Slashdot Mirror


20k Down Can Get You Up Into Space

TheOzz writes "Virgin Galactic announced this week that space tourism will be a reality by 2008. The company is already taking $20,000 deposits for the estimated $200,000 seats on their new spaceships. You can reserve your seat today at the Virgin Galactic web site. The Virgin Group's Branson teamed up with SpaceShipOne builder Burt Rutan to form The Spaceship Company that will build these new commercial spaceships. They are building 9-person spaceships that will carry 7 paying passengers and two crew members, according to space.com. They report that test flights should start in 2007."

205 comments

  1. Down payment by SeaFox · · Score: 0

    Is that $20k non-refundable?

    I'd like to see what happens to people who put their money down and then can't make the other $180,000, or if the space tourism idea doesn't fly in the end (pun not intended).

    fp?

    1. Re:Down payment by FleaPlus · · Score: 4, Informative

      From the web page:

      The first flights are planned to begin in 2008. We are now starting to take reservations and deposit commitments for the first year of operations. The ticket price has been set at US$200,000 and the minimum, fully refundable deposit to secure your spaceship seat is US$20,000.

    2. Re:Down payment by dr3vil · · Score: 1

      I'd be more worried about the solvency of Virgin Galactic. Giving Beardie a 20k loan to bail out his other interests doesn't seem like a great idea to me.

    3. Re:Down payment by Golias · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you are in a place in your life where spending $200,000 to be taken up above the atmostphere for a little while seems like a good idea, you probably don't give a shit about $20,000.

      Note to those who are mere millionaires instead of billionaires: It would be much cheaper and almost as good to get one of your rich asshole friends to take you along for a ride on their Gulfstream V jets sometimes. Those private gets fly high enough that the sky is dark blue in the daytime. Very cool. Plus, there's no need to wear a gay-ass looking space suit.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:Down payment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahah, some of you are just too pessimistic for your own good. It'll be the opposite. There'll be limited seats available, so once they get going, the rich will pay a premium for a ticket. Pay down $20k now and sell the ticket for $300k later.

    5. Re:Down payment by TrevorB · · Score: 1

      Yea, I can go to the furnature store and they give me stuff for FREE! (No money down, that's the same thing, right?)

    6. Re:Down payment by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      It's not refundable if they file bankruptcy. At that point, everyone gets fucked starting off with the investers all the way to the employees. The debt simply gets "written off".

      A well known scam in the US involves taking investment money and buying a home in Florida. Then, once bankruptcy is called, the home that all of the investment is locked up in, gets sold by the individual. As I understand it, even if the court knew this for a fact, it's against law in Florida to seize someones home.

      I'm not saying this venture is a scam. But, you always must be aware of the possibility. 20 grand is a lot to keep an eye on.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    7. Re:Down payment by Free_Meson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A well known scam in the US involves taking investment money and buying a home in Florida. Then, once bankruptcy is called, the home that all of the investment is locked up in, gets sold by the individual. As I understand it, even if the court knew this for a fact, it's against law in Florida to seize someones home. A court can pierce the corporate veil in cases of fraud or self-dealing similar to this one, allowing corporate debts to be collected against the owners/shareholders. Also, while many states protect a person's homestead from bankruptcy proceedings, I doubt any of them protect property obtained with the proceeds of a crime (here, fraud).

    8. Re:Down payment by DavidSJ · · Score: 1

      The fact that this enterprise is backed by Virgin suggests that it isn't a scam. They have a reputation at stake.

  2. nifty by Rabid_Llama · · Score: 0

    Burt Rutan is a great aviator, possibly the best of our time. Unfortunately, i cant see this being a large money maker. Not many people will be able to part ways with $20,000 for an hour long space flight.

    1. Re:nifty by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 1

      Um, it's $200,000 for the trip, not $20,000. The $20K is just for the downpayment to reserve a spot on one of the trips.

    2. Re:nifty by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Hey, they could take $20,000 to go up, $180,000 to go back down. On the other hand, that might attract the suicidal demographic, of several kinds.

    3. Re:nifty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actualy there are plenty of people. I personally know four not including me. The USA is not the bipolar land of mostly serfs lorded over by a dozen rich overlords that many Slashdotters like to pretend it is. I'm just an EE, and I can probably swing $200K for something like this. Mind you it'll delay my retirement a bit, but not everyone is a poor starving student.

    4. Re:nifty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thousands of people spends hundreds of thousands on sports cars and many other frivilous things. Going into space will appeal to them.

  3. The real question is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can space travel provide efficient transportation?

    1. Re:The real question is by shawb · · Score: 1

      Well, it's the most efficient way to go to the moon or another planet, AFAIK

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    2. Re:The real question is by eclectro · · Score: 1

      Can space travel provide efficient transportation?

      No, I think the real question is can the armrests withstand superhuman squeezing forces?

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    3. Re:The real question is by DrMaurer · · Score: 1

      How? Obviously, as a previous poster mentioned, for getting into space, space travel is pretty efficient.

      Properly conducted, space travel can provide transportation for missiles delivering explosives across the planet. Or, retrofitting some of them with some rudimentary landing gear and putting in seats instead of nuclear bombs.

      That's a silly idea though.

      --
      Dan
    4. Re:The real question is by Rei · · Score: 1

      Yes. Very. You're asking the wrong question, though: The question should be "Can it provide cost effective transportation?". The answer to that is, sadly, currently "No."; ticket prices always come up as being too high. There continues regular research, still, on potential suborbital passenger jets.

      --
      POTUS Witch Hunt tracker: 75 charges filed against 19 witches, 4 witches cooperating and 5 witches have pled guilty.
  4. How about refunds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The company is already taking $20,000 deposits

    Translation: Suckers wanted!

  5. How much for one way tickets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I happen to know a few people.....

  6. Rate by northcat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $200,000 for going to space without going out of your ship is fair, but $1 million - 5 times as much - for going near the moon without going out of your ship is unfair?

    1. Re:Rate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      100 million.

    2. Re:Rate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nitpicker!

    3. Re:Rate by mOoZik · · Score: 0, Troll

      That's $100 million, Einstein. Furthermore, I doub the Russian Space Agency would conduct full-size tests of your moon mission, thus you'd be at a higher risk than the VirginGalatic trips, which would have had many tests by that time.

    4. Re:Rate by GamingFox · · Score: 1

      It's $100 million. But don't forget, the $200,000 trip in space is very short.

      From Virgin Galactic site: After these precious minutes soaking up the thrill of space, you will start your return to earth.

      Let assume it is 20 minutes flight in space (which is more than resonable amount of time for SpaceShip One.)

      200,000 / 20 = 10,000 dollars per minutes.

      The trip around the moon usually take about a week (assuming 3 days to moon, 1 day in orbits, 3 days back to Earth).

      100,000,000 / ( 7 * 24 * 60 ) = 9,920.63492

      So, that mean the $100 million trip around the moon is about $80 a minute cheaper than the $200,000 trip into Earth's orbit. The moon trip seem to be a damn good deal to me compared to Virgin Galactic's trip to the Earth's orbit.

    5. Re:Rate by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 1

      How much is a "tad"?

      --

      There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
    6. Re:Rate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, let's see. It's $10000 versus... well, what do you know, almost $10000. Saving $80 on a $10000 bill isn't what is known as a Significant Savings. And the Russians never even got a man to the Moon--nope, not once--while the Virgin Galactic proposal is just an upscaled version of Space Ship One.

      I think you could make the point that it's comparably expensive per minute, and on that basis, provided you have the cash, it's about as good a deal and it's a lot more fun. But I'd hardly call it a far cheaper option, no matter how you slice it.

    7. Re:Rate by Rei · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not very likely - they probably won't get 20 minutes in "space". They have almost no horizontal velocity, and thus, their gravity losses are only reduced by the minimal distance gain away from Earth. I.e., gravity losses are almost essentially the same as they are when you're a foot off Earth (9.8 m/s^2).

      Assuming that they're not going to go for horizontal velocity (which seems almost certain, since they want to land where they start), the only extra time that they can get must correspond to a rocket burn. If your rocket provides 3g acceleration, that's only buying you three times the duration of the burn in fall time. They're not going to be able to tack on that long of an extra burn, because, with such a low ISP, it would require the scaling up of the engines, propellant and oxidizer amounts (and oxidizer tank), structural support, and everything to such a large degree that it's not realistic for a $200k flight.

      Of course, don't take my analysis's word for it - take Rutan's. They're only tacking on another 90 seconds of free fall (i.e., time in which air resistance is insignificant, i.e., space)

      --
      POTUS Witch Hunt tracker: 75 charges filed against 19 witches, 4 witches cooperating and 5 witches have pled guilty.
    8. Re:Rate by Zen+Punk · · Score: 1

      ???????
      My mind is reeling. You beleive Virgin Galactic would be more reliable than the Russian Space Agency? Russia has sent missions to the moon. Russia is active in space and has been for 50 years. Virgin Galactic has never launched a damn thing. Burt Rutans little rocket-plane barely made it out of the atmosphere.

      --
      Sleep is futile.
    9. Re:Rate by HUADPE · · Score: 1

      In the initial flight of SpaceShipOne the pilot released M&Ms candy in the cockpit which indeed did float around the cockpit...WEIGHTLESS.

      --
      This sig has not been evaluated by the FDA. It is not designed to diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure any disease.
    10. Re:Rate by Rei · · Score: 1

      Yes. For three minutes. Three minutes plus ninety seconds = four minutes thirty seconds, not twenty minutes.

      Please pay attention before you respond in the future. I never claimed anything even remotely like "SpaceShipOne never went weightless". At 100km altitude and minimal velocity, the air is sparse enough that a low cross-section craft will encounter low enough wind resistance as to be negligable to those inside. As a consequence, minimal forces are applied to the craft, which in turn applies minimal forces to objects in the cabin (i.e., "weightless").

      The problem is that there is no horizontal velocity. This means that the craft still suffers gravity losses. Gravity losses are the transfer of potential energy due to your altitude into kinetic energy - i.e., falling. If you have high horizontal (orbital) velocity, you "fall around the planet", and thus have no gravity losses. On the other hand, if you have no horizontal velocity, you have the same sort of gravity losses that you'd have on the launch pad.

      You can be weightless and suffer extreme gravity losses at the same time. If you don't believe me, jump off a building and notice how weightless you feel :).

      --
      POTUS Witch Hunt tracker: 75 charges filed against 19 witches, 4 witches cooperating and 5 witches have pled guilty.
    11. Re:Rate by Seraphim1982 · · Score: 1

      Russia has sent missions to the moon.

      How many of those had people in them? The Luna and Zond missions, in addition to being full of problems were unmanned. One of the Zond missions (6?) devolped a problem that would have killed anyone who had been onboard.

      Russia is active in space and has been for 50 years. They have alsi killed several people, and the launch vehicle that they devolped in the 60s cary people to the moon was a TOTAL failure.

    12. Re:Rate by Zen+Punk · · Score: 1

      No, the Russians never sent people to the moon. Neither has Virgin Galactic. Yes, cosmonauts have died. So have NASA astronuats. Virgin Galactic has NO track record in space, becuase they haven't built anything that will take people there. Tell me why you think that they will do the job so much better than the folks who were FIRST in space.

      --
      Sleep is futile.
    13. Re:Rate by nijk · · Score: 1

      what's with the agitating?
      The problem is i'm trying to float. That is not a problem that's an asset. An asset to our trusting funds and our potential future buddy budd pals. Go away st

  7. Add it to the list by JCY2K · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just one more thing to do when I win the lottery.

    1. Re:Add it to the list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try these to win: 4 8 15 16 23 42.

  8. Virgin Galactic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Isn't that a synonym for Slashdotters in Space?

    1. Re:Virgin Galactic by Charles+Jo · · Score: 0

      Ha ha!

    2. Re:Virgin Galactic by Zen+Punk · · Score: 1

      That would be Innn Spaaaaaaaaaaaace....

      --
      Sleep is futile.
  9. Virgin Galactic business strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. Take $20k down.
    2. Invest.
    3. Refund original $20k in 2008
    4. Profit!

    1. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by mendaliv · · Score: 1

      1. Take $20k down.
      2. Invest.
      3. Refund original $20k in 2008
      4. Profit!


      Actually, you make a good point. From the article: "But this is a unique project. We've made it very clear...that we are not going to be hidebound to a particular timetable." (said with regards to the end-of-2k7 test and end-of-2k8 commercial availability timetable).

      So in other words, they'll take the $20K down, either invest or use it to further their aims, and when the end of 2k8 comes, they can pretty safely say that they aren't ready yet.

      To be honest, it sounds kind of fast to go from testing to commercial deployment in only one year. I'm no aerospace engineer, but for a vehicle of this complexity, I would expect a much longer testing period.

    2. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

      Even if a thousand people put $20k down, that's $20M, which is pocket change for a large company like Virgin.

    3. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by BigZaphod · · Score: 1

      It does seem a little fast, but I'm not sure we're talking Shuttle-level complexity here. Basically this thing is a roller coaster ride without the track - it just goes up and then more or less glides back down again, right? (I could be very wrong about that, but the impression I had is that these flights aren't anywhere near as high or long as the Shuttle goes.)

    4. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by pigscanfly.ca · · Score: 1

      One other way to look at this is all the publicity the Virgin name is getting thorugh this stunt. I'd say it would be worth quite a lot more than 20m

    5. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      yeah it just goes up and down. not only does it not go as high as the shuttle it also has very little horizontal movement.

      the shuttle actually goes into orbit which requires it to achive a huge horizontal velocity as well as the problem of getting up there.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      All I can say is if anyone can do it Richard Branson can.

    7. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is that all you can say?

    8. Re:Virgin Galactic business strategy by WhiplashII · · Score: 1

      To make it even better: if 1,000 people took the ride the total revenue would be $200M, which would probably just break even after development and setting up the business. For reference: SS1 cost about $20M, flew only twice, carried only one person, and was virtually certain to kill someone eventually (that's why they retired it - it was more of a learn from mistakes type of craft). This one will have 3x the payload, have to fly many times, and NOT have the primary atitude control system fail...

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
  10. Cheaper by romka1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Thats much cheaer then the 20 million you have to pay to go on Souz :) But with Souz you get to stay on ISS for a few days

    --
    Visit my site @ http://www.madtorrent.com
    1. Re:Cheaper by darkonc · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, if I was rich enough that I could throw away that kind of money, I'd rather spend the $20M to go to ISS. On the other hand, there are a lot more people with $200K to trow away on getting 'into space' than $20M. I know a reasonable number of people with $200K equity that they could pull out of their savings/investments without ending up destitute. The number of people with $20M, on the other hand, I've mostly only seen on the news, or in passing.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    2. Re:Cheaper by bomber009 · · Score: 1

      I'd rather pay 20 million to go up with the Russians. From what I've read of this Virgin Galatic deal is for the 200k you ride up in a ship with 7 other suckers and you must stay strapped into your seat and you are only weightless for like 5-10 minutes. I find this to be a rip-off but I'm sure alot of people will do it, because some poeple have more money than they know what to do with. But for 10 minutes of being in space it's not worth it to me.

    3. Re:Cheaper by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      20 Millions for Souz now will do nothing for the future. Virgin galatic is trying to do a start-up for getting to space. My guess is that this 9 person craft will go much higher than 60 Miles. The next craft after that, will probably be the one to 300 Miles.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    4. Re:Cheaper by elyobelyob · · Score: 3, Funny

      "The number of people with $20M, on the other hand, I've mostly only seen on the news, or in passing." You're Dr Shipman and I claim my free five pounds ...

    5. Re:Cheaper by Rei · · Score: 1

      Um, no. For why, please read.

      --
      POTUS Witch Hunt tracker: 75 charges filed against 19 witches, 4 witches cooperating and 5 witches have pled guilty.
  11. 20k down will not get you into space by Loconut1389 · · Score: 0

    20k down will do nothing, and you've simply put up 20k in a non interest bearing account if you can't afford the other 180k. So no, 20k down will not get you into space- that is unless they only ask for the other 180k when you get back and you just file for bankruptcy, I'm sure the state'll love your excuse.

    1. Re:20k down will not get you into space by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      All this $$$ demand is strictly for insurance/safety reasons. It only takes 1 passenger ship to crash, and the industry will suffer public relations disaster for a decade.

      There is zero room for failure especially when NASA make things look ever so difficult. It's like a road that will bring down the best offroad SUVs, would you feel safe in a Geo metro.

  12. Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Virgin is offering something for their target market.

  13. Re:Title misleading by spencer1 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Hence the "Down".

  14. In case of a water landing by glazed · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your seat cushion can be used as a heat shield during the rapid descent.

    1. Re:In case of a water landing by Steve+Cox · · Score: 4, Funny

      Todays inflight movie will be Apollo 13....

    2. Re:In case of a water landing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For $7.00, you can have an in-flight meal consisting of cheese crackers and dried ice cream.

  15. Re:Title misleading by autocracy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mods should get to this, but... that's what "20k Down" means. It's a down-payment; synonymous with "deposit."

    --
    SIG: HUP
  16. Lord, Lady, Dame & Sir titles by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 2, Funny

    Notice anything about their expected demographic?
    I'm suprised there's no HRH and 'Bill Gates' options

    --
    FGD 135
    1. Re:Lord, Lady, Dame & Sir titles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure if the Slashdot crowd (about 100000 people?) donated $1 each we could get together enough money to buy a ticket for Bill Gates to show our appreciation for his work in improving the computer experience.

      Oh wait... that would only be enough for a one-way ticket...

    2. Re:Lord, Lady, Dame & Sir titles by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 1

      You mean Bill doesn't insist on being called 'Lord Gates' any more?

  17. The real news: Branson and Rutan's new company by FleaPlus · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think the real news here isn't the fact that they're taking deposits (they've been doing this for a while), but that Branson and Rutan have started up a new business, "The Spaceship Company."

    From here:

    But today's announcement reflects a finer appreciation of the financial and regulatory realities. Several months ago, Rutan complained to Congress that U.S. export restrictions [NOTE: These are ITAR restrictions, the same ones which turned this tattoo of encryption code into a munition a few years back] were making it difficult for the British Virgin Galactic project to move forward.

    The new arrangement restructures the deal: The Rutan-Branson venture, called The Spaceship Company, will license SpaceShipOne's technology from Mojave Aerospace Ventures, the company set up with financial backing from software billionaire Paul Allen and intellectual property from Rutan's Scaled Composites.

    The Spaceship Company will then do the actual building of SpaceShipTwos (or Threes ... or Fours) for Virgin Galactic, and for any other spaceline company that wants a suborbital craft. You can assume that the company is structured so as to avoid running into export roadblocks, while keeping the British financial backer in the loop.

    1. Re:The real news: Branson and Rutan's new company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The SpaceShip Company -- and all of those sub-orbital posers -- are just ways to postpone getting the general public into actual space. By actual space, I mean orbit and beyond. It's a disgrace to call a suborbital craft a SpaceShip.

  18. What about those PanAm down payments on the moon? by jpellino · · Score: 4, Funny

    After 2001 debuted, someone at PanAm got smart and instead of hanging up on what they thought were cranks looking for tickets to the moon, they started taking cataloged down payments on the first PanAm flights to the moon...

    One way or the other, I want to visit my one acre on the moon!

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  19. who gets the interest payments on the 20K ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    if i want my cash back in 2years ?

    but then Virgin(TM) always liked being a middleman operation (music,mobile phones,holidays)

    this time they can also make loads of money for watching your money grow in their investment portfolios, its like free money

    1. Re:who gets the interest payments on the 20K ? by BigZaphod · · Score: 1

      Compared to the money they are spending (and thus funneling into the economy) to try to make this happen, the interest they get from a few $20k pre-flight ticket sales is hardly worth worrying about and is certainly nowhere near enough to cover their R&D costs.

    2. Re:who gets the interest payments on the 20K ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course Virgin keeps the interest. It works the same way everywhere, e.g. in real estate when some company wants to build new homes, except that in RE the deposit isn't refundable... You should really get out once in a while and check out this thing called "real world", but you'll need to get off your fantasy high horse first.

  20. Re:What about those PanAm down payments on the moo by FeriteCore · · Score: 1

    I suspect that they found out that they were "unsecured creditors" when PanAm went belly up, and got nothing.

    A less likely alternative would be that somebody bought their contracts at the liquidation sale. I doubt this would happen.

  21. This is way cool. by BigZaphod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm too chicken (and far, far too poor) to be one of the first people to go on a trip like this, but I'm very happy to see it being done. I'm 25 and have many childhood memories of how space was the future and how someday I'd get to visit the moon (maybe even live there) and all that. Somewhere along the line all of that kind of talk just ended and space faded from people's view. It has indeed been a sad thing to not have some kind of huge bigger-than-seems-possible goal to strive for as a nation or even as a species. I hope this new commercial space industry can bring some of the magic back.

    1. Re:This is way cool. by jav1231 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's great too. As great as NASA is, they've kind of been slow to find the next leap forward. The Shuttle Program is a great accomplishment but it's become routine almost, recent disaster aside. The ISS is a neat idea but it's kind of stagnant too. Perhaps the private sector can move us along so that we may all have the chance to see Earth from space someday.

    2. Re:This is way cool. by kesuki · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Somewhere along the line all of that kind of talk just ended

      If every penny we spent on the cold war had been spent on a combination of nuclear and space technology we'd be paying 2 cents/kwh for electricity, and we could have built any number of of the potential 'low cost' space sytems, (electro magnetic rail 1st stage booster ramps, or a 'true' space elevator, at the equator) and a full city on the moon, possibly more than one.

      So you see what happened to the dream? we built big weapons to blow the world up a few thousand times over instead of building a space infrastructure. It looks like the space race is back on again, but america no longer has the talent or resource to lead the race. Especially with people so adamantly against the deployment of cheap, nuclear power. If china builds enough nuclear reactors to power to light up all of aisa they'll probably be the first to build on the moon.

    3. Re:This is way cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If every penny the US spent on the cold war had been spent on a combination of nuclear and space technology, you'd be addressing me as comrade ... if you hadn't been shipped off to a gulag, that is.

      Defence of a nation isn't just a gimmick dreamed up by politicians, you know.

    4. Re:This is way cool. by dangitman · · Score: 1
      I'm 25 and have many childhood memories of how space was the future and how someday I'd get to visit the moon (maybe even live there) and all that. Somewhere along the line all of that kind of talk just ended and space faded from people's view

      I'm 30, and blame the eighties (as any Gen-Xer would!). the Cold War was on, and we were shit scared of nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles. Reagan proposed the "Star Wars" space-based defense initiative. This grubbied the art, instead of being about romantic exploration of our destiny in the stars, space started being seen as a tool of war, or at least big satellite media companies and maybe mining companies one day. Similar to the confounding issues of nuclear technology and Hiroshima making people nervous about peaceful nuclear technology.

      Then there was the Challenger disaster, and the rest's history. It's sad they're still persisting with the shuttle and didn't implement something different in the 90s. These days we are busy being worried about terrorists, and that inverts the focus from the great, expanding future - to fighting non-technological (but socially sophisticated) methods and culture wars. The moon landing didn't stop Vietnam, nor did any other aviation technology. But the money was already gone, digging holes, rather than lifting ourselves up.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    5. Re:This is way cool. by dangitman · · Score: 0
      If every penny the US spent on the cold war had been spent on a combination of nuclear and space technology, you'd be addressing me as comrade ... if you hadn't been shipped off to a gulag, that is

      Bullshit. There was no serious threat of invasion of America by the Soviets, just as there was no serious threat of nukes or WMD from Saddam's Iraq being deployed in the US. It's this kind of paranoid attitude that fuels the massive waste and potential destruction of something like the Cold War.

      Most of the thousands of nukes were not necessary, and are like white elephants today. None of it was used to "win" the cold war, America could have just pretended to have nukes and it would have been equally as effective. Not to even mention the waste of "star wars" type programs.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    6. Re:This is way cool. by kesuki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Defence of a nation isn't just a gimmick dreamed up by politicians, you know.

      I said If, I didn't say we 'could' have. I was postulating what that kind of investment into space and nuclear technologies could have been realistically expected to yeild. And someone sle pointed out that once we had enough nukes to destroy the world one time over we no longer needed to build any more... we could have 'won' the cold war spending 1/4 the money on it that we did... if people had decided that we needed superior nuclear power and space launch capabilities, instead of 'more nukes , more planes, and more subs' we would have been much further along, but then again hind sight is 20/20

      Russia would have bankrupted itself trying to catch up to us on our nuclear and space technologies if we had focused on them instead of just better subs and making too many bombs. It was the trident subs that really won us the cold war, so we would have needed to do the sub technology, but satelite weapons without a deployment infrastructure, and making vastly more nukes than needed was down right wasteful.

    7. Re:This is way cool. by nsasch · · Score: 1

      I just came home from Oshkosh, Wisconsin where the anouncement was made. The speakers really want space travel to be a simple, safe, and someday affordable adventure.

      --
      Make your computer faster: rm -rf /mnt/windows/
    8. Re:This is way cool. by markass530 · · Score: 1

      I'm 25 also, and although I understand being to poor for something like this, how in hell, at 25 can you be to much of a pussy? I thought people didn't get like that until they were 40 or 50? Unexcusable.

    9. Re:This is way cool. by jadel · · Score: 1

      I blame Robert McNamara (sp?) The Dyna-Soar project was a re-usable spaceplane launched by a disposable booster. The initial version were single seat, but a version version that would carry four passengers to a projected space station in orbit (if this sounds familiar it's almost identical to the currently talked about shuttle replacement.)
      After six years of development and US$660M in funding it was cancelled just after the construction of the first example had begun.

  22. Like Pan Am by blueZhift · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This sounds like what Pan American airlines did back in the 60s when 2001: A Space Odyssey came out featuring the Pan Am spaceplane. They too sold tickets for future spaceflights. But I guess Virgin has a better chance, perhaps, of fulfilling the promise. And it may help that most probably don't remember what happened to Pan Am either!

    1. Re:Like Pan Am by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      And it may help that most probably don't remember what happened to Pan Am either!

      Um, she became a noted cabaret artiste ? ;-)

  23. uhh about Nasa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what if this is exactly what we need, a commercial company to do space travel, because seems like when a commercial company is doin it, they do it better, because if they lose money they wont just get more from the government.

    1. Re:uhh about Nasa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like all the airlines do currently huh? Check your facts, many are suckng from the government teat.....

    2. Re:uhh about Nasa by koreaman · · Score: 0

      Never heard of Amtrak then, have you?

  24. Canadian Planetspace: public flights within 2 yrs by toby · · Score: 3, Informative
    Today's Toronto Star has an article (apparently not online) about the heated competition in "space tourist" ventures, and highlighted the London, Ontario, firm Planetspace, which believes it could be the earliest to offer public flights.

    Funded by Dr Chirinjeev Kathuria, they see the secret to success as a modernised liquid oxygen/alcohol rocket motor based on the German V2, which proved its reliability in over 3,000 past flights (more history via that web page). The company uses the Canadian Arrow Space Centre.

    --
    you had me at #!
  25. $200,000?! by MirrororriM · · Score: 5, Funny
    "The company is already taking $20,000 deposits for the estimated $200,000 seats on their new spaceships. You can reserve your seat today at the Virgin Galactic web site."

    Will they accept a personal check the day of the launch? ;)

    --
    Content Management System: A pretentious way of saying "text editor."
    1. Re:$200,000?! by Volkov137 · · Score: 2, Funny

      How about Paypal?

    2. Re:$200,000?! by Artifex · · Score: 1
      Will they accept a personal check the day of the launch? ;)


      I know it was a joke, but... you think they're going to have any empty slots, anytime soon? I don't.
      --
      Get off my launchpad!
  26. And where does this go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do they actually go into space? Do they orbit? Or do they just do the spaceshipone "we've breached the top of the atmosphere, then come back down! whee!"

    1. Re:And where does this go? by mOoZik · · Score: 1

      100km and then down. Whee!

    2. Re:And where does this go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you define space as being where the athmospheric pressure is negligable (that is has *no* aerodynamic effect) a reasonable minimum would be 100 Miles (around 160 Km).

      SpaceshipOne *not* having reached that cannot really be described as having gone into space. The proof comes from the fact that it raises its tail to act as an *air brake* (suggesting an appreciable amount of athmosphere - which there would be at 60 miles). The shuttle, Soyuz et al use *retro rockets* as no airbrake would be effective at the altitude they operate at.

      That having been said SpaceShipOne is a notable technical acchievement - it's just that the difficult bit of space travel is getting things *really* out of the athmosphere and safely bringing them back - that is something SpaceShipOne has *not yet done*

  27. But do they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    from the bad-credit-no-credit-come-on-down dept.

    but do they habla español?

  28. Uh-oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Virgin Galactic announced this week that space tourism will be a reality by 2008.

    Uh-oh, I knew it was only a matter of time before they started launching virgins into space..

    1. Re:Uh-oh by chawly · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but isn't it going to be hard to find qualified canditates in this day and age ? - Just a thought.

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  29. But is it space? by Snaller · · Score: 1

    If I want to see earth from high above I'd use Google Earth... I don't really think its space unless you fly around the moon and the rings of saturn - and fast.. and we can't do that yet.

    It may be one hell of an achievemnt when they launch the space shuttle, but I can't help thinking "what a hunk of junk" when I see it flying - the burden of too many years of scifi I guess...

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:But is it space? by JeffTL · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not the Sci-Fi that makes the Shuttle look like a hunk of junk.

      It's the memory of the Saturn V and the present-day versatility of the Soyuz (though admittedly Soyuz can't carry as much of a payload as the shuttle).

    2. Re:But is it space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't help thinking "what a hunk of junk"

      She'll make point five past lightspeed. She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid.

    3. Re:But is it space? by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      And of course, the existance of the super-Energia configuration (a few tons more to LEO than SatV)

      --
      Me (Blog)
  30. Annoying by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Am I the only one that's annoyed by this?

    This is not space travel. I don't care that a bunch of geeks in a room defined "space" as 100KM, space travel means CONTROLLED space travel. This is just shooting people really high and letting them fall to earth, at which point it's normal air travel.

    We could fly before the Wright Brothers, but what made their accomplishment noteworthy was that it was controlled, powered flight. This is uncontrolled powered space travel. It's a stunt.

    Space travel means an orbital insertion. Controlled powered space travel.

    Granted, this is a necessary step. I'm glad they're doing it. But I hate all the hype they're putting into this. I'm afraid that people, once they figure out it's a very expensive stunt that isn't really space travel, are going to poison the well for this sort of thing.

    Be honest: Would you really be impressed with someone who rode this thing, other than the fact that they were able to shell out 200 grand? Would you look at them as Astronauts? I wouldn't.

    Bah.

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    1. Re:Annoying by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      The only ones in this situation that might possibly earn the title of astronaut would be the ones at the controls, IMHO.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    2. Re:Annoying by mOoZik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know what annoys me more? Geeks like you who dissect every good thing, every litte progress just so you can feel better about the fact that you won't be able to enjoy it, even if it was to "actual" space. No one said this was space travel. However, this is as good a view as you're gonna get for $200,000. But nooo, it's not good enough for you!

    3. Re:Annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wouldn't consider this to be space?

    4. Re:Annoying by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1
      You know what annoys me more? Geeks like you who dissect every good thing, every litte progress just so you can feel better about the fact that you won't be able to enjoy it, even if it was to "actual" space.

      Who says I couldn't do it? It'd be a stretch, but I could do it. But if I'm going to shell out money for space travel, I want SPACE TRAVEL. Not four or five minutes of free fall, but docking with a hotel in space.

      It's a good first step. But did you read the marketing crapola on the Virgin Galactic web site? Don't you think they're overselling this just a tad?

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    5. Re:Annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am curious what made SpaceShipOne uncontrolled? I thought the rocket motor is gymballed, and there are flaps and rudders on it as well.

    6. Re:Annoying by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Man, you can do that. You just have to pony up $20,000,000 and you get 8 days on the ISS. Is that space travel enough for you? For 1000th the price you get a "sample" of space travel.. for some of us that's worth it. For the rest of us, we have to wait for early adopters to drive down the price. Personally I hope someone buys one of these tickets and raffles it (with permission from Virgin Galactic of course). Then for the price of $20 we can all have a chance of going into space.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    7. Re:Annoying by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Space travel means an orbital insertion. Controlled powered space travel.

      I'll be sure to mention that to Alan Shepard and Gus Grissom.

      --
      Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
    8. Re:Annoying by lee1026 · · Score: 0

      just buy a lottery ticket. for the price of $1 you get to have a chance to go to space and do a whole lot more things.

    9. Re:Annoying by cmodcmodcmod · · Score: 1

      You are my new slashdot hero. I think I'm going to quote this regularly.

    10. Re:Annoying by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that's annoyed by this?

      For the most part, yes. Of course, this is slashdot, where everybody bitches about everything which isn't Linux.

    11. Re:Annoying by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      Shooting people really high and letting them fall back to Earth and survive is a lot harder than you seem to think it is.

    12. Re:Annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gus Grissom died in the Apollo 1 fire, you insensitive clod. :-( In other news, I was reading in a book how John Glenn was the first American in space, and I was just thinking, "What about Alan Shepard? What is he, chopped liver?"

    13. Re:Annoying by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it wasn't hard, I said it wasn't space travel.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    14. Re:Annoying by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 1

      Gus Grissom died in the Apollo 1 fire, you insensitive clod.

      Damn, I'm dumb; I don't know how I forgot that. Sometimes I can be such a, well, clod. Mea culpa.

      As for your book, are you sure it didn't say he was the first to orbit (which he was)?

      --
      Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
    15. Re:Annoying by PlacidPundit · · Score: 1

      I don't think anybody wants to be viewed as 'impressive.' We all just want to ride on the thing. Who cares what we call it?

    16. Re:Annoying by demachina · · Score: 3, Insightful

      First off you are totally off base using the word "CONTROLLED" here. SpaceShipOne is totally controlled. It has a pilot that lights the engine and can shut it off. He uses a stick and pedals to steer it. In fact he is more of a pilot than Space Shuttle pilots are. SpaceShipOne has no flight control computers. I think the Space Shuttle's computers could with some tweaking fly an entire mission without astronauts aboard. I suspect it would be dangerous to impossible to fly a Shuttle launch or reentry by the seat of the pants, if the computers all went down. The SpaceShipOne's feathered wing is fantastic innovation that make piloted reentry possible and safe, though of course its not bleeding off as much speed as the Shuttle is coming from LEO.

      I think the subject of your rant is not "control" but duration and maybe velocity. The fact is SpaceShipOne is getting to the same elevation as the lowest of low earth orbits, you will get the same view, its just brief. It just lacks the speed or fuel to stay there. This is exactly like the Wright brothers, their first flights barely left the ground too. With time, more R&D, better engines they increased the duration of their fligths, so will Rutan. The Wright Brothers had to scrape together private funding for their R&D so does Rutan.

      "Would you really be impressed with someone who rode this thing"

      No but I'd be really impressed if I could ride the thing. Its important to note I'm note really impressed with people who ride in the Space Shuttle either, nobody really is. Most of them are just passengers too, and again the flight computers do most of the flying not the "pilot" or "commander" they are mostly flipping switches per a carefully written script. Fact is todays real astronauts are boring, no one knows their names, they are only "heroes" when they get killed.

      I think it would really relight enthusiasm for space travel if LOTS of people could get astronaut wings and we would break down the barrier between ordinary people and NASA astronauts. At this point we NEED for people to realize they can get in to space without doing what astronauts do, devoting their entire life to the pursuit, being an overachiever to the point of being obnoxious, have a high tolerance for bureaucracy(NASA), and be very adept at kissing ass to get to the top of the heap to get a ride.

      Virgin Galactic and Rutan are trying to make the very important step where space travel starts turning in to something more like airline travel and people can buy a ticket and go if they want for fun or if they want to do business there.

      Fact is there just aren't many adventures left in this world. Climbing Mt. Everest has been done so many times its not special any more. Affluent thrill seekers will probably snap this up because its something new. Once it stops being new then there will be the next goal, getting to LEO and to a space hotel, and then beyond.

      --
      @de_machina
    17. Re:Annoying by tigga · · Score: 1
      You know what annoys me more? Geeks like you who dissect every good thing,

      The problem is IT is NOT a good thing, it is piece of shit. It is dissecting a lie really.

    18. Re:Annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether SpaceShipOne got into space has *nothing* to do with if it was controlled or not. As someone else correctly pointed out early US space flights were essentially "ballistic" the pilot had *little* influence over the spacecrafts direction.

      What (IMHO) is more significant is the *altitude* of the flight. At 60KM you're still effectively in the athmosphere (sure SpaceShipOne used its tailplane to "slow it" - something that is *not* an option for Shuttle, Soyuz, Appolo etc., because they were *really* in space and needed retro-rockets rather than aerodynamic surfaces to slow them).

      Space starts at approximately the 100Mile (160KM) mark - and SpaceShipOne *did NOT* manage that. That having been said it's a step in the right direction and should be welcomed.

    19. Re:Annoying by ill+dillettante · · Score: 1

      Does it really matter what people do with their own money as long as they aren't hurting anyone else? If you don't want to ride on it at least you will save $200,000.

    20. Re:Annoying by demachina · · Score: 1

      " out early US space flights were essentially "ballistic" the pilot had *little* influence over the spacecrafts direction."

      Well in the case of SpaceShipOne the pilot has complete control over the trajectory so I fail to see your point. The pilot has an LCD that is guiding him to the optimal trajectory but he is totally responsible for flying it, and he can fly any trajectory loads will let him get away with though obviously he is usually shooting for peak altitude.

      There is no difference between a ballisitic trajectory and an orbital insertion trajectory except velocity. Altitude is only important because you prefer to escape most atmospheric drag.

      Not sure why you qualified "early US space flights. The pilots on NASA missions seldom have any influence over the spacecraft's direction. Space shuttle orbital insertion and reentry are computer controlled. The only missions I can think that were really piloted were the LEM landings because the astronauts demanded to fly them, Apollo 13 where the computers were down and U.S. astronauts hand flew a lot of docking operations, versus the Russians where they are mostly computer controlled.

      "Space starts at approximately the 100Mile (160KM) mark - and SpaceShipOne *did NOT* manage that."

      That altitude is pretty arbitrary, you are just trying to discern the bounds of the atmosphere. You can orbit the earth at 100 KM, but yes there is a lot of atmospheric drag so you wont maintain it long unless you have a lot of power. There is drag at the altitudes ISS, Mir and the shuttle orbit at its just less.

      SpaceShipOne is flying to 100 KM because that is the altitude the X-Prize set, that is where you get astronaut wings and that is the altitude some have set for the edge of space. If it had been 160 KM Scaled Composites would, no doubt, have built a bigger engine and gone there instead. Its really arbitrary and always will be.

      --
      @de_machina
    21. Re:Annoying by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      You know what annoys me more? Geeks like you who dissect every good thing, every litte progress
      Your comment should have been score "-5 Misses The Point".

      His point was, that Spaceship One/Two *isn't* progress - not on the space side of the house anyhow. It's a really, really, neat aircraft - it's not a spacecraft. It's a sideshow - a carnival attraction.

      And a lot of people who should know better having been drooling all over themselves as if it was the Second Coming.

  31. Got a list of 1st subscribers by mynickwastaken · · Score: 1, Funny

    1. NASA = 20k
    2. NASA = 20k
    3. NASA = 20k
    ...
    7. NASA = 20k
    Gross: 140k

    The funding of the next space mission is now secure!

  32. Charter by climb_no_fear · · Score: 3, Informative

    And you can charter one for about $5k/hour here: http://www.aircharternetwork.com/pages/faq.html

  33. black sky or zero gee? by kylemonger · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think what most people want from a trip to space is to muck about in zero gee. If that's the case they could get much more bang for their buck with this. Just the down payment for Branson's Most Excellent Adventure would buy five of these trips.

    1. Re:black sky or zero gee? by mynickwastaken · · Score: 0

      You didn't meant G-Spot, isn't it?!

  34. Welcome by Charles+Jo · · Score: 0

    to the world of tomorrow!

  35. C ommercial by Propaganda13 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Down payment on space flight = $20K
    Final payment on space flight = $180K
    Realizing you spent $200K to have a fellow passenger throw up on you in Space = priceless

  36. I would totally do ... by ta+ma+de · · Score: 1

    this if I could bail-out at the apex and parachute back ... that would be awesome.

    1. Re:I would totally do ... by kylemonger · · Score: 1

      Me too. The problem is that you'll be supersonic and spinning like a propeller by time you reach a point where opening your chute will do any good. By then (assuming your arms and legs haven't come out of their sockets and you haven't caught fire) the shock of opening your chute would be fatal.

    2. Re:I would totally do ... by ta+ma+de · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking ... small drag chute.

    3. Re:I would totally do ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's a drogue chute; it's the precursor parachute that gets whipped out at high speeds to eventually pull out the next part of the parachute system.

      It'd do what you'd be looking for, but since SS1's re-entry is supersonic (but not hypersonic, like the shuttle), you can just look at what the military's already done for ejection from high speed aircraft. Some of their fastest designs (up in the Mach 3 region) have had "escape pods" (I kid you not) that close around the crew's ejection seats before being jettisoned.

      You'd probably need something similar to do a parachute re-entry, and it wouldn't be nearly as safe as staying with the ship. Not to mention the small problem of how you get out without inconveniencing all the other passengers. Human nature being what it is, though, I guarantee somebody does it anyway in the next 50 years. Heck, the next few attempts might even manage to live through it.

      As for spinning around until your arms fall out of your sockets, I don't think that's likely to happen (seems like it'd take a pretty stable torque to accelerate up to those speeds), but the buffeting involved will probably cause black outs and could damage your air equipment (which is obviously needed at 100 km up).

    4. Re:I would totally do ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's called a stabilizer chute. Previous tests with dummies have shown that without the stabilizer chute, you can enter a spin of around 200rpm that will be deadly.

      BTW the highest parachute jump is from 30km. So you've got some thinking to do before you jump from 100km.

  37. OOH YEH! by ZombieChiefExecutive · · Score: 0

    Space! Now we can go see the sights of...

    Oh wait.

    --
    James Buchanan
    Zombie Chief Executive/15th President of the USA
  38. We know what we're getting into. by Radak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Virgin's already got my deposit. I'm going.

    The naysayers can say what they want, but those of who are actually involved and actually paying for tickets are fully apprised of what the spaceship is, where it's going, and for how long.

    It's been my dream ever since I knew space existed to get there, and since I can afford it, $200,000 for a few minutes there is worth it to me.

    No, this isn't controlled orbital insertion, but it is still a flight into space, hence spaceflight, and flights like these are a vital first step toward getting real civilian orbital travel working, and I'll be first in line for that, too. If I have any money left, that is.

    You guys can whine about ballistic space travel not being real spaceflight all you want. I know what it is, I have no doubts about its value to me, and I'm going for a ride on a rocketship!

    1. Re:We know what we're getting into. by Radak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      u paid 200,000 for a trip that will last a few minutes. you better justify that.

      I did justify it. I told you I knew what I was paying for and it was worth it to me. What other justification is necessary?

      My point to the naysayers is that Virgin, while good at PR hype, isn't misrepresenting this and they're making the people who are seriously interested fully aware of what they're doing and how they're progressing. To the people like me who think it's worth it, it's worth it. Nuff said.

    2. Re:We know what we're getting into. by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      I'm glad to see this. Don't let us (The people without 200k laying about) down by changing your mind.

    3. Re:We know what we're getting into. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And we know what you're getting the rest of us into. The eventual lowering of cost for the rest of us to go and continuing developments towards eventual privately built and flown orbital flights.

      NASA does science, they do a pretty good job at it overall (lots of smart people working there doing some pretty amazing things) but to anyone that thinks NASA is really paving the way so that one day you or I might be able to afford a ticket into space is just fooling themselves. It's going to take visionaries and brilliant engineers like Burt Rutan coupled with funding from venture capitalists to get the common man into orbit and beyond. It's people like the above poster that's going to make the initial investments pay off and bring in even more capital, more R&D, and eventually make it possible for the REST of us to get into space and even orbit one day. So my hat's off to not only the engineers and folks taking the financial risk to fund these sorts of projects but also for the folks willing to support the future of private space travel because they can see that their $200k isn't just for a fun/quick stunt, but also goes to help support the future of space tourism (and like ot or not, space tourism is going to be the first primary money making industry that drives the development of privately manned space travel).

    4. Re:We know what we're getting into. by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      Virgin's already got my deposit. I'm going.

      That's really cool, and I'm quite envious of you. You'll post pictures for us, right? :)

    5. Re:We know what we're getting into. by khallow · · Score: 1
      u paid 200,000 for a trip that will last a few minutes. you better justify that. lol.

      Justify? It's his money and his desire. No justification warranted.

  39. Directions? by zkn · · Score: 1
    up into space

    What about down between, over under, next to above and the like? When will these options become available?

  40. show me by harkabeeparolyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When Burt Rutan and Paul Allen have the guts to ride that fucker then I'll get in it. If it's such a fun thing why haven't they been up in it yet?

    1. Re:show me by delong · · Score: 1

      When Burt Rutan and Paul Allen have the guts to ride that fucker then I'll get in it. If it's such a fun thing why haven't they been up in it yet?

      Branson and members of his family are going to be the first passengers of the venture.

      Next inanity!

    2. Re:show me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Burt Rutan will fly with his father in a flight before the first paying passenger, along with Richard Branson and his father.

    3. Re:show me by PenguinOpus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Burt Rutan has said he will be one of the passengers on the 50+ test flights that will occur before they start accepting paying passengers. I'm not sure about Paul Allen, but I'd guess he would go up also.

      BTW, check out this photo essay of SpaceShipOne's visit to Oshkosh this week:

      http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showflat.php/Cat/0/Numb er/53677/an/0/page/0#53677

      [ scroll down about half way to see the pics of SS1 fly-bys and landing ]

    4. Re:show me by jnhtx · · Score: 1

      As I pointed out above, Rutan will ride SpaceShip Two during the 50-100 test flights.

      The passengers on the first revenue flight of SpaceShip Two will include Richard Branson, his wife, and his children.

  41. Hmmm..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    After these precious minutes soaking up the thrill of space, you will start your return to earth. Your seats will recline to make the journey through the atmosphere as comfortable as possible. At around 50,000 feet the spaceship will return to a glider-like configuration for the landing back at the spaceport.
    Hmm....200 000$ for a few minutes in "space".
    Burt has utilised a much safer fuel than ever before - nitrous oxide (laughing gas) and rubber.
    It turns out the comedians on board suck. They make the fuel "leak" on purpose so the audience will laugh.
  42. What's the status of the orbital projects? by Y-Crate · · Score: 1

    I've tried to keep on top of all the developments in private space travel, but I don't really have a good idea of how far along the various orbital projects are.

    Could someone provide some more info on this?

    1. Re:What's the status of the orbital projects? by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      The main private orbital contender is probably SpaceX, which is scheduled to launch its first rocket later this year. This article has a good overview:

      http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM .20050721.gtbcspace21/BNStory/Technology/

      SpaceX has also announced its intent to compete for Bigelow's orbital prize. Their Falcon V, which launches one of Bigelow's habitat module prototypes next year, should be big enough for an appropriately-sized manned capsule.

  43. 20.000 for 200.000 : Nice pyramid scheme. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "The company is already taking $20,000 deposits for the estimated $200,000 seats on their new spaceships. You can reserve your seat today at the Virgin Galactic web site."

    And if you sign up your friends, you can get it for free !

    Get a free flight into space !

  44. Thanks but... by twinstead · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll wait and get my ticket on priceline.com.

    1. Re:Thanks but... by Wescotte · · Score: 1

      I'll wait and get my ticket on priceline.com.

      Then using Shatner as a spokesperson will be semi relevant!

  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  46. Musing by LowbrowDeluxe · · Score: 1

    I don't know whether I think it'll work or not. I agree with many of the points made so far, that the deployment seems awfully fast for a project of this nature, that it's not really space travel (really, it's kind of an inverse bungie jump. We throw you up really high, then you fall back down.) all that sort of stuff. However, and here's where I think this maybe has half a chance, my dad, and myself to a lesser extent, held onto the dream of space flight for most of his life. Eventually it reached a point though where it seemed pretty clear that it wasn't going to reach a point where he would ever achieve the dream himself. I remember the look on his face when he admitted that fact out loud for the first time. I don't know what I think of the chances of this really working, but I know if it did, if I could ever afford to, I'd buy my dad a ticket. And maybe myself, too. To the current generation maybe this seems mostly like a cheap stunt or gimmick, and I guess it probably is, but I think it's more important than that. A lot more important. It's about reminding an entire generation, who are now the one's in power, that when they were children they grew up believing that the dream of spaceflight was their birthright. Without the cold war to keep it going, I think that's about the most important thing that could happen for space exploration.

    1. Re:Musing by oneiron · · Score: 1

      We just need Cold War v2.0 with China... That will get us going again. Considering thier space program is picking up space and the liklihood of flareup in relations over the Taiwan issue, we might be well on our way. Yay for space flight!

  47. $200,000 for that? by MarkByers · · Score: 1

    If you paid $200,000 for that, you were conned!

    It let me download it for free. It makes a nice desktop wallpaper though.

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
  48. Re:What about those PanAm down payments on the moo by kesuki · · Score: 1

    Why wouldn't you buy the contracts? Pan am didn't specify a final price, only a 'reservation' price.
    Someone planning to start a company to 'fly you to the moon' would have a slightly beter credibility if they had a passenger list for the inital flight.

  49. From the Website by archgoon · · Score: 1

    By the end of the decade, Virgin Galactic - the most exciting development in the story of modern space history - is planning to make it possible for almost anyone to visit the final frontier at an affordable price.

    Kick ass! I'm going to have 200,000 dollars in disposable income by 2008! Awesome!
    ...
    Or does this mean hyperinflation?

    1. Re:From the Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard the president of Virgin Galatic say that they anticipate the price to drop down to $30,000 within 5-6 years. Since they are investing $100,000,000 into it, they want to recoup their investement with the first years flights.

      So maybe with inflation, you'll have $30,000 by 2013 :-)

  50. You mean that's not space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next you'll be telling me that when a fish jumps it hasn't made the transition from sea to land...

  51. 20k still out of my pricerange ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess I'll have to drink 7up and get lucky

  52. But I want a launch by snowwrestler · · Score: 1

    When I watch the shuttle take off, what excites me is the thought of that great ride from the ground up. If the Virgin Galactic flights start the same was as the SpaceShipOne flights--a leisurely climb to 50,000--that's a shame. I've always wanted to lay on my back, strapped in, waiting for T minus 3 and ignition.

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  53. 7 Up spaceflight sweepstakes running now by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

    Personally I hope someone buys one of these tickets and raffles it (with permission from Virgin Galactic of course). Then for the price of $20 we can all have a chance of going into space.

    7 Up is currently running a sweepstakes for a suborbital space flight. I think it runs until the end of August:

    http://www.softcoin.com/p/handler?target=general&a ction=getHome&sid=550
    http://collectspace.com/ubb/Forum35/HTML/000126.ht ml

    Look for unique promotional codes on specially marked ½-liter, 20oz., 2-liter bottles and inside specially-marked 12-pack wraps of 7 UP, Diet 7 UP, Cherry 7 UP, Sunkist Orange Soda, A&W Root Beer and Canada Dry Ginger Ale.

    Register and enter your code for a chance to win $500 and the first free ticket to space or other space prizes from Diet 7 UP!

    With each new code entered, you could win the following:

            * $500 and the chance to win the First Free Ticket to Space
            * A trip for 4 to Space Camp
            * A star in your name
            * Diet 7 UP 2 Liter Coupon

  54. I can think of by Nybble's+Byte · · Score: 0

    I can think of a few people I'd be happy to pay $20k to be sent to outer space - my former boss, for starters.

  55. Or ride in a Mig by ravenspear · · Score: 1

    Or you can get a ride on a Mig 25 to 80,000 ft. where the sky is black. That only costs $21k, somewhat more economical compared to this trip where that would only cover the initial deposit.

    1. Re:Or ride in a Mig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spaceflight = 328,084 feet. That mig doesn't fly nearly high enough to qualify.

    2. Re:Or ride in a Mig by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      maybe so but these suborbital arcs aren't really spaceflight either except by a very artificial definition (which will likely get changed if these arcs become popular).

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  56. Sounds fishy to me... by Piranhaa · · Score: 1

    They report that test flights should start in 2007.

    Hmm.. These betaor alpha flights seem to be a little scary to me. I at least want a Service Pack 10 before I trust anything like this!

    1. Re:Sounds fishy to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not that bad. Pretty much the worst thing that could happen to you is that that the rocket could lose control and fall out of the sky...which you're doing anyway.

    2. Re:Sounds fishy to me... by fbartho · · Score: 1

      Shit man, the people who's names you remember WERE the beta testers. (Alpha, I agree, few came out alive)

      --
      Gravity Sucks
  57. enterprise by minus_273 · · Score: 1

    "Designs for the Virgin Galactic craft are progressing on a weekly basis at Rutan's base in Mojave, California and by early 2005 the final design for the maiden Virgin Galactic ship, the VSS (Virgin SpaceShip) Enterprise, should be signed-off. "

    gotta love how enterprise is now a popular spaceship name :D

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
  58. Notes on Rutan presentations at EAA Oshkosh by jnhtx · · Score: 5, Informative

    I just got back from the Experimental Aircraft Association convention and flyin at Oshkosh, Wisconsin.

    Burt Rutan, Paul Allen, Richard Branson, Mike Melville, Brian Bennie and a bunch of Scaled Composite and Virgin people were there. Mike Melville flew the White Knight to the show, carrying Mr and Mrs Rutan in SpaceShip One.

    I heard a press conference and no less than six 90 minute talks about Rutan's space program from SpaceShip One and SpaceShip Two principles.

    Here are some more or less random factoids that were discussed in detail at Oshkosh:

    1) The White Knight with attached SpaceShip One were remarkably graceful in flight, far more so than the videos I had seen would have suggested.

    2) Allen said that the cost of the entire SpaceShip One program were about the same as a ride to the ISS on Soyuz, i.e. on the order of $20 million dollars.

    3) Rutan and his people reveled a number of problems that I had not seen in the press prior to this week. For example, on one of the early White Knight flights one of the nose wheels struck a rough spot in the runway during the take off roll. This nose wheel shimmied to the point were the nose wheel detached from the airframe. White Knight had to make a three wheel one stump landing.

    4) The first flight into space exceeded 100km of altitude by only a little more than 100 meters. There was great concern that the motor didn't have sufficient impulse to attain the X-Prize goal of 100km altitude when carrying one human pilot and two passengers or 400 pounds of ballast. They went so far as to buy solid rocket booster motors from Thiokol. In the end they were able to improve the performance of the basic engine without needing these extra boosters. Rutan was coy about exactly how this was done, but the two official X Prize flights did exceed 100Km by comfortable margins. He did mention that engineers from both the winning motor company, SpaceDev of California, and the losing company, EAC of Florida, assisted in improving the motor. They have one more complete motor that was not used.

    5) The maximum temperature during reentry was on the order of 200F. The craft experienced greater heating on ascent rather than descent. This heat was control by 14 pounds of Scaled proprietary thermal protection material on the leading edges of the wing.

    6) Both pilots were effusive in their praise of the "care free" feathered reentry system. They both said that flying the ascent was very demanding, but that during re-entry they had nothing to do except enjoy the ride.

    7) SpaceShip Two will be "one hundred times safer than any previous manned space system" according to Rutan. His goal is to attain a safety level equivalent to the airliners of the late 1920s and early 1930s.

    8) Scaled Composites will design SpaceShip Two. The SpaceShip Company will manufacture the craft, Scaled will test and certify the craft. Spacelines such as Virgin Galactic will purchase and operate SpaceShip Two and its carrier aircraft.

    10) Each SpaceShip Two and carrier will be individually flight tested and certified. This is an approved alternate certification method to that used for mass produced aircraft. By testing each craft individually, they do not have to provide conformity data back to raw materials as is done with airliners.

    11) Rutan anticipates 50 to 100 test flights prior to certification and paid passenger travel. Rutan will fly on some of these flights. In fact, he expects that during the test phase, prior to paid passenger flights, more people will fly into space on SpaceShip Two than have ever flown in space by all other craft.

    11) SpaceShip One flew straight up, and recovered straight down. SpaceShip Two will fly 200 to 300 miles down range. Rutan anticipates that Virgin will launch SpaceShip Two over the Pacific Ocean and recovering it at Mohave. This will provide several minutes of atmospheric flight at Mach 2-3 during ascent and descent, providing a Concorde like experience.

    12) Li

    1. Re:Notes on Rutan presentations at EAA Oshkosh by ndogg · · Score: 1

      For those curious about why Rutan was in a small city of 40k, EAA is the host of the largest air show in the world.

      Living close by, I can say that it can be a bit of a clusterf--k.

      --
      // file: mice.h
      #include "frickin_lasers.h"
  59. 20k Down Can Get You Up Into Space by jkerman · · Score: 2, Funny

    but how much to get you down?

  60. Do they allow cameras? by Sterling+Christensen · · Score: 1

    If they let you, consider taping it. I'm sure there are a lot of people who couldn't afford to go but would love to watch. You could probably convince a TV news station to buy some of the footage from you.

    1. Re:Do they allow cameras? by Radak · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unknown at this point what will be allowed, but you can be pretty sure they'll be more than happy to provide a keepsake DVD afterwards. Watch them charge $69.95 for it, too.

  61. Re:Canadian Planetspace: public flights within 2 y by Mechcozmo · · Score: 1

    Yes, but remember what the V-2 did? I doubt many people would like the "crash landing" the engine based on the V-2 would do....

  62. adult softball games aren't "real" ball, either by artifex2004 · · Score: 1

    But that's as close as most players will ever get to playing major league.

    A lot of people want to go to space. They'll never qualify for even the equivalent of the minor leagues, in that regard. But they'd still like just a little taste. Why rain on the little game they are able to get together?

    As for being impressed, I'm happy for them that they're taking their dreams as far as they can, instead of sitting around not doing anything and making fun of others. I say that as a friend to someone who's already had a seat reserved for months. And I'll be happy for him to tell me all about it for a long time after, because I can't even get into the dugout at the sandlot, myself.

  63. It's your money, and your dream by artifex2004 · · Score: 1

    A lot of people spend a lot more than that, and never get close to realizing theirs.
    So it's a good deal, all things considered ;)

  64. Just gotta make sure of one thing... by Just-some-person · · Score: 0

    ...Billy doesn't have enough oxygen ^^

  65. Insurance by threaded · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much of the fee goes on insurance, for the passengers and for the people on the ground.

  66. Expensive Ride by Mallaien · · Score: 1

    $200K for a ride in space, basically you shoot stright up and glide down, no weightless flight, about 1 minute of "space" and you heading back home. well it shouldent cost that much per person, there cashing in on the ride, but its just a longer laster Roller Coaster trip. well maby a little wightless free fall for a few seconds. I would rather wait till they have trips to the moon.

  67. The real question is... by fedork · · Score: 1

    ..how much is season pass?

    --
    ...remember good 'ol times when IP used to mean Internet Protocol....
  68. I could afford to go too if by Stone316 · · Score: 1

    I suppose I could afford to go too if I lived in my parents basement and could save all my money! Sorry, had to bed said. (BTW> i'm jealous)

    --
    "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
  69. hmm by Danzigism · · Score: 0
    this is indeed wonderful..

    but then I think of the kids you could send to college for $200,000.. or even the house you could buy for a family in need.. yes it would be wonderful to see space, but thats still a lot of fuckin money.. it drives me insane to see how people just throw there money away.. it would be absolutely brilliant to see space.. but how can anyone have it in there heart, to waste $200,000 when they know they can just as easily use it to help people?

    --
    *plays the Apogee theme song music*
  70. You can get into space... by Kingrames · · Score: 1

    ...But where would you go? SETI Alpha Five? That big monolith? I shudder to think what would happen if everyone else on board said "Let's go to mars!" ...and the pilots and stewardesses had to oblige. (for that much money) I think we need a functional space station, and outposts on other planets before we start discussing commercial travel to and from them. I'd much rather spend $400 on a plae ticket than $200,000 on a shuttle ticket... ...considering NASA has only recently acknowledged "okay, so it's not THAT safe anymore..."

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
  71. That is true IFF by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    you keep spaceship one based on the same engine. But nobody will do that. Rutan did it to have a safe, a developmently fast engine. Now comes the fun of creating a new upper stage based on H2/O2 (IIRC ISP of more than 450) rather than butyl rubber (less than 250). Keep in mind that he did not develop the engine. Another group did. He is simply buying those.

    But I totally agree with the article. It is a good one in that many ppl do not realize that Rutan has a long ways to go. But he is committed to the 2 part ship, which has always made a lot of sense to me. In addition, he is striving for the low hanging fruits, which is to place a minimal crew rather than a large cargo (or worse mixed) into space.

    In fact, I am guessing that the next craft (9 ppl) will have a cargo counterpart for launching microsats via a small rocket into space. The military and probably communications companys will be interested in these.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  72. I don't know ... by Archimboldo · · Score: 1

    A lot of unpleasant stuff happens when you are in zero gravity that takes time to adjust to. For a flight of only a few minutes, I think all you'll enjoy is the view of the vomit bag you will be filling.

  73. Double that by stevebenson · · Score: 1

    I would gladly pay double that amount for a chance to ride in space. To experince weightlessness and to see the world from abouve is like that master card commerical to me PRICELESS Space shuttle ticket $20,000 Space outfit $1000 Space Boots $500 Looking at the world from abouve in space Priceless !! For everthing else theres you know what.

  74. Re:Notes on Small Towns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    40k is huge when you're from Mojave, pop. about 4000. This is a very interesting development. Burt Rutan has said for years that he was a designer not a manufacturer, he would sell you plans but not planes -- now he will preside over a spaceship factory in Mojave. Interestingly, he won't be the first person to do that! Better luck this time...!

  75. You can go to space for $995.00 ... small catch .. by Sylven_1969 · · Score: 1

    You can go to space alot cheaper try $995.00! http://www.memorialspaceflights.com/options.asp Oh yeah, the small catch... you have to be DEAD! ;)

    --
    Jay Dale "If you're not living on the edge then you're taking up too much space!"
  76. Re:Canadian Planetspace: public flights within 2 y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah I guess people don't fly on 767's anymore either... Wouldn't like the crash landing into a building it would do.

    Dumbass. You can use a V-2 type engine to provide thrust and put it on a vehicle that isn't designed to "crash land"