Jeff Bezos to Build Space Center

An anonymous reader writes "Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos will build a space facility in west Texas to develop a commercial suborbital spaceship. His space company, Blue Origin, is 'developing vehicles and technologies that, over time, will help enable an enduring human presence in space.'"

Comments

This just in...

[kaedemichi255]

One lucky Amazon customer will win a free trip to Mars! w00t w00t!

Article text without ads and annoying javascript

[Gob Blesh It]

Am I karma whoring? Possibly. :)

Please don't sue me, Microsoft.

----

Amazon founder unveils space center plans

Bezos' Blue Origin venture to build West Texas rocket facility

By Alan Boyle
Science editor, MSNBC
Updated: 4:58 p.m. ET Jan. 13, 2005

[Image: Jeff Bezos, who heads Amazon.com and is bankrolling the Blue Origin space venture, strikes a pose at the Seattle headquarters of Amazon.com. Andy Rogers / AP file]

AFTER YEARS OF WORK BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos has gone public with a plan to build a suborbital space facility on a sprawling ranch under the wide open skies of West Texas.

Bezos' Seattle-based Blue Origin suborbital space venture is starting the process to build an aerospace testing and operations center on a portion of the Corn Ranch, a 165,000-acre spread that the 41-year-old billionaire purchased north of Van Horn, Texas. Over the next six or seven years, the team would use the facility to test components for a craft that could take off and land vertically, carrying three or more riders to the edge of space.

Blue Origin's team has been laying the groundwork for the hush-hush project from a 53,000-square-foot warehouse in Seattle, but this week's announcement fills out a puzzle that previously could only be guessed on the basis of isolated rumors. Blue Origin has been the most secretive of several space ventures bankrolled by deep-pocketed private backers -- a club that also includes software pioneer Paul Allen (SpaceShipOne), Virgin Group entrepreneur Richard Branson (Virgin Galactic) and video-game genius John Carmack (Armadillo Aerospace).

Details of Bezos' plan were first reported in this week's edition of the Van Horn Advocate, the community's newspaper, and confirmed Thursday by Blue Origin spokesman Bruce Hicks.

Contacts with FAA
Bezos told the Advocate that Blue Origin already has contacted the Federal Aviation Administration, which plays a lead role in regulating nongovernmental launch facilities. FAA spokesman Hank Price confirmed that Blue Origin was in the midst of the pre-application process for a launch site license.

But Hicks said Blue Origin was just starting to work on getting the necessary clearances. "Obviously a lot of work needs to be done, including the environmental assessment work, the FAA work and so on," he told MSNBC.com.

Hicks said the first elements of the facility, including an operations building, an engine test stand and storage tanks for fuel and water, could be built in the next year or two. The facility, along with all the buffer zones required for safety, would take up "maybe 5 percent" of the Corn Ranch acreage, he said.

Hicks said Bezos and Blue Origin's other principals, program manager Rob Meyerson and launch manager Ed Rutkowski, were not available for comment Thursday.

Bezos' Southwestern roots
With an estimated worth of $5.1 billion, Bezos is ranked No. 82 on Forbes magazine's latest list of the world's richest people. Amazon.com, the company he founded in 1994, is one of the world's leading online merchants. Bezos still serves as Amazon's president, chief executive officer and chairman, but in the year 2000 he used millions of dollars from his personal fortune to start up Blue Origin as well, following through on a boyhood dream.

[Image]

Although Amazon.com and Blue Origin are both headquartered in Seattle, Bezos' roots go back to the American Southwest. He was born in New Mexico and spent childhood summers on his grandfather's ranch in South Texas. Bezos told the Advocate that he learned much from those expe

Let's see...

[SAN1701]

...if he can manage to get a patent for the "one-click launch button". There's prior art for that!

Fascinating

[Lord_Dweomer]

I have to say, what we may be witnessing is the birth of man's space age. The time when we will begin to populate space en masse.

I mean, look around. When you have several of the worlds extremely wealthy throwing money at something this big, independently (rather than teaming their efforts), you know that A. there's a SHITLOAD of money to be made, and B. that it has more than a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding because of the pure amount of money that is going to be thrown at it.

I know some people are worried about the privatization and commercialization of spaceflight, but I think those are perfectly fine methods of bringing this about. Properly regulate it and do it on a global scale. And always remember that populating space is a human quest, not a Bezos quest. He may get us there, but we all win in the end.

Re:Fascinating

[PhotoGuy]

When you have several of the worlds extremely wealthy throwing money at something this big, independently (rather than teaming their efforts), you know that A. there's a SHITLOAD of money to be made, and B. that it has more than a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding because of the pure amount of money that is going to be thrown at it.

While I wish this were true, I think that's pretty faulty logic. If this were the case, you'd see logical *investment* firms investing in space, which is pretty rare. Bezos, Branson(sp?), and others, have made more money through smart business, than they could possibly ever spend, and are now spending some on some "long shots" that may benefit the good of mankind.

I applaud these efforts, and any moves by people who are in a position to take some chances for the betterment of mankind.

But a sound business decision? I think not.

Re:Fascinating

[costas]

It could also mean that:

Aerospace technology has been commoditized: a) Rocket engine designs are more obtainable with more trained aero engineers are in the market (from Russia's crumbling industry or the American imploding one). b) Tools, such as super-computers to develop CFD models of engines and/or vehicles are quite affordable (tens or at most hundreds of thousands of dollars instead of millions).

These rich folks don't have any other better ideas to throw money at: no more internet thingies, or incumbators or other wild-eyed ideas to take over the world.

Worst case, these millionaires can write off these toys from their taxes. And in the order of things, the whole SpaceShipOne deal cost Paul Allenn less than *one* yaught. Pretty cheap.

two words...

[Jodka]

"Over the next six or seven years, the team would use the facility to test components for a craft that could take off and land vertically, carrying three or more riders to the edge of space."

Carmack Envy.

Space mission

[Anonymous Coward]

I would like to see uncle Sam send Gates, Ballmer and Darl on a space mission to visit our nearest star, "to bravely be the first humans to put their feet on the surface of the sun".

The problem with human space travel

[eraserewind]

I hate to say this, but the problem with human space travel is that there is just nowhere to go. There are no alien civilizations (or even alien plant life) within reach. There are no habitable planets within reach (unless you count Mars or Venus, but as wastelands go, Antartica is paradise in comparison with either of those in terms of human habitation). It sucks, but it's true.

why we need (human) space exploration/colonisation

[N3wsByt3]

We all heard the reasoning for abolishing space-exploration (particulary human-based) before, and I think the major flaw in all these 'arguments' why we shouldn't go into space is that they always set economic factors as a premise.

But, although economic viability is important to create a mass-usuage of space(travel), I fail to see why it should be the only possible motive to start exploring space. It's a pretty narrowminded, materialistic and typical capitalistic view on things. It's the same view that makes progress on medication for very rare diseases, or for diseases that are prevalent in continents that are poor, so slow: corporations can't see how they are ever going to get profit out of it, so they all turn their backs on it.

If ppl (including states) are only going to do something when they are sure of an immediate profitable return, the world has become a sad place. (And we should leave it the sooner ;-)

Arguments based on such a viewpoint fail to recognise other incentives apart from economical ones.

The reason why we shouldn't (only) rely on robots? You can explore, but you can not colonise with robots. The will to explore is deeply entrenched in the human race, but with a reason: it has survival advantages.

A species that doesn't colonise new territory and adapt, will perish. I think it's paramount that humans always keep their adventurage spirit and keep exploring and expanding, because the moment we will go "ah, let's sit back in our sofa's and let our robots/droids do it", we're basically finished, even when not being aware of it at that moment.

Why not space elevator

[Capt. Dick Jackman]

Building a stupid little ship to put a couple of rich people into suborbit for a few minutes gets us no where in the grand scheme of things. I'm rather dumbfounded as to why none of these guys are trying to bankroll a space elevator. That's when you can do some serious space stuff and become richer than Bill. I've read various places that it could be done in the very near future for as little as $10 billion. When I read that someone isn't dicking around with suborbital vehicles and is behind this, I'll get excited. Otherwise, all this has already been done for the past 60 years.