Slashdot Mirror
Space Tourism, Now and to Come
bart_scriv writes, "BusinessWeek looks at the latest in space tourism, from a $20 million Soyuz trip to a $200,000 ride via Virgin Galactic. The article looks at existing and planned opportunities, with a slide show of photos and artist's conceptions of vehicles and facilities. From the article: 'Among the other wonders of space is the planned Bigelow Aerospace space hotel. Similar in design to the International Space Station (which has kept a constant human presence in space since 2000), the hotel has a modular design that will allow it easily to expand. The key difference is that the hotel's modules will be inflatable. Bigelow Aerospace launched the Genesis I test module into orbit on July, 2006, and plans to send Genesis II in early 2007.'"
am excited to be travelling through space in a large inflatable ball... what could go wrong?
To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion...
Gigolos...in space!
Of course, my friend asked me, "Are you worried about the rocket blowing up?"
"Not really," I said. "After all, when I kick-it I plan on having my ashes and a sample of my DNA shot into space anyhow. As long as the rocket makes it to space first, I think it would actually be a pretty good deal."
My Computer Music Tutorial Videos
Call me when they put a huge, inflatable arena in space, and start holding athletic events there. Somewhere between Ender's Game and Jocks In Space there's got to be a sweet spot of entertainment...
As if there wasn't enough junk to try to monitor in space and worry about falling to earth, now we're going to have private enterprise try to make a buck or two off of going to space.
Government contractors worry me enough, but what happens to a space hotel when the business runs out of money? I can see this going through a boom and bust cycle like just about every new business, and I want to know. It's not like running lots of fiber optic cable and then going bankrupt. Who's going to take care of the degrading orbit of the hotel?
Linux - because it doesn't leave that Steve Ballmer aftertaste.
Oh shit. Does this mean that there will be inflatable women in the bar of that inflatable space station hotel? 'Cause, for that price, I expect the real thing!
Fucking in outer space will be quite a mess unless you like the idea of jism floating by your head. My 2 cents.
I've got twenty bucks- what'll that get me?
Every time there's an article about Bigelow Aerospace here, there's a dozen or so commenters who are convinced that because the modules are self-expanding, they must therefore be delicate and vulnerable to space debris. In reality however, the walls of their modules are quite durable, probably even more so the aluminum walls of the International Space Station. The walls will be composed of multiple layers of materials like kevlar (the stuff used in bullet-proof vests) and vectran, resulting in a wall 16-inches thick. They've done a number of projectile tests, with results which compare favorably to NASA's.
Rob Schneider comes out with, "Deuce Bigalow, Space Gigalo"!
Scary... Now you can really start the penis pump and inflation jokes.
I don't considering suborbital trips to be space travel, so I'm glad they're talking about some of the real players trying to bring orbital travel to be affordable.
My great fear is that the marketing machines are overselling suborbital "roller coasters", and when that is an abject failure, we'll see less investment in real orbital trips. Orbital is at least an order of magnitude harder than suborbital (if not more), so it's possible that some investors could be spooked away.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
WMV or MPG video just posted by John Carmack of Armadillo Aerospace's test hover.
Seastead this.
"The site's elevation 4,700 feet above sea level will also make for a shorter trip into space, saving on fuel costs."
Isn't Earth's escape velocity constant, regardless of how far you travel to escape it? I don't see dropping off quicker with only 1 mile "head start" so much of the acceleration to escape velocity is against less weight, with constant mass requiring constant acceleration fuel.
Wouldn't the Equator's 26 miles extra distance from the Earth's center (compared to the distance at the poles) make it an even cheaper launch site?
Even if all these factors count, isn't Ecuador's low lattitude and high altitude the best combination? Forget a space elevator, how about just an escalator up the Andes?
--
make install -not war
Does it come with caffeine-free diet Sprite and receive Fox news?
Rumor also has it that Johhny Depp, John Daly and well as other rock stars/bands and athletes would have to pay a hefty deposit. "It's damn hard to replace the windows although an advantage we have over our "grounded" competition is that should such hotel trashing take place, it would be fairly quiet. What many of these stars don't understand (well besides Sigourney Weaver) is that in space, no one can hear you scream".
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
Muslim extremists who think that the Koran bars going into Heaven (space) will target the ships and station.
will most likely be developing a tug for moving between the moon and earth. Once bigelow gets the hotel working, it would make sense to use these for moving between the moon and earth. In fact, I would be surprised if Bigelow does not have several groups designing these at this time as well as a true lunar lander i.e. a craft that will remain in the lunar arena.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The fact that these ppl have gone to orbit has caused numerous companies to really push for getting to space cheaply. I would like to see russia send up about 5 more ppl. As long as VC feels that there is money in this, then more development will occur.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Does this mean we can finally send Rob Schneider off the planet?
How do we regulate space? Don't think we won't have to. We can regulate our own air space but with the need for orbits, for there to be regulation at individual country levels, that's alot of stuff in geosychronous orbit.
Who would be the regulating body? If we leave space up to the private sector and traveling by space becomes a viable alternative, what's to stop the private companies from gouging the consumer? I'm sure we could find a way to regulate on an international level through a conglomerate made of a series of coutries with a viable interest. We have another international organization designed to protect a commodity. We call it OPEC and they are the bane of any oil using nation out there...in some people's eyes that is.
Then again, if we think planes and terrorism is bad, just think what would happen with such ships and stations for tourist travel. On top of that, how would all these people get there?
But what environmental impacts would there be? I mean sure, there is a good, viable business model to cash in on people's "pie in the sky" dreams but is it sustainable? What resources would we need to do this effectivly, safely and cleanly. Rocket launches are a dirty affair when it comes to the environment, safety and the checkbook.
This is something that needs more than a business model. I mean, there needs to be a way to show profit for the private sector to be interested so that capital can be raised to fund the project but where are the long term goals and plans? We have been hearing about this stuff for a couple of decades now with promise after promise after promise. When is somebody going to actually look at this with a REAL feasability model instead of some rich dude forking over the cash to hitch a ride on a natonally funded science mission?
You young people are lucky.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Zero. G. Porn.
:-)
...and I don't even want to think about what would happen to the instruments if they tried zero-G Bukkake :-(
There's your 21st centure business model
Although, cleaning up afterwards would be a challenge...
Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
Please reassure me that the Bigelow Aerospace Space Hotel does in fact come with blackjack and hookers...
Nope. A thing is only worth what someone is willing to pay, it's costs are irrelevant. There's no such thing as intrinsic value.
That means you have to start with... What is someone willing to pay for a week in orbit? Then ask how many people can we get into the thing, how long will it last. Then you have an approximate measure of what the ISS might be worth to a space hotel operator.
There are no space hotel operators at the moment and nobody else really knows what to do with the thing, which means that if the ISS were abandoned tomorrow, it would literally be worthless.
Deleted
There's a whole existing body of law around this - Oceanic law, naval law, whatever you call it. No one owns the ocean, and yet ships are represented by their respective countries, do business, have environmental impacts (oil spills come to mind) etc. Whats to stop private cruise ship companies from gouging the consumer? Fair market I guess, plus whatever regulating body the terrestrial company is owned by. And this thing will really get off the ground once Virgin, Amidillo, etc start getting craft into orbit. It will be a while, but once we get people into orbit using commercial vehicles then the government (and taxpayers) don't have to foot the bill.
I'm wondering if the Virgin Galactic ship is simply an up then down affair, or will it take off from one port and land in another.
A sub-orbital jaunt could easily turn a 20 hour flight into a much shorter trip.
Actually, forget the blackjack.
Since you can apparently see Genesis I when it does a fly by, is it really to crazy to think that there could be a giant glowing sign attached to these modules? http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/fly_stuff/corporat e.php is already looking at some marketing angles (but on a much smaller scale...$300 for logo in space/on their site).
While I think it could be cool to be able to send contained personal stuff into space, I'm not so wild about the "big sign" possibility. Maybe I should be more worried about the ISS, since it is closer and if we are unlucky, only the Russian program will have a way to get there. The Russian program is already making a buck off space (they fly the tourists!).
Well, since most nations govern thier own air space, how do we regulate how high that air space goes? One of the largest air space issues is the threat from other countries using not only airplanes but orbital craft to covertly spy on other countries. We assume that the private sector has controlled air space and regulated themselves because we don't see the government agencies behind all air traffic in any country until something goes wrong. Then every administration, department and ministry is on the TV telling us what happened. Air traffic is strictly controlled by governments around the world yet you can still get on a plane and safely and easily fly around the globe due to regulation and standardization.
Beyond tourist trap visits to space stations and the moon, what is the purpose of space travel? Most countries are too small in area to warrant regular jaunts into space just to travnsverse thier land area. More fuel would be expended trying to enter a low Earth orbit only to descend mere minutes later to reach your destination then would be to hop into a modern jet plane and just take teh trip across the country. While this seems spectacular to the average traveler, at what cost does this convienince come? There are many factors here that contribute to even this latest "look at space tourism". I would love to see something like this happen and I'd probably be one of the first in line to have the chance to leave this rock even if it was for a few short hours. I just don't see any feasible answer yet. Sure, there will be teething problems but look what we have to spend just to send 7 people in to orbit now. How are we going to send a load of people large enough to justify the cost? Especially for tourism only?
Lastly, how does "oceanic" or "naval" law apply? Ocean going ships do not cross that many borders while transversing oceans aside from international waters and they certainly don't fly over land and make international secrets vulnerable. The U.S. isn't the only country with things it wishes to hide. Also, how will the tax payers not front the bill? It seems that you are applying the model of the U.S. which has a good deal less regulation in these areas than other countries and it doesn't really apply. If we wanted to use the U.S. as an example of taxpayers fronting the bill then who do you think pays for the FAA and all it's air traffic controllers and other national security agecies that handle things like homeland security which reaches into air space like the U.S. Coast Guard and even the U.S. Navy?
It's not so cut and dry on who pays for what or how such international ventures are governed. When one of these "ideas" pops up that addresses such international governing issues then we will start seeing some progress in to actual space travel. Other wise Virgin's idea of just a quick launch into space amounts to no more than the space equivalent of a glass bottom boat or submarine ride and that is where it will stay unless they can get some long term goals outlined and a viable use for space travel other than mere tourism and at a costly sum to boot.
Thank you,
Bigelow Aerospace Management
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Milking rock stars with more money than they could ever spend to finance the development of cheaper, better space tech isn't a waste of money; it's damn near a moral imperative.
I think that space travel is unsafe, and I think that many people believe it to be unsafe and if you see on TV or in the news about a failed launch, problem with a space shuttle or a crash then you will be scared and in doubt of space travel because you would feel that it is unsafe.
It cost really much money to goto space. It is a little potential userbase, and only few people that would like to goto space.
Why would you want to goto space? It is dangerous, and unsafe!
It takes long time to go there, and long time to get back!
And it is very boring! There is nothing todo in space! There is nothing there!
Also think about the... SPACE TERRORISM!!!
Quite the contrary. The human race will make no real progress in space until such a time as it no longer requires regulation.
Many science fiction authors have already covered this and in my opinion the philosophies are self evident to anybody
with an honest and realistic mind. The politics of frontiers change everything, it's what made America possible. The current
tide of neofascism exists only by dint of a few deranged maniacs who believe the planet as it exists today is small
enough to totally control. They are in for a shock, this time around, but maybe in another century or two we will get to the
position where it really is if we survive that long. At that point space travel will not be politically possible so we must
colonise and establish groups independent of Earth as soon as possible to escape ourselves. Space is the big one, it changes everything,
because it is effectively limitless in scale and resources. You cannot have power, as humans understand it, unless you have
a finite bounded arena. Without the ability to create artificial scarcity and impose power through the reach of your force you are reduced to what you really are in the universe, whether you are a mighty empire or a lonely individial - an insignificant blip in the cosmos. A wise spacefaring civillisation would never give it's citizens private space ships and a carte blanc to go colonising other planets, not unless they
understand the historical inevitability that the colonies will eventually rebel, fight wars with them to break free and eventually usurp their
homeworld. Space stations and even moon bases possible in this century will be very dependent on Earth, but by the time we get to that stage it's inevitable that humans will soon break free of their home world because space is not a place you can survive while dependent on a resource 20 light minutes away. Most people migrate or colonise not because they are drawn to new frontiers, but because they are trying to get away from the abuse, injustice and miserable limitations of their existing environment. In other words, for those who can't imagine a future human civilisation as anything other than a homogenous, connected, and centrally controlled "empire", your visions are as real as father christmas and the tooth fairy.
I think at some point there's a reasonable limit to what you can claim as "viable" airspace. As for the general airspace, those are already being regulated with "spaceports" already designated in the US. (And a lot others on pacific atolls, etc). Generally they're in areas devoid of commercial air travel and population density. I don't believe that at > 100 miles anyone can still claim dominance over that particular airspace. It just isn't practicle. If a country wants to monitor launches, etc. that needs to happen on its own. (Although, you'd see some coordination as you do today with national agencies - Russia launches a "weather sattelite" it tells us so we dont' assume its an ICBM.) But once something is in orbit? Doubtful. That's why I said international law applies as to the parent posts question about debris, environmental impact, etc. Just as though an oil slick can spead over internaltional waters to other countries, debris could break up and land across several borders. Now, as for your other point, I think tourism for the sake of tourism is worth it. Sure, its slow, small, underpowered, now, but so was airflight 100 years ago. It took 20 years or so after the first flight for stuff to really get going. Granted, we've been shooting shit into space for a while now, but never with a strong commercial sense of things. If you're in it to make money, you're going to try and lower costs. That means reusable vehicles, cheaper methods of propolsion, the works. Once the commercial companies have figured out how do do it a little more cheaply, you might eventually see some commercial applications in travel. Imagine if virgin can fly New York - Tokyo for $20000 a person in 2 hours. That's a viable enterprise. Cheaper lift technology might eventually lead to being able to economically research orbital power stations, orbital manufactuering, etc. All which could lead to viable economic enterprises in the future. Don't poo-poo a fantastic and exciting development in space travel and exploration (one that's stagnated in the past 25 years with Nasa and the space shuttle) just because it has humble beginnings. The Wright brothers flew for 12 seconds their first try. Pretty small potatoes, but a hell of a long way compared to everyone before them.
As long as our source of energy - usable for spacec rafts - is non-renewable, space tourism is a horrible waste of energy.
Are there any salvage laws yet? What is "abandoned" in space? Everything up there was at one point pretty darn valuable, just from the sheer launching costs let alone any tech it represents.
I would imagine that once private industry is up there all the time, that "space junk" will become a valuable resource and won't be allowed to just de orbit and burn up. They'll do something with it.
Yaaarrrr...Law ends with gravity, me bucko! I'll be out riding the solar wind guided by His Noodly Appendage. Ain't that right, Parroty Error? "Awwk, pieces of seven, pieces of seven"
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Virgin Galactic? Space tourism? Seems sombody have their heads too full of hot air. We are still barely able to get outside Earth's athmosphere; the galaxy and even interplanetary space are still decades away, at least as tourist resorts. Just think about it - have you ever been to one of those socalled 'luxury' resorts on this planet, where your room (which you are only going to sleep in) is equipped with a big kitchen, a bed that could sleep three people, a living room with two tvs etc etc; and everything is ridiculously expensive (it is a LUXURY resort, after all) - and you are far away from any kind of actual fun, so you're sort of cooped up in meaningless, useless luxury. That's when you realize what boredom can be. Now imagine how much fun it would be, being confined to what is basically a big sack of gas with absolutely nothing to do and REALLY nowhere to go.
In other news this morning, apparently Branson has offered Wm. Shatner a free trip... but he's too scared to go (unless they pay him...)
0 .html
eg. http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006410413,0
Ok, so maybe we should give the guy a break since he's 70-odd, but really if you got that far mightn't you just want to do that one last big thing whether it killed you or not?
On a related note, Anousheh Ansari is set to become the first female space tourist. She will be blasting off in 11 days. http://www.anoushehansari.com/
I find a bit of irony that a member of the Ansari family who contributed many of the millions for the contest to stimuate private space travel is jumping the gun and taking a conventional space flight. I cannot fault her for this. She's generously given millions already. At her age she is in her prime for space travel. If she had to wait 10 to 30 years for private orbital travel to become a reality, she may be too old to safely make the trip.
What's the intrinsic value of the Krebs cycle, eh? Probably worth your life, regardless of your willingness to pay.
But I think your actual point was correct, even if my out-of-context deconstruction is too.
"No generalization is worth a damn, and neither is this one." -- George Bernard Shaw
I know if it was me up there, no junk gets tossed! I keep about everything, you ought to see my worn out lawnmower collection, let alone ancient computers and other electronic gadgets. I even cut the cords off of really busted stuff and save those-hey, you never know when you might need a plug! My space station would look like sanford and space sons....
Your a niger!!