Slashdot Mirror
John Carmack To Cut Space Tourism Prices 50%
An anonymous reader writes "Looks like John Carmack, through Armadillo Aerospace, will be battling Burt Rutan and Richard Branson to make space travel affordable. From the article: 'Space Adventures is going to use an Armadillo Technologies rocket to launch amateur astronauts 62 miles into the sky. Nothing new, except that they will do it at half the price of Virgin Galactic's ticket, and in a real rocket!' Perhaps I'll visit space, after all."
As soon as I sell my Fijian island.
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
You're paying for a one-way ticket to go up into space. Coming down from space will be free.
Most of the difficulty lies in accelerating up to orbit and decelerating from it. Currently, only Space Adventures is offering that by reserving seats on Soyuz spacecraft. Sub-orbital shots require neither powerful rockets nor massive heat-shielding.
Do people still need the "early adopter" concept explained to them? We live in a technological society where new gadgets and experiences come onto the market all the time. The early adopters pay top dollar for them, this attracts competitors, and the price starts to drop.
How we know is more important than what we know.
I linked to this is a previous slashdot submission, but for the curious you can see video of some of Armadillo's launches in the past year here:
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/Gallery/Videos
Youtube version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsdpB6UmrAw
There was also a rather cool news update back in January describing in great detail what they've been up to for the prior 8+ months: http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=369
Also, I disagree with the summary/gizmodo's claim that Armadillo has a "real" rocket while SpaceShipTwo isn't a real rocket. Armadillo has a VTVL (vertical take-off, vertical landing) while Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo is an air-launched HTVL (horizontal take-off, vertical landing). Both are "real" rockets.
Finally, NASA recently put out a request for proposals for a testbed for lunar lander demonstrations, which I think will be right up Armadillo's alley. They'll probably be competing with companies like Blue Origin, Masten Space Systems (Lunar Lander Challenge winner, currently working on their "Xogdor the Meltinator" vehicle), and Unreasonable Rocket:
http://spaceprizes.blogspot.com/2010/05/shoulda-had-tfftb-prize.html
ETDD is for smaller technology development and demonstration projects. Expected subjects for ETDD include in situ resource utilization, autonomous precision landing, advanced in-space propulsion, closed-loop life support systems, advanced EVA, radiation shielding, human-robotic interfaces, efficient space power systems, EDL (entry, descent, and landing) technologies, high-performance materials and structures, and participatory exploration.
The new ETDD RFI is for several technology demonstrations. The subjects of these demonstrations include:
* In-Situ Resource Utilization: This is to demonstrate a prototype ISRU system in a vacuum chamber that can simulate lunar temperatures and that can contain lunar simulant. Later, there would be a flight demonstration at the lunar surface on a robotic precursor mission. Of course this plan brings to mind several lunar space prizes: the Regolith Excavation Challenge, the MoonROx Challenge, and the Google Lunar X PRIZE.
* High-Power Electric Propulsion System for human spaceflight
* Human Exploration Telerobotics: This involves ISS-to-ground telerobotics, ground-to-ISS telerobotics, and large-scale participatory exploration
* Fission Power Systems Technology
* Autonomous Precision Landing: This involves demonstrations on Earth of autonomous landing and hazard avoidance technologies. The long-range plan is to use the technology on a robotic lander on the Moon or other large body. The technology "Must be capable of flying on a variety of lunar lander precursor missions". The two major parts of this demonstration are the Terrestrial Free Flyer Test Bed and the Hazard Detection System.
The Terrestrial Free Flyer Test Bed deserves special attention. This test bed needs to be able to carry 100 kg of sensor/electronics payload as well as supporting mass for other subsystems, fly up to 1 km, translate horizontally, land at various angles ending in the last 30-50 meters with vertical landing, and fly for at least 210 seconds with the payload. I didn't see anything in the RFI about propulsion, but I imagine rocket-powered vehicles would have a bit of an edge.
The regulations - by the FAA's Office of Space Transportation (AST) - are already in place, and perfectly manageable. They asked John (and everyone else in the industry) for input on developing them, with a mind for both flight participant safety and safety of people on the ground.
Sales tax would seem to apply as well, as well as federal corporate income tax.
Are you under the impression that they'd tax it more than normal business transactions?
An integer rocket.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
No, 5 minutes seems about right to me...
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Doesn't Mark Shuttleworth feel like a sucker now?
No, because Mark went into orbit in a fair dinkum Russian spacecraft, which he got to fly (partly) himself. The vehicle being discussed here won't go into orbit.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
NASA isn't doing "tourism", it's doing science. A big part of what it does is continuous improvement and modification of the mission capabilities of their systems. These guys won't be able to afford that. They'll have to do one or two rounds of refinement then lock it in place for several dozen "missions" in order to break even, because if they don't break even, they go bankrupt and stop flying. NASA breaks even by getting the science done, wowing the taxpayers, and getting approved for another year of funding.
BTW, NASA invented almost all of the stuff that these guys are now using, but these guys don't have to pay NASA a nickel in royalties. If they did, these tourist flights would be an order of magnitude costlier. NASA's successes paid for Carmack's profit projections.
Doesn't Mark Shuttleworth feel like a sucker now?
A quick name change to Mark Rocketworth will change that, no prob.
If you think those industries are unregulated, then I would like to see what you consider to be regulated. I mean, once you have governmental control over the money supply, how much a bank can and cannot loan, etc., it becomes pretty hard to call it unregulated. Poorly regulated, perhaps, but not at all left to its own devices.
SSC
Srs face now: This is something that annoys me no end. Just like you'll never meet someone on the internet who doesn't have at least a 9 inch cock, and still thinks it could be an inch or two bigger, every time people talk about endurance they always say "20 minutes is still too quick, you have to last at least an hour!". That's bullshit. On the first count, anyone over about 6" who's been with more than one or two women will know that sometimes, more than 6 inches just. won't. fit. Anyone who says they're "9 inches and that all the bitches love it" is either 5" or less, or a virgin. On the second count, no matter how much lube you use, you're going to start chafing after about 15-20 minutes unless you're either fully tantric or you're both on IRC at the same time or something, and forget to make with the thrusting.
The only correct answer is "if it's big enough that she couldn't take any more, without being too big and hurting her, and if it lasts long enough for her to get off a couple of times, but not long enough to chafe, then you're doing it right."
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.