Thoughts on Virgin galactic and spaceshiptwo

[montyben101]

So what do you think? Good idea or not?

[xenomorph555]

YESYESYESYESYESYES... i want to go to space...

[Kryten]

Good idea? Certainly. Good execution of that idea? Not exactly...

YESYESYESYESYESYES... i want to go to space...

SS2 won't get you there, at least without a completely new engine.

[TMS]

I'm happy that the world has an overabundence of celebrities with money to burn on measly suborbital hops.

Such early adopters are necessary for the commercial viablity of the sector. Ultimately, it will contribute to improving technology and drive down costs in the future, thus increasing accessibility of real space travel for the rest of the peasantry.

[Guest]

SS2 won't get you there, at least without a completely new engine.

On the contrary, it will get you to space just fine. It won't get you to orbit, but as a start, I guess that's fine. It's a lot easier to go to space than to orbit, even the V2 managed it.

[Kryten]

On the contrary, it will get you to space just fine. It won't get you to orbit, but as a start, I guess that's fine. It's a lot easier to go to space than to orbit, even the V2 managed it.

You misunderstand. SS2 hit severe problems with engine development, and is currently too overweight and underpowered to actually achieve suborbital flight by most people's definitions (I.e. hit the Karman line).

[Dkmdlb]

On the contrary, it will get you to space just fine.

Well technically we're all flying through space on a vessel called earth, but that's not really what people mean when the say things like you have. What definition of space are you using here?

[sp1989]

It will get you to space if you can afford the $250,000 dollar price tag. http://www.virgingalactic.com/booking/ That price is gonna have to come down around $249,000 for me at least.

[Woopert]

I want to take my German Shepherd up and see how it goes. I hope they get it going soon, as long as it's safe. I have faith in Sir Richard Branson's team.

[sojourner]

It's great - fpr a carnival ride.

[vger]

I'm happy that the world has an overabundence of celebrities with money to burn on measly suborbital hops.

Such early adopters are necessary for the commercial viablity of the sector. Ultimately, it will contribute to improving technology and drive down costs in the future, thus increasing accessibility of real space travel for the rest of the peasantry.

What I really hope to see is a space version of what we're seeing now with crowd-sourced research expeditions to remote regions on Earth. Shell out a heavy sum to bum a ride on a ship, and support scientific research in the process.

[Nibb31]

The plan is to go just over the Karman line (100km) and for 7 minutes of microgravity, but with the underperforming engines and general unreliability, it's looking like that are going to have to settle for a couple of minutes at 80km and that's it. The delays (combined with the fact that they are running out of money) are pushing them to rush their test program, which is causing a genuine lack of confidence in the reliability of the system.

I doubt it will ever be economically viable. The business model counts on rich people who want to be among the first to "go to space" for bragging points. Once everyone has done it, it loses appeal. It's also not something that those people will really want to do over and over again.

And they really have to get it right, because if there ever is some terrible accident or if they go bankrupt, the fallout of their failure will ground space tourism for decades. Nobody will want to invest in that sort of venture again for a long while.

[Sky_walker]

I doubt it will ever be economically viable. The business model counts on rich people who want to be among the first to "go to space" for bragging points. Once everyone has done it, it loses appeal. It's also not something that those people will really want to do over and over again.

Erm... and what about all of the companies from around the world selling that as an award for various competitions?

Land Rover?

Where have you been in last year or so?

(combined with the fact that they are running out of money)

Money is a secondary problem. Branson considers it a pet project, so he'll pump his own private cash into it for as long as it's needed to make it fly.

And they really have to get it right, because if there ever is some terrible accident or if they go bankrupt, the fallout of their failure will ground space tourism for decades. Nobody will want to invest in that sort of venture again for a long while.

True.

But every private company has this burden. Imagine that next Falcon flight explodes mid air just like their test flight did not so long ago. Fallout from that would put a strain on a whole private space sector for years to come.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Sky_walker

[Tommygun]

I liked Arthur C Clarke's take on space tourism.

When asked if he wanted to be one of the first tourist, he respond that he did not want to be the first, but the one millionth.

I'll go when they work all the bugs out, but I'll probably still won't be able to afford it.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Tommygun

[Nibb31]

Erm... and what about all of the companies from around the world selling that as an award for various competitions?

Land Rover?

They do it for the publicity. If everybody does it, it loses its novelty and it's no longer newsworthy.

Contest awards aren't enough to sustain a space tourism business model. After a dozen of those prizes are awarded, nobody will be interested.

Where have you been in last year or so?

Watching Scaled Composite's lack of progress with their hybrid engine.

Money is a secondary problem. Branson considers it a pet project, so he'll pump his own private cash into it for as long as it's needed to make it fly.

Branson is the founder of the company, but he is not alone. One major investor is an investment fund from Abu Dhabi. Those investors are getting seriously annoyed with the delays and several of them have spoken about penalties if deadlines are not met, which is putting pressure on the schedule and forcing them to rush the test flights. There is also the upfront payments from future customers, who are also getting anxious.

And there are limits to how much money people like Allen, Branson, or Musk can dilapidate in spare money. They are rich, but not infinitely so. They didn't get where they are by pumping cash into lost causes you know.

True.

But every private company has this burden. Imagine that next Falcon flight explodes mid air just like their test flight did not so long ago. Fallout from that would put a strain on a whole private space sector for years to come.

Not really. The commercial launch industry has existed for decades now and it's a proven industry with a solid business model and sustained sales from commercial and institutional customers. Besides, outside of a few space geeks, nobody cares if a Proton or Sea Launch blows up. If Jay-Z or Lady Gaga crash in the middle of Mojave, it will be the end of space tourism for a long time.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Nibb31

[TMS]

If Jay-Z or Lady Gaga crash in the middle of Mojave, it will be the end of space tourism for a long time.

True. But the ad revenue from YouTube vids would fund a resurgence.

[Dkmdlb]

Imagine that next Falcon flight explodes mid air just like their test flight did not so long ago. Fallout from that would put a strain on a whole private space sector for years to come.

Just like how that failed Proton flight from earlier this year did, right? You remember that, right? Do you?

[Sky_walker]

They do it for the publicity. If everybody does it, it loses its novelty and it's no longer newsworthy.

Contest awards aren't enough to sustain a space tourism business model. After a dozen of those prizes are awarded, nobody will be interested.

Nor the pop stars are.

Besides - looking on it in the way you do the whole space tourism is just a bubble that will burst in a year or so - even if everything goes well. Sorry, but that's far from truth.

Watching Scaled Composite's lack of progress with their hybrid engine.

To be fair - since they got rid of HTPB they have made some progress.

Branson is the founder of the company, but he is not alone. One major investor is an investment fund from Abu Dhabi. Those investors are getting seriously annoyed with the delays and several of them have spoken about penalties if deadlines are not met, which is putting pressure on the schedule and forcing them to rush the test flights. There is also the upfront payments from future customers, who are also getting anxious.

And there are limits to how much money people like Allen, Branson, or Musk can dilapidate in spare money. They are rich, but not infinitely so. They didn't get where they are by pumping cash into lost causes you know.

True, though so far Branson is quite clear on what his goal is and that he's ready to support the project at least till he can take a flight himself. And Virgin Galactic is nowhere near as desperate situation as you try to paint it here. They don't need an infinite funding.

Just like how that failed Proton flight from earlier this year did, right? You remember that, right? Do you?

That's not a private rocket. Single disaster for them is meaningless considering how long and good track record they have. As we know though - it wasn't a single problem they had, but here we go off topic.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Sky_walker

[sojourner]

I think sub-orbital space tourism has a much shorter life span than orbit and beyond space tourism does. It's a thrill ride, not a destination. To have any lasting market it will have to come down to thrill ride prices.

[Mazon Del]

Slightly off topic, but this keeps reminding me of a book that was made relatively recently. I forget the name, but there is a space race between China and the US to get back to the moon. China just sent a robotic craft to the moon to land and come back as a test. The US manned flight will be like a week later. Meanwhile a Scaled Composites lookalike company has launched its first load of rich tourists on a flight to orbit the moon once and return to Earth. On their way around the backside of the moon the tourests get a signal on their radio. "PLEASE! Please someone help us! This is the Chinese Lander! We hit a rock on landing and are on our side! Major damage sustained! Please, can anyone hear us?!". It was a pretty excellent book that was very accurate to the Constellation program (the guy was just about to release the book when the Constellation program was canceled). The tourist industry shot off after that.

[Nibb31]

Nor the pop stars are.

Which is my point.

Besides - looking on it in the way you do the whole space tourism is just a bubble that will burst in a year or so - even if everything goes well. Sorry, but that's far from truth.

Yes, I think that suborbital tourism a joyride for rich people. It'll be a novelty, like climbing the Himalaya or bungee jumping, which will have novelty value at first, but the novelty of spending a week in the Mojave for a 7-minute flight will wear off quickly. I'll give them a couple of years maybe, depending on the flight rate.

Orbital space tourism is a pipe dream. Even if the price of the ticket was just the cost of the propellant required to accelerate a person to 27000km/h, it would still be too expensive for the general public. Even if SpaceX brings the cost of a launch down to $7 million, that's still $1 million per seat.

And there is still nowhere to go. You need a rocket, a spacecraft, infrastructure, and a destination to get people to pay for the ticket. A ticket to orbit is a ticket to nowhere.

To be fair - since they got rid of HTPB they have made some progress.

They seem to be using nylon these days, and mixing methane to it, and they still have burn instability. More weight. Less performance. Slower turnaround. Which is why it's doubtful that they keep their Karman line promise.

True, though so far Branson is quite clear on what his goal is and that he's ready to support the project at least till he can take a flight himself. And Virgin Galactic is nowhere near as desperate situation as you try to paint it here. They don't need an infinite funding.

Branson's goal is clear: he wants to fly to space with his kids. As long as he gets up there, and can get some of his jetsetting friends on a ride and some photo-opportunities with supermodels in spandex spacesuits, he'll be happy. Branson isn't Musk.

That's not a private rocket. Single disaster for them is meaningless considering how long and good track record they have. As we know though - it wasn't a single problem they had, but here we go off topic.

Sea Launch was a private rocket. Ask anyone around you if they even heard about it. ULA could blow up an commercial Delta V tomorrow, it wouldn't make the headlines.

[Mr Shifty]

Sea Launch was a private rocket. Ask anyone around you if they even heard about it. ULA could blow up an commercial Delta V tomorrow, it wouldn't make the headlines.

In fact commercial launch failures aren't all that uncommon. Lockheed lost a Titan IV pretty spectacularly in 1998, and a year earlier, McDonnell-Douglas (just before it merged with Boeing) lost a Delta II, which has since been one of the most reliable launch vehicles out there. In 2011 OSC lost a Taurus XL. The commercial launch sector seems to have survived these events.

[Kryten]

They seem to be using nylon these days, and mixing methane to it, and they still have burn instability. More weight. Less performance. Slower turnaround. Which is why it's doubtful that they keep their Karman line promise.

They've started testing a HTPB hybrid again, but this one appears to be a different design without SNC involvement. Apparently the nylon motor is considered too expensive for operational flights.

[NERVAfan]

They do it for the publicity. If everybody does it, it loses its novelty and it's no longer newsworthy.

I dunno. I thin there is more demand than that.

If Jay-Z or Lady Gaga crash in the middle of Mojave, it will be the end of space tourism for a long time.

Not necessarily. It depends on what the FAA would do - I don't think it would stop everyone from wanting to fly.

Slightly off topic, but this keeps reminding me of a book that was made relatively recently. I forget the name,.

"Back to the Moon" by Travis Taylor and Les Johnson.

EDIT:

Orbital space tourism is a pipe dream. Even if the price of the ticket was just the cost of the propellant required to accelerate a person to 27000km/h, it would still be too expensive for the general public. Even if SpaceX brings the cost of a launch down to $7 million, that's still $1 million per seat.

It's a long way off, but if SpaceX (or Skylon, etc.) succeeds in making reusability work, it'll happen someday, IMO.

[Nibb31]

I dunno. I thin there is more demand than that.

Obviously Branson agrees with you. I don't. I guess only time will tell.

Companies like Novespace or Zero-G sell parabolic flights for a couple of thousand dollars. The experience is pretty similar to what Virgin is going to offer, with a few hours of flight and a couple of minutes of weightlessness. The main difference is that they don't get you bragging rights for reaching the Karman line. But these folks aren't exactly swamped with queuing lines in front of their office.

Not necessarily. It depends on what the FAA would do - I don't think it would stop everyone from wanting to fly.

No, it depends on what the insurance companies and investment funds would do. I'm pretty sure Virgin would be sued to death (especially as their self-certification process is only going to be 5 flights), and the press will destroy them.

It's a long way off, but if SpaceX (or Skylon, etc.) succeeds in making reusability work, it'll happen someday, IMO.

*sigh* Reusability only makes sense if there is a huge demand. That demand does not exist at the current price point and with no destination to go to.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Nibb31