Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tourists To ISS Two At a Time Starting In 2012

Posted by kdawson on from the honeymoon-with-barf-bag dept.

Matt_dk writes "The US firm Space Adventures said on Friday it will be able to send two space tourists into orbit at once from 2012 onwards, on Soyuz spacecraft. 'We have been working on this project for a number of years,' said Sergey Kostenko, the head of the company's office in Russia. Each Soyuz will carry two tourists and a professional astronaut. One of the tourists will have to pass a year-and-a-half training course as a flight engineer. Space Adventures has been authorized by the Russian Federal Space Agency Roscosmos to select and contract candidates for space tourist trips." Meanwhile, the AP has a look back at the delays and disappointments in the commercial spaceflight industry since Burt Rutan captured the Ansari X Prize 5 years ago — no space company has yet announced a date for commercial availability.

69 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Two goes in, Three comes out! by conureman · · Score: 1

    Prepare to be modded to oblivion.

    --
    The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
  2. No company has yet.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    no space company has yet announced a date for commercial availability.

    According to the summary, Space Adventures just did.

    1. Re:No company has yet.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nowadays all we do is try to find cures for cancer, better batteries, and other boring things.

      Sure they're useful, but where's the excitement in it?

    2. Re:No company has yet.... by mirix · · Score: 1

      ancient history now. get off my lawn!

      --
      Sent from my PDP-11
    3. Re:No company has yet.... by murdocj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, it's too bad that the USA has fallen so far behind, now with Russian rovers exploring Mars, Chinese spacecraft making the first detailed inspection of Mercury, the Brazilians having sending a probe to Pluto... /sarcasm

    4. Re:No company has yet.... by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      That made me think... anybody remember when the USA used to actually pioneer anything, back when it used to innovate and do new things? Unless you're a member of the geriatric crowd you probably don't remember this at all.

      You got modded up for this? What do you define as a 'geriatric'? Ten years ago nobody had heard of Google. 15 years ago nobody had heard of Viagra. 20 years ago the internet was an novelty item that was little used outside of academia and the US Government. 25 years ago nobody outside of the military had any use for GPS. 30 years ago the personal computer was a novelty item that was priced out of reach for most households.

      Yes, I can see why you would bemoan the fact that the US no longer innovates or does new things.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:No company has yet.... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      What do you define as a 'geriatric'? Ten years ago nobody had heard of Google. 15 years ago nobody had heard of Viagra. 20 years ago the internet was an novelty item that was little used outside of academia and the US Government.

      So now us old folks can use Google on the Internet to go buy Viagra. The future is here and we're loving it! Go USA!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:No company has yet.... by lysergic.acid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Space Adventures is a U.S. company; they're just using the Russian space program to send clients into space. Nothing is really being pioneered here, not even by the Russians. They haven't designed a new launch vehicle. They haven't made space travel more affordable. They haven't made it significantly safer, either.

      That said, the Russian space program has had a better safety record. Also, they're probably a little less risk adverse, and a little more desperate for cash. So that's why it's the Russians who are sending billionaires into space.

      I think it's a good thing that NASA has the federal funding to focus on science rather than having to rent themselves out as a space taxi for the rich for funding. If private companies want to invest in space tourism, that's their prerogative. That's not what NASA was created for. If anything, they should stick to developing cutting-edge technology (which eventually gets passed down to the civilian sector after they've matured and decreased in cost) and leave the commercialization of space to the private sector.

      This is akin to renting out our cutting edge nuclear subs to the rich and famous to use as a weekend pleasure vessel. Yea, it's "pioneering" in the sense that it hasn't been done before, but it's not exactly an enviable achievement. Now, if Space Adventures had designed a spacecraft of their own specifically tailored to commercial space travel, making it economically viable and safe enough for civilian use (i.e. not having to spend a year training for a 10-day trip), then that would be a huge pioneering achievement.

      However, I just don't see that happening within the next decade unless some significant advances in space technology are made. It simply costs to much to put something into space. Short of the space elevator or some other revolutionary launch vehicle being developed, "space tourism" will remain a novelty for the super rich.

    7. Re:No company has yet.... by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      "Russian space program"
      "Desperate for cash"
      "[NASA] developing cutting-edge technology"
      "leave the commercialization of space to the private sector."
      "space elevator"

      yep, you've definitely been listening to the western propaganda. Let me just fix a few of these up here:

      1. It's Energia who is providing the flights, you know, a private corporation that sells flights on their rockets to anyone who will pay?
      2. They are "desperate for cash" in the exact same way any company with a product they want to sell is.
      3. NASA does indeed do some great research that occasionally makes it out of their little pork barrel and into the greater world, but not in rocketry.. their stuff is 1970s era technology compared to Energia's 60s era stuff, not a great leap forward.
      4. Private sector eh, like, say, Energia? Or do you mean like the COTS program? Which NASA is doing everything possible to smother when it comes to crew launch.
      5. Space elevator.. oh god, you're one them aren't you, you're one of them.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    8. Re:No company has yet.... by lysergic.acid · · Score: 1

      I think you're confused. S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation Energia is the manufacturer of most of the spacecraft and components used by Roscosmos. But it's the Russian Space Agency that's providing the transportation into space. It's also through the RKA that Space Adventures is able to book civilian flights to (the Russian part of) the ISS.

      I don't know what you're getting at with the rest of your post. It may help if you reply a comment in its entirety rather than randomly singling out words and phrases here and there. You'd also come off less troll-ish sticking to constructive arguments instead of making snide remarks.

      What is wrong with mentioning the space elevator anyway? It may not be feasible to construct in our lifetime, or ever, but at least there are people out there working on developing alternatives to conventional launch vehicles. I named the space elevator as an example as it's the most original alternative launch vehicle concept being toyed with by researchers right now to my knowledge. Obviously there aren't any truly viable alternatives to rockets at the moment (though Scaled Composites' air-launched rocket-powered glider is an interesting take on an old idea), otherwise we'd already be using them. But radical thinking is what got us into space in the first place. And even the space elevator isn't nearly as absurd as trying to build a commercial space tourism industry on half a century old technology that costs $60,000 per kilogram to put things into low earth orbit.

    9. Re:No company has yet.... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      I think it's a good thing that NASA has the federal funding to focus on science rather than having to rent themselves out as a space taxi for the rich for funding. If private companies want to invest in space tourism, that's their prerogative. That's not what NASA was created for. If anything, they should stick to developing cutting-edge technology (which eventually gets passed down to the civilian sector after they've matured and decreased in cost) and leave the commercialization of space to the private sector.

      Actually, I agree with much of what you say, with one exception. I would love to see the dems increase privatization increases for a couple of year. In particular, if NASA would spend another .5B on another round of COTs, we could get several human rated ships within 3 years (boeing and Scaled doing SS3).
      THe problem is that there needs to be other places besides NASA to make money; IOW, we need bigelow moving forward. The way to move them, is for us to buy several of their units and attach it to the ISS. If we buy a sundancer, followed by a BA-330, we could bump up ISS quickly and easily. In addition, it gets Bigelow started and primed so that in 2011, they are ready to go with several systems.
      Finally, we need a way to move systems around. The only way is with a tug. If we offer up several contracts for tugs, then we get the industry moving forward. The tugs can be used for a number of things: Sat. fixes; Cleaning up junk; Handling the ISS. BUT, the important one is that the tug would then be used to move systems to/from the moon.

      For less than a couple of billion dollars, we could shot for the moon by 2017 (maybe sooner).

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  3. Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And that's how you do it folks. Take a product that people are already climbing over themselves to pay deposits on, and then hype it some more, and back up that hype with an unrealistic schedule. When you go one year over that schedule, people might forgive you. When you go two years over people start wondering what the hell is taking so long. When you go three years over.. well, hello Duke Nukem Forever, can I have my deposit back please?

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uhhh... Virgin Galactic announced their service before they had even really started development on their spaceship. I think people understood pretty well there would be a delay as they develop, build and test a new spacecraft. And considering the virgin galactic trip costs 1% the price of a soyuz trip I would say they're in pretty different markets.

    2. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "People" understood nothing. There's still people *today* talking about Virgin Galactic like they're going to be doing orbital flight. In any case, the whole "Bigger Faster Better" aspect of SpaceShipTwo was a long time coming.. most people who put down their money thought they were going to get a flight on a vehicle identical to SpaceShipOne. Of course, since then the buzz has started to die off and crazy Will Whitehorn has been talking up the alternate uses for White Knight 2 should SpaceShipTwo never fly - which is great if you're trying to attract investors, but terrible if you want to stem the tide of people asking for their deposits back.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      If you put down a $20k deposit without reading the description "Sub-Orbital flight of about 10 minutes" expecting a multi-day orbital flight then you deserve whatever comes your way in life.

    4. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Also Virgin Galactic has no investors, it's personally funded by Richard Branson so they have nobody to please or string along.

    5. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Interesting

      5 years ago people were willing to pay $200k for a ride on SpaceShipOne.. there was a line of them out the door. They refused. Today, people have had 5 years to think about it and they're asking "Gee, what do I get for my $200k?" and now they're not really interested anymore. That's how you kill a market.. gobble up all the capital so you can make the only product, hype the hell out of the product, then not be ready when people come banging on your door. VG have openly said that people are no longer interested in their flights. Even if they were to fly next year (and I doubt they will fly for many years yet), there's likely to be less customers than they need to turn a profit.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    6. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      I think people understood pretty well there would be a delay as they develop, build and test a new spacecraft.

      Definitely. After all, what private citizen doesn't know more about Space Tourism Project Management than that Branson guy? Clearly, no one would take Branson's words at face value, expecting him to have done his homework and been honest about the results.

    7. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Funny

      Go research that and come back when you realize how much of an idiot you are.

      Oh, and enjoy the fact that you can't delete your comment.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    8. Re:Virgin Galactic has lost the buzz by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hm, I wonder why that is? Surely it didn't have anything to do with the financial meltdown. Surely it wasn't because all the CEOs with millions invested in various stocks realized that the stocks were failing? Basically, Virgin Galactic's market is CEOs or other wealthy people with cash to burn who want to experience weightlessness in space. When most of them realized they can't afford the million dollar bonus this year, Virgin Galactic's market kinda dried up.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  4. Transformation in Progress by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds like the first space hotel is up there already; it just doesn't know it yet.

    --
    Demented But Determined.
    1. Re:Transformation in Progress by MRe_nl · · Score: 1

      ISS: I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    2. Re:Transformation in Progress by NoYob · · Score: 1
      Not interested until they have the "red light", gambling, bar, and the Tony Benet modules added.

      Having a cosmonaut give me some cheap vodka, then betting me that he can give a great blow job and doing it while singing on of Benet's hits doesn't count.

      --
      It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
    3. Re:Transformation in Progress by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1, Troll

      I hope they rip the tourists off ... like, make them pay three/four times the full costs of the travel, and invest the rest into research, extensions, repairs, etc.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  5. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The spaceflight participants are trained to do the same job as the cosmonauts do. Why do you care if the trained monkey is a Russian government employee or a person who has paid for his own seat? Energia is a private corporation who provide human launch services to the Russian government (and soon the US government), if they want to sell the extra soyuz seat to the highest bidder, what concern of yours is it?

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  6. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Somebody needs a hug ...

  7. Re:Two goes in, Three comes out! by germansausage · · Score: 1

    Stealth Godwin Sig - Sehr Gut!

  8. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by mill3d · · Score: 3, Funny

    One could also ramp up $35 mil. in debt and become the first bankrupt pauper to make it to space...

    --
    Nothing is enough for whom enough is too little - Confucius
  9. Re:Two goes in, Three comes out! by conureman · · Score: 1

    I change sigs often, this one fit my Godwin first post yesterday. It drew a parallel with a hero of the ditto-heads, so last I checked it was a troll again.

    --
    The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
  10. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    Let's turn ISS into Disneyland in space instead.

    Personally I would prefer hookers and blackjack. It worked for the internet.

    We can run a competition to choose who gets to go up there and dress up as a fucking mouse.

    Kind of a reverse strip poker. The loser gets to put on the "Minnie" costume, and everybody else gets a condom.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  11. Re:Finally! I can join the Orbit-High club by voss · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dont laugh so fast...Some rich nerdy guy can buy a seat for himself and some hot chick prescreened
    not to have space sickness.

    For the small, small price of 40 million dollars he can make himself a legend.

  12. Re:It's about time siamese twins were allowed. by mysidia · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes, but they will have to pay for two seats..

  13. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by syousef · · Score: 1

    The spaceflight participants are trained to do the same job as the cosmonauts do. Why do you care if the trained monkey is a Russian government employee or a person who has paid for his own seat? Energia is a private corporation who provide human launch services to the Russian government (and soon the US government), if they want to sell the extra soyuz seat to the highest bidder, what concern of yours is it?

    The trouble with mixing private enterprise and public science is that private enterprise will push for only immediately "profitable" experiments to be done, and will use up the public funds securing their own profit. Meanwhile any long term hard core science without a payoff in the next quarter or two doesn't happen because the public funds have dried up and private corporations don't do anything that won't produce profit.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  14. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What part of this are you not understanding? The ISS does the science right? They need humans up there to follow instructions and do the busy work because putting robotic arms up there would be just too hard (or something). Basically anyone can do it.. you don't need to be a fighter pilot or a superman, you just have to have the training. So who gets the training? The hand picked military man? Or the guy who shows up and says "I'll pay you $30 million if you teach me how to do it". Kinda a no brainer.. you send the guy who is offering to pay you rather than the guy who is demanding a pay check. Duh.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  15. My kind of spacestation by CarpetShark · · Score: 2, Funny

    We can run a competition to choose who gets to go up there and dress up as a fucking mouse.

    Haven't quite made up my mind yet, but my vote's definitely going to either Jessica Alba, or Scarlett Johansson.

  16. Sooo.... by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So if I buy a ticket and perform the tasks of a flight engineer, do I get a discount?

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    1. Re:Sooo.... by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      You just want to press all the buttons to see what happens and that's not the task of a flight engineer :-)

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    2. Re:Sooo.... by Kumiorava · · Score: 1

      You pay extra for the training and privilege of getting flight engineer diploma.

    3. Re:Sooo.... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Sure we'll discount you the salary of a soviet officer for the time you're on the flight. $5k.

      $30m - $5k = $30m. Check please!

  17. The world's gonna end anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't know why anyone is making plans beyond 2012, we all what is coming...

    1. Re:The world's gonna end anyway by kimvette · · Score: 1

      they accidentally the whole thing?

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    2. Re:The world's gonna end anyway by selven · · Score: 1

      The Iraq War and the bailouts are actually cover for the trillions of dollars being spent trying to get to Pluto, where those three years we have left will be equivalent to six centuries.

    3. Re:The world's gonna end anyway by gmuslera · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe a clue is that those space tourists could be Adam Sandler and Eve.

  18. The hand picked military man works for the SGC by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 2, Funny

    The hand picked military man works for the SGC and so they have the room to do this as the ISS is for show.

  19. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggghhhhhhhhhhh.. I tell ya. Talking to morons on Slashdot is tiring.

    They do the same thing as the cosmonauts.

    Get it through your thick skull.. Christ.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  20. Re:Finally! I can join the Orbit-High club by vawarayer · · Score: 1

    It's funny you mention it, because some 'rich Guy' is visiting ISS as we chat.

    Guy Laliberté is a French-Canadian entrepreneur (...)

    (from Quebec, for those who care)

    From Wikipedia

  21. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by Kumiorava · · Score: 1

    I believe the number of people each country can send to ISS is established in the contracts between the participating countries. NASA personnel may prefer to do experiments that prepare NASA for long duration space flight, ESA might be just happy to get there, Russian space program seems to be happy to serve vodka on space station to highest bidder. I'm not saying any of these goals are wrong, but maybe Russians just believe that this tourism experiment is more important/beneficial than cultivating bean sprouts. They did run MIR for many years and now are stepping into next level of space travel.

  22. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    Maybe you should try an "In Soviet Russia" joke....

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  23. Re:Rockets: Dangerous, Primitive and Expensive by jamstar7 · · Score: 1
    Just what we need, physics as wishful thinking.

    I read through that link a bit. What does Savain think keeps the Solar System in motion? Or does it start and stop at a whim?

    --
    Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  24. Re:Two goes in, Three comes out! by B00KER · · Score: 1

    By 2012 you will be death.

  25. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by rohan972 · · Score: 1

    I'm not saying any of these goals are wrong, but maybe Russians just believe that this tourism experiment is more important/beneficial than cultivating bean sprouts.

    What do you think they're going to do with the bean sprouts? It'll be the most expensive salad those tourists have ever had.

    --
    http://marriedmansexlife.com/
  26. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by rockNme2349 · · Score: 1

    It's the happiest place orbiting earth!

    --
    Sewage Treatment Facilities - "Our duty is clear."
  27. Maybe there are fewer lawyers in Russia by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

    and/or space flight insurance is cheaper from those machines at the spaceport.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  28. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  29. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by syousef · · Score: 1

    What part of this are you not understanding? The ISS does the science right? They need humans up there to follow instructions

    What the fuck part are you not understanding, you condescending prat? If you bring in commercial interests they become more important and the same science doesn't get done.

    The hand picked military man? Or the guy who shows up and says "I'll pay you $30 million if you teach me how to do it". Kinda a no brainer.. you send the guy who is offering to pay you rather than the guy who is demanding a pay check. Duh.

    Yes, if your concern is money and not science, you send the barely trained fucker who has leverage because they can pull out their $30 million, and you do the science HE'S interested in. Not the paid professional scientist (military or otherwise) who has dedicated their life to it. Believe it or not there is science to be done that requires more than a couple of months of training. Believe it or not science is complex and a paid professional is going to do a better job than an interested fucking tourist.

    FUCK! Slashdot gives me the shits lately. Full of nothing but trolls and modding based on popularity rather than truth or common sense.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  30. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dude, no-one is talking about sending a scientist up there, so you can stop your whining. Your choice is either:

    * two army brats and an empty seat; or
    * two army brats and a paying third pair of hands.

    There's no choice of:

    * three ivy league trained professors

    Know how many geologists the US sent to the Moon? One, and it was on the last mission. For the foreseeable future, especially since the shuttle is being retired, science in space remains a "pack it tight and make your handling instructions simple, and you might get it back in one piece if the parachutes open".

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  31. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by syousef · · Score: 1

    Dude, no-one is talking about sending a scientist up there

    Dude, that's the problem. Perhaps if you stop smoking weed DUDE and start actually researching what you're talking about...


    There's no choice of:
    * three ivy league trained professors

    Dude, Google NASA astronaut PHD

    Guess what we're not living in the fucking 1960s. Lots of NASA astronauts have degrees. DUDE.

    For the foreseeable future, especially since the shuttle is being retired, science in space remains a "pack it tight and make your handling instructions simple, and you might get it back in one piece if the parachutes open".

    Yeah because science is something you can train a monkey to do, right? Experiments that require thought are too boring. We need fun parks and casinos in space.

    Your attitude is a big part of what's wrong with space exploration.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  32. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by syousef · · Score: 1

    Given that no practical, useful scientific knowledge has emerged from the ISS yet, giving it over to the commercial interests suits me just fine. Explain, exactly, why scientists should be entitled to taxpayer support for essentially nothing but to indulge their own curiosity?

    How fucking practical do you think playing with magnets and electricity looked before there was wide spread use of either? What about pressure boilers before the steam engine. The fucking computer you're using right now is provided courtesy of people who did "essentially nothing but to indulge their own curiousity". You prefer fun parks and casinos. Fine. Leave the scientific community out of it.

    Let them pay for their own circle-jerk.

    Translation: I'd rather the rich go into space than any real science get done.

    The real circle jerk is building a space station for billions and then using it as a fun park for the rich with an entry fee of a few million.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  33. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by Nivag064 · · Score: 1

    I've seen the position after

    1. f3 e5
    2. g4 Qh4 mate

    At school when I was 17 I ran the chess club, a 13ryr old came up and asked if this was checkmate...

    Often called fool's mate for some reason! :-)

  34. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    Sigh. Reality, you should look into it sometime.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  35. Private spaceflight is a joke by damburger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I find it intensely amusing that the only commercial space flight companies that can actually put people into space for money, are the ones who outsource the actual business of launching rockets to a foreign government, using equipment designed by communists.

    To me it has exposed serious weaknesses in the corporate model of organization. Space travel just doesn't seem like something they can do, at all, whilst larger governments have been doing it competently for years. Sure, there are corporate contractors for government funded space missions, but they are kept on a very tight leash. It could be that higher-level organization is not something you can get from institutions built around artificially inflated self interest.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
  36. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    The game in my sig was actually played in a tournament though.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  37. salmonella vaccine for starters by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    The coming Salmonella Vaccine was all based on what was learned in space. Without that knowledge, then the vaccine would not have happened. Next.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:salmonella vaccine for starters by HanzoSpam · · Score: 1

      Given the vaccine was only necessary because salmonella is an only an issue of consequence in space travel, isn't that kind of begging the question? I mean, this is an infection that kills maybe 30 people a year on earth. Considering what the cost of running the ISS is, don't you think there are more pressing medical issues to spend that kind of money on?

      --

      Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
    2. Re:salmonella vaccine for starters by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      isn't that kind of begging the question? I mean, this is an infection that kills maybe 30 people a year on earth.
      I would guess that at least 30 ppl a year die JUST in America JUST from eating EGGS that were infected with salmonella. Throw in bad chicken (kept too long in freezer; yes, salmonella grows slowly on chicken in freezer; don't believe it? Put a black light on a chiken that has in the freezer for about years; the glow is salmonella) and we probaby jump that to at least 100 or even 1000. Around the world, it is certainly MUCH MUCH higher.

      In addition, in terms of dollars spent for health care with it, it is one of the larger ones. Get salmonella and dehydration becomes a real issue in third-world nations. Many of the children that die in these nations will die from dehydration, but it is unknown from what disease. Salmonella is one of those.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  38. Re:Glad we can provide a new fun park for the rich by jolyonr · · Score: 1

    They should have sent a poet

    --


    Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
  39. Sex, plain and simple by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

    I have $10 that says the first pair up tries to have sex. No seriously. Everyone has been curious about the physics and nature of it in zero-G I got $10 that says that a couple is going up there and a whole lot of note taking going on. I'd even pop an extra $5 one that a university or two will even chip in.

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
  40. There's a reason for this by sean.peters · · Score: 1

    It's not that private companies are inherently incapable of doing space travel. The fact is that space travel simply isn't profitable, and therefore, there's no reason for private companies to do it. This is also why the various prize programs to encourage space technology development are not really having that much of an impact. The companies with the most experience with this kind of thing (your Boeings, Lockheeds, etc) have already figured out the cost/benefit situation here, and have rationally decided not to bother. Until someone can figure out how space can be made profitable, all the X prizes in the world aren't going to have much of an effect. And ironically, if we do solve the profitability problem, you wouldn't need the X prize any more.

    1. Re:There's a reason for this by damburger · · Score: 1

      It's not that private companies are inherently incapable of doing space travel. The fact is that space travel simply isn't profitable, and therefore, there's no reason for private companies to do it.

      That is pretty damn funny.

      Basically, its "I COULD climb that tree any time I want to, I just don't want to!". Nothing other than blind faith in the 'invisible hand' or some such nonsense could convince you that private enterprise is capable of space flight.

      Ironically, you've already indicated the reason why; corporations can only respond to simply profit margins. If something is a) worthwhile and b) has a worth that can't be represented monetarily then private enterprise is lost.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?