Slashdot Mirror


Space Planes to Meet 'Big Demand' For Tourism

Mab_Mass writes "Widespread space tourism is getting closer to reality, reports the BBC. In fact, Aerospace company EADS sees that sector of the tourism market being so lucrative that it will need a 'production line' of rockets to satisfy the needs of rich travelers. '[EAD's] market assessment suggests there would be 15,000 people a year prepared to part with some 200,000 euros (£160,000) for the ride of a lifetime. [EADS subsidiary] Astrium anticipates it be will be producing about 10 planes a year.'"

9 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Attract thrill seekers with the mundane? by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to travel to Hawaii for vacation a lot. This was back in the old days before Waikiki was this huge tourist development. Back then those of us who ventured that far for vacation were greeted with island hospitality and lush greenery and a "get-back-to-nature" type of laid-backedness that was desperately missing from mainland life.

    Unfortunately, they found that they could make more money by attracting more visitors. And they did. But in the process they built tons of highrise hotels and turned quiet surftown Waikiki into the bustling tourist trap it now is. In order to attract more visitors, they destroyed the reason to be a visitor in the first place.

    I'm sure someone will want to ride an over-priced airplane comfortably into space. But I'm not sure that those people are the same ones who would shell out millions to fly in today's ramshackle space carts.

    1. Re:Attract thrill seekers with the mundane? by fantomas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Has it crossed your mind that you might have been the people that 'ruined' Waikiki?

      I don't understand the moral superiority that some people have when they declare it's ok for them to visit places, but not other people. A bit like people who insist on calling themselves "travellers" rather than "tourists". You're all outsiders visiting a place. Perhaps if you and your friends hadn't visited Waikiki a local guy (or another outsider) wouldn't have had the brainwave to throw up the first highrise hotel. By you going there such folks realised more money could be made.

      I'm not necessarily saying it's a good or bad thing you or other people visit out of the way places (in many cases locals might be happy for people to visit and spend money) but I question this moral high ground angle that somehow your actions were positive whereas everybody else's visit is negative. Seems like snobbery to me.

  2. I hope they look like DC-8s by __aavhli5779 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I want to visit some volcanoes

  3. Nice first step by TFer_Atvar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a good first step, but none of the plans mentioned in the story really advance anything. They're basically glorified Vomit Comets with no ability to orbit, which would really be a stepping stone to things further out. After all, once you're out of the gravity well, you're halfway to anywhere else in the solar system. I guess the best hope is that the number of "spaceplane" providers will compete against each other for new perks, thus pushing someone to provide a true orbital experience.

  4. Remember the Concorde by SystemFault · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Concorde SST had massive government subsidies from both Britain and France and because of lack of demand still couldn't produce a decent return on investment Well, other than being a jobs program.

    And yet any ticket for a near future spaceplane will likely cost a hundred times more than did a Concorde seat. Increases in fuel costs might make it even more expensive than that. And just think of the even more stringent security screening bullshit passengers will have to endure.

    Summary: Show me a commercially viable SST first. Then we can talk about a spaceplane that's not a welfare program for the aerospace industry.

    1. Re:Remember the Concorde by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The Concorde SST had massive government subsidies from both Britain and France and because of lack of demand still couldn't produce a decent return on investment Well, other than being a jobs program.

      Occasionally it's just nice to see something was done purely as a technical achivement rather than putting a financial value on it - we British can be proud for inventing things like the jet engine and Concorde (with the French) just like the Yanks can be proud for getting the first man on the moon.

      Sometimes it's nice to see the bean counters in suits being totally ignored and just seeing something done "because it's there".

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  5. Don't go on a roller coaster then... by afc_wimbledon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Some of them pull up to 6 gees, and all they have is a height restriction and warning notice! Yes, it's for a shorter time, but 4.5 gees seems high - ISTR the STS only gets up to 3.5 gees.

  6. Re:Not to ruin the ride.. by TFer_Atvar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The sorts of G-forces expected on the ride will be less than those experienced on many modern rollercoasters. Granted, the G-forces onboard a spaceplane might be a bit longer in duration, but until we have details on the mission profile, it's difficult to tell. You might end up getting greater G-forces from some of the more extreme rollercoasters out there, and given the physical fitness of a lot of roller coaster riders, I wouldn't worry too much.

  7. Re:Safety by Ngarrang · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think safety concerns are the biggest issue. What happens when the first crash happens. I think this was said when the car, train and airplane were first built. Safety is always an issue and crashes will eventually happen to ANY form of transport. That is no reason not to march forward, though.
    --
    Bearded Dragon