ok. but i missed the part where you stated what you would actually cut to keep NASA funding intact...
..the craft got a stronger engine for the second flight. With 3000 ppl as likely customers for a trip to space at a 200k price point, this looks like a nice beginning. I hope they build a bigger SS2. Who will make the engines and components?
Can't get too much bigger because it has to remain small enough to be carried aloft and dropped by the mother aircraft. But it will probably have to get somewhat bigger since it only carried the weight equivalent to three people and not actually three people - and therefore not the extra seating space, environmental systems and capacity, etc.
Yea, I bet it is IMPOSSIBLE to use a bigger launchcraft. Just impossible.... What about using a 747 or a B52? Would those crafts be powerful enough, or am I just smoking some mush? Probably a BIG problem for Branson to buy a 747 for the purpose of launching a new industry with USD 600 mln rev potential counting only the est customers at the current price point. I mean Branson does not really have that much experience with aviation and flying and that sorta things, now does he? A moron he is, and a rich moron, yeah!!
Frankly I don't know WHAT you might be smoking, but you definitely should stop it. If you reread the earlier post, I said that the SS1 module can't get too much bigger (meaning that it's scalability is not unlimited). I didn't say it couldn't get ANY bigger. Sure, they can more than likely rig a 747 to carry a larger module. The Air Force was launching X-planes from 747s decades ago. But we were talking about the likelihood of a future SS1 derivative replacing current NASA vehicle capabilities. The point I was making was that since SS1 only carried the weight of extra passengers but wasn't equipped or sized to carry everything necessary to actually carry the extra bodies (let alone any meaningful cargo), that the overall design will likely reach the size limit of a 747 launched craft will allow before it can be scaled to a practical industrial size usable for more than "personal experience" flights.
Haha.. I am a non-smoker. OK, thanks for the input. I sometimes have a sharp tounge, hope you're not offended. This just shows why ET should have an 'investment opp' discussion forum, I hate to be in 'chit chat' chatting about this interesting opp, especially since I started this thread in hope of discussing the launch into space as a commercial opportunity and an investment opp (like a long term growth-stock opportunity). (I thought that was clearly indicated early on in the thread, but I may be mistaken). Thanks to Burtakus for sharing some of his insights (I learned something). I was hoping the 'chit chat' about the 'glory of NASA' was over and done with (ppl here seem to have forgotten the role of i.e. the USSR in the race to space - who was the first man in space, or was it in orbit? Gagasomething? And the first dog in space was Leika, not Santas Little Helper if I recollect correctly).
In the spirit of private enterprize and space-tourism: I'm talking about the decently sized space-tourism market. I'd like to see an SS2, however strange and different-looking, carry like 5 or 10 times the no of ppl of SS1, meaning 15-30 passengers. I don't see the big technical problems with that (although my background is not in the sciences, haha ). Scalability: build a bigger hull, have spacedev build an engine 10 times as strong as the current one by means of some fresh investments or something, and put maybe 2 or 3 of them engines into the craft if you're scared of not reaching space and don't have the scientists to do the calculations . Carrying the 'SS2' to a decent altitude should not be a problem, maybe with a larger mother-craft, and neither should reaching space. Hope this makes sense, I'm just trying to predict the future. LOL.
an update: http://www.janes.com/aerospace/civil/news/misc/janes060620_1_n.shtml 20 June 2006 Space tourism: ready for the masses? By Kimberley Ebner, Janeâs Space Directory Editorial Researcher According to Will Whitehorn, president of Virgin Galactic, and Christopher Faranetta, vice-president of Space Adventuresâ Orbital Space Flight Programme, space will officially be opened to the mass tourism business as early as 2008, when the first commercial passengers are piloted into suborbital space for what will probably be the ride of their lives. Both spaceflight company executives spoke, along with other space industry professionals, at a Space Tourism event held at the Royal Aeronautical Societyâs (RAeS) London Headquarters earlier this month. Space Adventures is a veteran in the space tourism industry, already having sent three affluent individuals, since 2001, to the International Space Station (ISS) aboard Russian Soyuz craft; the firm has scheduled two more participants, as well as a back-up, to complete the necessary training in Star City, Russia for further journeys to the station. Virgin Galactic is establishing itself in the space tourism industry as well as in the suborbital spacecraft development field. Galactic partnered with Ansari X Prize winner Burt Rutan and his company Scaled Composites in 2005, to form The Spaceship Company, which will build suborbital craft and provide the ships to Virgin Galactic to use as some of the first vehicles to carry paying passengers into suborbital space. Incredible Adventures, a booking and marketing agency for extreme activities, also has been engaged in the space tourism business for some time. The company already has several yearsâ experience in organising MiG flights for its customers and now offers a variety of space-related adventures, including bookings for future suborbital flights. Jane Reifert, Incredible Adventuresâ president, claims that space tourism has been around for many years already. Customers can experience simulated weightlessness in a MiG-25, as well as in a modified B-727 conducting parabolic flight manoeuvres, operated by the Zero-G Company in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. But is an orbital or suborbital journey affordable or even desirable for many typical individuals? Will space travel be a real possibility for the masses in the near future? Futron Corporation, in 2002, released a Space Tourism Market Study based upon data received during a survey conducted by Futronâs project partner, Zogby International. The study includes both orbital and suborbital travel data as well as forecasts for future commercial space travel demand. Individuals polled included only those with a net worth of USD1 million plus, or an annual income of USD250,000 or more. Janice Starzyk, programme manager for Futronâs Space and Telecommunications Division, presented some new data at the RAeS event, but stated that although there was interest in completely updating the market study, it will be difficult to do considering the participation by affluent individuals that a realistic study requires, as well as the expenses involved in conducting the survey and subsequent market analyses. The Futron study predicts that space tourism could become a competitive, thriving business. By 2021 it is possible that up to 14,000 passengers annually could book suborbital flights and the industry could be taking in over USD700 million. Orbital passengers may increase to 60 per year and generate over USD300 million in revenue during the same time frame. Space Adventures is now charging USD102,000 to pre-book a suborbital flight to depart when the trips become available in about two years. Virgin Galactic expects to charge about USD200,000 for its first suborbital flights. However, Futron projects that prices will decrease gradually after the first three years of commercial service, and as demand increases, the passenger flight fee could fall to USD50,000 by 2021. The Futron study found that public interest in space travel increased when the price of an orbital trip dropped significantly, as well as when training times were markedly decreased for orbital space travel. Space Adventures presently charges USD20 million for a journey to the ISS. The six-month training time currently required for orbital trips, endured by the likes of multimillionaires Dennis Tito, Mark Shuttleworth, Greg Olsen, and future spaceflight participants Daisuke Enomoto, Anousheh Ansari and Charles Simonyi, could eventually be reduced to a month or more. To prepare a participant for a suborbital flight time of approximately one to two hours, Space Adventuresâ, Virgin Galacticâs and Incredible Adventuresâ training duration targets will be approximately one week or less. Training is considered part of the space tourist experience, but importantly addresses flight readiness requirements and passenger safety concerns. The space tourism business does not have its head entirely in the clouds. Besides Futronâs market study, which the industry has taken on board to help make a sound business case for space tourism, space tourism professionals are obliged to investigate such down-to-earth topics as space vehicle and passenger insurance; space law and regulations; environmental impact concerns; and passenger medical and fitness screening processes. Safety and adherence to the law are top priorities for the space tourism industry now and will continue to be so. Both Space Adventures and Virgin Galactic plan to engage in rigorous vehicle testing previous to any passengers boarding commercial craft. An accident during the industryâs infancy could reverberate for many years and industry professionals seem eager to avoid episodes like NASAâs Challenger and Columbia tragedies. Faranetta and Whitehorn agreed that both Space Adventures and Virgin Galactic vessels would make at least 100 flights before conducting any passenger excursions. Of course, a certain amount of risk will always be involved in spaceflight, as it is in commercial air travel. Although Space Adventures, Virgin Galactic and Incredible Adventures are all offering to sell seats for suborbital flights departing within the next few years, each company will rely upon various reusable launch vehicle technology, operators and spaceport locations. Space Adventures is planning to book flights on both the Myasishchev Design Bureauâs Explorer, an M-55X air-launched spacecraft design, and the XCOR Xerus, a ground-launched, horizontal launch and landing, rocket-propelled spacecraft. The Xerus can carry only one passenger, while the Explorer can take five. Space Adventures is working with Prodea, the investment company owned by the Ansari X Prize founders, to fund the development and operation of the Explorer. The company also has a marketing agreement with XCOR. Space Adventures plans to potentially operate from airports located in Mojave or Oklahoma in the US and has signed agreements to operate from new, not yet built, spaceports located in the UAE and Singapore. Virgin Galactic will rely on the Spaceship Companyâs/Scaled Compositesâ SpaceShipTwo and White Knight Two designs. SpaceShipTwo, like the Paul Allen funded, X Prize-winning SpaceShipOne, is air-launched from the back of the White Knight aircraft. Virgin Galactic now has an agreement with the state government of New Mexico to jointly build and operate from a new, also not yet built, USD200-300 million spaceport in the White Sands area. Galactic has also investigated potential spaceport sites in the UAE, Australia, Scotland and Sweden. Incredible Adventures is promoting the Rocketplane XP, a ground-launched, rocket-propelled, horizontal launch and landing vehicle. The XP can carry three passengers and will operate from established airports. Among the prime considerations for spaceport construction are the ability to build a long runway, the absence of a large population in the area, the potential area market for space tourism and good weather to prevent launch delays. Future space tours booked and operated by Space Adventures and Virgin Galactic may include circumlunar and lunar landing excursions, and flights through the Aurora Borealis, respectively. Presently, Space Adventures is quoting USD100 million as the price for a trip to the Moon. Stephen Hawking may believe that humans must colonise space in the future, but for the present it seems, the expense for average individuals is simply too high to make the trip, even if one does want to reach for the stars. http://www.virgingalactic.com/en/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Galactic
Te key word in all of this talk about space tourism and NASA being left behind by private companies is SUB ORBITAL. Despite NASA having its problems, which I admit that it does, private industry is still trying to do things that NASA was doing in the early 60's.