Scientists, Not Just Tourists, Are Getting Tickets to Ride Into Suborbital Space

"Science, perhaps even more than tourism (free reg. may be required to read), could turn out to be big business for Virgin Galactic and other companies that are aiming to provide short rides above the 62-mile altitude that marks the official entry into outer space, eventually on a daily basis." Virgin is looking at ticket prices in the $200,000 range, which is peanuts compared to the millions some scientific space expeditions can cost, even for brief experiments. And if you don't even have *that* much in your research budget, John Carmack has been touting $105,000 space flights for nearly a year now, and Xcor Aerospace has been taking $95,000 space ride reservations since 2008. It looks like the biggest customer for short space flights for scientific experiments so far is the Southwest Research Institute, but many others are lining up, especially since, the article quotes one scientist as saying, “It’s almost impossible to get research on the space station at the moment." Of course, none of these commercial space ventures has actually carried any paying passengers into space yet, but it's only a matter of time before some of them do.

Comments

Re:What sort of experiments?

[Nyeerrmm]

Plenty of experiments rely on microgravity -- as an aerospace engineer most of my experience has been in testing devices for use in space, but I know theres a lot of biology and materials work done as well.

There is certainly a market. Consider that Zero G Corp and the old Vomet Comet got plenty of research done, and there you were stuck with less than a minute of microgravity at a time. Suborbital flights are a midpoint between parabolic flights and orbital flight both in terms of cost and time.

Also, I know that another point of research that there's a lot of interest in isn't so much for the microgravity environment, but that the vehicles are travelling through the least understood parts of the atmosphere. This provides a great opportunity to learn about the upper atmosphere.

Re:Huge difference between these and low orbit

[DerekLyons]

The earlier SpaceShipOne was derivative of the Bell X-15.

Other than having a completely different engine, completely different electronics, completely different thermal protection, completely different aerodynamics, completely different... Well, you get the picture. SS1 is no more 'derived' from the X-15 than my PC is 'derived' from the Difference Engine. And the same goes for your other 'derivations' - how can the SS1 be 'derived' from the X-15, but the aerodynamically identical SS2 be 'derived' from the X-20, which is radically different from the X-15?
 

The rocket plane design is cheap, but I'm not sure it's possible to actually get the necessary altitude with it. I don't know if the X-20 would've gotten that altitude or not, but Scaled Composite's estimate of 110km seems more sane given their design carries 7 more people than the X-20.

The Space Shuttle reaches it's designed orbital altitude - what makes you think the X-20 wouldn't have been able to?
 

But if nothing else, it goes to show that Germany had some damn fine rocket engineers in the 1940s.

For the 1940's, yeah. But they're no more responsible for the current craft than James Watt is for nuclear power plant.