Slashdot Mirror
First Commercial Space Tourism Company
uberdave writes "The Canadian Arrow team (one of the contenders for the Ansari X-Prize) has joined forces with Dr. Chirinjeev Kathuria, a leading American entrepreneur, to form a new corporation called Planetspace. The goal of the company is to make space flight available to the public within 24 months.
Geoff Sheerin, President of Canadian Arrow, says that Planetspace has entered final discussions with partners who will establish a reality television show set in space, and with a company to hold an international lottery with space flight prizes. Planetspace expects to fly almost 2,000 new astronauts in the first five years of flying. Fares will start at USD $250,000 for a suborbital flight, including fourteen days training."
This may be interesting, but these guys are definately not the first.
TW
The amount of hot air that this 'news' has, is enough to give space tourism a big boost! :)
*laugh*
Notice they didn't say which planet these 24 months were measured from.
Since these are suborbital flights, this may have the distinction of being the *quickest* reality show in history! (But maybe that's a good thing.)
of Virgin Atlantic/Cola/Radio/Records/Megastores/Trains/What ever has already started a company called "Virgin Galactic."
My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
man I can't even get a condo for that kinda money...
My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...
Lets see, with the pennies I earn, I should be ready to afford one in about 8½ years assuming I don't spend any of my money....
You will be able to play Duke Nukem Forever on the Phantom game console during flight!
There are a lot of the ridiculously rich that can't spend their money fast enough, and if going on a little rocket trip gives them a trill, then more power to them. Not really sure if there enough with the desire for something like this to fill 400 seats a year, not to mention that once it's been done the desirability would definitely plummit among the uber-rich (why go on a sub-orbital flight if 1200 of your peers already have? Instead you'd pooh pooh it and say that's so last year).
Imagine what life insurance costs to cover a trip like this though - I would imagine that a million dollar policy would have about a $250,000 premium.
Well, Virgin Galactic may be the first company *founded*, but this will be the first one to *operate*, if all goes as planned.
multifariam.net -- yet another nerd blog
So, if space flight really is becoming something consumers can do, what is the extra cost of all of the high atmospheric pollution and space junk? How are we going to keep low orbit from becoming the riskiest dodgeball court around?
Is it just me, or does the website look like 12-yr old's first try with HTML? does that mean i'm in good hands?
I don't really see the point in this, granted there are a lot of people in the world with that much disposable income but that can't seriously be enough to make this be a profitable venture. I didn't RTFA but how many people fit into this spacecraft?
If you pay your taxes you support terrorism!
Space Adventures helped broker the $20mil Space Station rides for Dennis Tito and Mark Shuttleworth. They are also partnered with a number of rocket companies and are ready to provide passengers to the first one with an operating system.
http://www.spaceadventures.com/intro
A company that hasn't put anyone... anyone at all... into space, is starting a company to put people into space.
One step at a time guys...
If the guys financing hem have money to burn... I've got a company with a real product taat could use some investment.
Given the present condition of the supply of energies we have available and our rates of consumption, is this yet another luxury for the few that will needlessly deplete our supply of fuels?
Yes, I know the rich can easily afford it.
And with yet more demand on a the growing scarcity of petrochemical fuels powering the whole shebang, I guess we just watch fuel costs for everybody step up another notch. Economics. Supply and demand.
Sometimes I wonder where our head is at when we choose to expend limited resources so frivously.
But then, I have wondered that for a long time on other matters... its a wonder to me that America is still a "superpower" given the way we squander our resources.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
Im my area of UK, hardly a garden shed... :(
lance will finally fulfill his dream of being a space cowboy.
If you've got the cash to consider dropping $250k for this, you've already got the house. And the beach house. And the Aspen condo.
The goal of the company is to make space flight available to the public within 24 months.
Is that like two twelvemonths? That is just so cool, imagine being able to say happy new twelvemonth and watch the fireworks from space!
"I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy"
...and today, a new standard of total sadness was achieved as it was announced that the first commercial venture to put humans in space will be in the form of a reality television show.
Ok, all these experts say we'll run out of fossil fuels in about 50 years at our current consumption.
When we run out of crap to burn, no more CO2, thus global warming will brought to an end.
Sure, our economy will be doomed but, our kids can worry about that. They'll have some crazy national debt to deal with anyway.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
"Eventually, our goal is to make PLANETSPACE a public company," said Mr. Sheerin
Uh, yeah. Because there's no other reason for it. $250,000 for zero g? How much to tandem jump? Lot's of problems here. Buyer beware.
Yeah, because rich people aren't people are they?
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
I'm already a certified space cadet. Do I get a discount?
I'm surprised Virgin have staked their brand on something so risky.
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
Well, no, not until you mentioned it, and got me (and others) to view it, increasing the awareness of this product. So, Microsoft or no, seems to be an effective ad.
If you blog it...
"...discussions with partners who will establish a reality television show set in space..."
Captain: Do you see any signs of intelligent life on that planet?
Science officer: Most definitely not, sir!
#DeleteChrome
"Planetspace expects to fly almost 2,000 new astronauts in the first five years of flying"
Those guys will be as much astronauts as i am a pilot when im flying to vacation.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
...when I say: SCREW SUB-ORBITAL FLIGHT.
If I want a quick rush I'll get on a damn roller-coaster.
Put me in orbit for a week, and bring me back safely.
Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
Well, one advantage of this form of travel is that if the plane malfunctions, there's no meddlesome debris to deal with. On a more serious note, would a black-box like recording system be plausible for this? I.e. wouldn't it burn up in re-entry if the plane blew up? Or does sub-orbital imply that there isn't enough atmosphere?
theres no place like 127.0.0.1
Economies of scale. Once this becomes popular, the infrastructure, research, demand, and the like will allow it to become cheaper. Lots of technologies start as toys for the rich, and then get bootstrapped into everyday use this way.
This is basically a single stage booster system based on 50 year old technoligy.
In order to move to higher "orbital" flights the cost of design and equiptment goes up in multiples using this old school rocketeering tech. It means that the average cost per person will go from $250,000 to more like $1.5M and that makes it highly unlikely that we will see anything more than suborbital shots from this. It's a cheap thrill ride but says nothing of our future space exploration.
once more into the breach
I've thought some on this before, and here's my view:
Technological progress helps social progress.
Many new technologies start out as luxuries, then due to economies of scale become widely available.
Therefore, no luxuries, less technological progress, less social progress, less ways to help the poor.
Of course, that means you need concrete applications of space technology for non-luxury use... hmm:
- various spinoff technologies
- orbiting solar power generation
- doing polluting/dangerous things in space instead of on Earth
Of course they are people, but they are not the community or people as a whole which is what public means.
If you are in a position to be able to drop a quarter mill on a trip then good for you but dont try and market it as something available to the public when clearly it is beyond the means of all but a tiny elite.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Uh.. with it's original design based on a V2 rocket. I hope it does not carry any warhead :)
Hey, it crashed, didn't it?
see, there are opposing philosphies
one professes that we should move on as a whole. without the populace reaching a particular average level, our aims of achieving more and more seem disastrous.
the other meanwhile says that we should continue to grow on single thread we have. this means that there is no turning back or moderating our singly-focused work for the weak ones.
people usually decided between the two. i see that my government has.
The real obstacles to space tourism aren't technology but economic and political. As you noted, it is feasible to send people up in suborbital flights with 50 year old technology. And when a market is established in volume, then the technology can be advanced to whatever level is sufficient for orbital manned flight.
My point is even if this is a "cheap thrill ride" (I certainly hope it is!), but that it's a bridgehead in establishing a manned presence in space. This is a stepping stone to more sophisticated markets. That will "say something" of our future presence in space (and probably space exploration as well).
Heh, if all goes according to plan, we'll have several ways to experience suborbital space flight by 2008. That's good enough for me.
A better response would have been "two chicks at the same time".
You gotta start charging high if you're gonna raise the capital to develop the technology to make it available to everyone.
And it's when you can start making it available to everyone that you can start making serious money.
Look at refrigerators, microwaves, cars. All of them originally rich peoples' toys, but nowadays, they're nothing special at all.
And none of it was made a bit easier by class warfare games.
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
Yeah, those people who build companies and have busted their asses to get rich (or are the beneificiaries of those who busted their asses to make themselves and their children rich) don't deserve to spend that money on anything! They should be obligated to give it away to the poorer among us, who use our average incomes to buy playstations and toys to decorate our cubicle office.
Yeah, fuck those stupid entrepranuerial cocksuckers! HOW DARE THEY!
Now all they need is a working rocket!
*cough Vaporware cough*
However, bear in mind that once a company is formed that can make a profitable round-trip to space for $250,000, they will have the funding to research and make the next generation of space vehicles that can do it for $200,000. Then $100,000.
Think of the first automobiles. Only a few 'wealthy elite' could buy them, but after a few decades, enough profit had been made off of those people, and enough money had been put back into research that soon pretty much everyone was able to get a car.
First the daVinci project made a TON of noise about their October 2004 launch plans. Did those ever happen?
Then we have aera corp, which is selling tickets for rides NEXT YEAR. They are ALREADY selling these. This is without demonstrating anything, or even having an engine, much less a space vehicle that can support a crew of humans. They have THIRTY flights scheduled for 2007.
"We're using such plain-vanilla technology that very little detailed testing is required," Sprague said.
MOTHER OF GOD!
Now we have this Canadian Arrow group. I mean, NONE of these guys has even gone to space ONCE with even a test pilot! I guess I'd just be a little cautious going up in things from these operations, hopefully folks considering this get some good advice before signing up.
The one contender I have some faith in is Burt Rutan and the Virgin Galatic effort.
These guys actually test, have actually gone to sub-orbital space and back with real live people inside their vehicle. Solid history building actual flying machines that don't kill people, and met some folks with great things to say about the group.
Curiously, I also noticed they don't have as many hot air releases.
So, while some folks seem to get tons of PR and are ALREADY selling tickets, I'd keep the eyes away from the Golden Palance Casino Davinci Project, Aerea Corp or Canadian arrow, and on Burt Rutan and his gang.
What worries me is that the second stage is propelled by four solid-fuel rockets. Suppose one of these babies doesn't work for some reason. The other three will fire, giving asymmetrical thrust, causing the second stage to spin. Being solid rockets, they can't be stopped once they are lit, so you'll just keep spinning faster and faster until the fuel runs out, at which point (aside from having passed out from the g-forces) you'll be in no position to try to land because you'll have nowhere near the necessary attitude.
However, I'm speaking as a rank amateur. Does anyone who actually knows what they are talking about have any insight into this?
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
How is the PP a troll? They are simply pointing out the fact that the "space tourist" could feed 1/4Million malnourished kids for a couple of days as opposed to taking a joy ride around the planet for a couple of hours. It may be simplistic and idealistic but moderating it as a troll puts the moderator in a bad light not the poster.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
From Wikipedia:
The propellant mixture in each SRB motor consists of ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer, 69.6 percent by weight), aluminum (fuel, 16 percent), iron oxide (a catalyst, 0.4 percent), a polymer (a binder that holds the mixture together, 12.04 percent), and an epoxy curing agent (1.96 percent).
This about the fourth commercial space company.
Hate to break it to you, but by that definition air travel isn't really available to the public. After all, a welfare mom isn't really able to aford a $300 trip across the country without impacting her electric bill.
Many of the working poor can't afford to buy a new car, or even a decent used one, especially if you factor insurance, gas and maintenance into the deal.
I get your point, that only an elite few will be able to afford space travel. Please try to get my point that a decent percentage of Americans, and most people in many third world nations, cant even afford Earth-bound travel. By your definition, the "public" can't afford to go anywhere.
You're probably (like me) a relatively rich guy, when measured on a world scale. You complaining about even richer folks traveling in a style you can't afford is just a little bit hypocritical.
TW
A company that hasn't put anyone... anyone at all... into space, is starting a company to put people into space.
One step at a time guys...
Most companies start up doing something they haven't done yet. Very few companies start up doing something they've already done. Arguably, no companies do.
How many companies have put people in space?
Zero. Only governments have put people into space (assuming "space" is LEO or better). And you are suggesting no companies do so until they have done so.
Worse than that you got modded insightful for asking for the impossible.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.