although, attaining orbit is also the most dangerous part of space travel. Actually returning from orbit is more dangerous, as there would be the heat of reentry to deal with. I have a feeling that this would be when we start to see lives lost in this competition.

This is great but ...

[Brigadier]

From what I've seen or read, the solutions to the x-prize challenge have been built for that specific purpose. example being Rutans space ship was disigned to fly 100km then return safely. I think to foster more innovation the challenge itself has to become more challenging. How about an orbital flight next. Then a moon orbital. This will allow designers to build on existing designs as opposed to coming up with the best and cheapest way to fly 100km. I sort of equating it with making lynnburgs flight a yearly event ..whats the point

Re:This is great but ...

[Carnildo]

The point of the one-year cycle is, at least right now, to give the rest of the X-Prize teams something to aim for. DaVinci and Canadian Arrow are both less than a year from their first flight, and most of the serious teams will be able to make it in two years.

In the longer run, it shouldn't be that hard to, say, scale SpaceShipOne up to where it can carry ten passengers, or to give it enough crossrange capability to reach New York.

Wonderful idea!

[Stoutlimb]

I think it's a great idea... There's a huge list of failed X-prizes, and they might risk being scrapped, instead of flown. That would be an awful shame, and a waste. I would like to see all of them fly eventually. (Except maybe the really dangerous ones.)

The other reason I think it's a great idea is because even though Spaceship One got their first, it won't ever go much further. That design was designed for one thing, to win the X prize. A modified version of it will never go anywhere useful. Some of the other X prize contestants could concievably scale all the way to orbit. So that way, setting the bar a bit higher each year is a great way of getting maximum development of the space industry for the prize dollars offered. If we ran this prize several years in a row, each time higher, I'm certain that Spaceship One wouldn't be able to hold on to the cup.

I wonder who would be next?

Take the Hint

[COMON$]

I think more areas of study need to take the hint here. Give people incentive and you will get solutions. Why not hold similar competitions for other products such as Fuel efficient cars, Economical Housing, or any other useful tech advance. If we take this competitive road, will we see a new age of innovation?

Do your own challenge then

[jeti]

The founder of the X-Prize owns a company that offers parabolic flights.
The hype that the X-Prize creates will hopefully get a lot of people interested in the flights,
which are cheap by comparison ($3k for a dozen parabolics).

If you want a new contest for emission free vehicles, organize it yourself.

Just an idea:

[modecx]

I like the idea of a regular X event, but not necessairly all having the same goal.. That would just become obnoxious and boring, in exactly the same way watching Astronauts on the moon did in the 70's.

Perhaps they need to go a different route: I suggest that there is a competition with no set time limit that would do exactly what the X-Prize did:encourage reguar people to try and do what is thought impossible, with engineering and imagination.

Let's say that the next X-Prize was for developing a car that pushed the envelope on fuel efficiency a little higher, within a set limit. It would work just like the race to space; first team that beats the set mileage on a certain course with a car that qualifies for weight, wins.

When one contest ends, another is anounced, and so on. This would be much more exciting to me, and no doubt to many more people.

For one thing, trying to blow oneself into space is quite a technological and monetary hurdle. Not everyone can invest $20 million to win $10 million. Secondly, it will encourage advances in whatever feild they chose for the prize, which is good for the rest of the people that can't or aren't interested to compete.