According to this news article, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos is getting ready to build a spacecraft facility near Seattle and have it open next year:
… a Texas newspaper editor who interviewed Bezos earlier this year said the billionaire talked about sending a spaceship into orbit that launches and lands vertically, like a rocket, and eventually building spaceships that can orbit the Earth - possibly leading to permanent colonies in space.
Well, that’s cool! I’m actually pleased that so many ultra-rich folks are starting this up. I think that the government space program was and is necessary to do certain things (not the least of which was to investigate how to get into space and what to do there in the first place) . I also think that technology has rolled along far enough that private industry can join in on the fun, though it is still extremely expensive: hence the people getting in are ones like Bezos, and Richard Branson.
Eventually, these guys will make it profitable. And then folks like you and me can hitch a ride to orbit.
The initial investment is huge, but the eventual payoff is much, much larger. How much do you think a kilometer-wide metal asteroid is worth? Or a solar station that can beam microwave energy down to Earth continuously?
How much is it worth to simply explore the cosmos?
December 28th, 2005 at 2:07 am
whoa!!!I hope i got the money needed to go for a ride when this happens…and exploring the cosmos is simply priceless…
December 28th, 2005 at 2:54 am
Now that’s some wonderful news
Of course, that might lead to something that was covered in PC game “Nexus: The Jupiter Incident” though… But still, great news for sure.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:26 am
A Texas-based spaceport would be sweet. Closer than driving to the Cape.
December 28th, 2005 at 9:49 am
I think the price is going to be in the millions though….?
December 28th, 2005 at 9:52 am
Maybe in my lifetime space travel will become affordable. All you have to do is wait long enough and the technology will come within reach of normal people. (next year I should be able to buy a Commodore 64, this is written on a VIC 20).
December 28th, 2005 at 10:33 am
The asteroid belt mining operations would allow people to go to space much sooner as employees of such companies. Once you get an active space industry that requires people to be out there, you’ll need more and more… That’s the realistic scenario, if you ask me.
(I’m currently using a Commodore 128 :D)
December 28th, 2005 at 11:16 am
It shouldn’t be a surprise that all these rich people are doing this. Circling the Earth in a hot air balloon has already been done.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:04 pm
Richard Branson? Ha!! Just ask Mike Oldfield, XTC and Robert Fripp how Richard Branson got to be so rich. He’s not exactly a beloved figure to bands formerly on his label.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:22 pm
I wonder how all this space travel talk will actually pan out? The Virgin Galactic setup is clearly just an amusement park ride for the super rich. It doesn’t actually go anywhere but up and down. And the high-speed air travel model has already been a failure with the Concorde. Air travel is a commodity, so without a unique destination (the moon?) I don’t see space travel becoming something for the masses. Even then, it’s bound to be way too expensive for most people. This is not to say I’m not excited about the prospect, I just wonder if there’s an economic market to support space travel as it is currently envisioned.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:26 pm
How much do you think a kilometer-wide metal asteroid is worth? Or a solar station that can beam microwave energy down to Earth continuously?
A kilometer-wide metal asteroid would be worth several trillion dollars if you threatened to collide it with the planet and held the Earth to ransom. A solar station capable of beaming microwave energy to earth could similarly be used to vaporize a city.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:16 pm
That is very cool. I’m already waiting for a turn on Virgin Galactic, but maybe I’ll be able to fly Amazon first?
December 28th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
You’ve probably heard about ZeroG, but in case you hadn’t I wanted to pass on this link: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/tourism-05zu.html.
December 28th, 2005 at 3:09 pm
Whole-grain Cocoa Puffs? Isn’t that kinda like frying pork rinds in canola oil?
December 29th, 2005 at 5:15 pm
My concern is what happens if this works. You’ve got companies in preliminary studies for space stations, you’ve got companies that are developing means to get into orbit, at some point, civilian spaceflight will be a reality.
What’s my concern? Well, if civilian spaceflight becomes available and affordable, imagine what this means for commercial space industry. You might see a small start up in civilian tourism, but provide corporations with low cost to orbit systems that they can have control over from assembly to lift off to landing without nitpicky government oversight? Stand the heck back, or you’ll get knocked over by breeze as they go by.
Be it for research, manufacturing, whatever, its possible we could see a new bubble develop like that which developed around the dot coms of the late 90s. Start ups, hacks, and other aspiring hopefuls suddenly clogging the spacelanes with whatever crackpot ideas that come to their minds.
Look at the junk that’s left up there from years of government use, military use, and relatively regulated corporate use now, and imagine that volume exploding in magnitude with the development and deployment of an affordable civilian launching system without any kind of environmental regulations covering that kind of litter/pollution. Putting 2 and 3 man crews up on the ISS generates [i]tons[/i] of garbage over the course of a mission, now multiply that number by the potential number of competing space launch services that could come about on the leading edge of a new economic bubble, if it takes off successfully.
Heck, we can’t even regulate cruise ships on the oceans here on the surface, now put them 200 miles straight up where close inspection and observation is all but impossible?
There’s a LOT of potential in low cost to orbit spaceflight, but its a double edged sword, and we’d better swing it carefully. One major accident up there spewing enough crap into a major orbital lane and we’ve got a problem that will haunt us for years to come. Unregulated dumping of garbage, accidental loss of exterior equipment, or even flushing enough toilets overboard over time is going to convolute what is already a problem that gives mission and flight controllers gray hair.
December 30th, 2005 at 10:25 am
Scott de B. has a very negative view, and though he is correct about the rock-crashing, the econimic gains from selling the rock are greater than any extortion gains that might be had, especially after engaging in the effort to move the rock in the first place… Conversely, the microwave thing is downright silly. The density of microwave radiation is so slight as to be negligible. You would literally have to have a rectenna (sic — a rectfying antenna) that covered square kilometres to receive the power, in the form of a light-gauge screen (akin the the shield that allows windows on microwave ovens) that allows the passage of rain and light to the land below, so farmers could grow crops and cattle could graze, completely safe from the microwaves even over years of exposure.
As to James Buchanan’s (Doodler) concerns, all I can say is flying up to space is patently SILLY. Oh, don’t get me wrong — we NEED to be in space — the economic gains are incredible. But we sure as heck don’t need knuckleheaded pilots (government or otherwise) flitting around like gnats or mosquitos around a campsite. Visit this link to see something truly intelligent:
http://spaceelevator.com/
December 30th, 2005 at 11:10 am
I’m familiar with the space elevator concepts. While we’ve had some pretty amazing breakthroughs in materials science along the path, I’m not holding my breath that I will live long enough to see the end of thrust propelled, free flight in orbit.
It was once said we would have a space elevator 50 years after everyone stopped laughing. I get the feeling there’s a chuckler or two left out there somewhere.
December 31st, 2005 at 12:53 pm
And Arthur C, from who that quotation originated has recently updated it from 50 years to 25… And if you look into Fullereens (sp) or Carbon nano-tubuels (aka diamond string), the material that was previously known by the name “Unobtainium” is now in regular production. It is just a matter of time before it is made into long enough pieces to be useful. To quote from the website http://www.elevator2010.org/
“We firmly believe that the set of technologies that underlie the infinite promise of the Space Elevator can be demonstrated, or proven infeasible, within a 5 year time-frame.
“And hence our name. Elevator:2010. we promise to get an answer for you by then.”
December 31st, 2005 at 1:20 pm
And, I forgot to mention, the website http://www.liftport.com/ where many of the Space Elevator companies work together to get things done, has a countdown clock to launch of the first space elevator. It currently stands at 12 years, 104 days, 7 hours, 35 minutes and 40 seconds.
January 2nd, 2006 at 2:53 pm
I believe you that we have the material now to do it. I am as yet unconvinced we’re going to make the leap from the current meter or so lengths of this stuff to (what is it, 125,000 miles to Geostationary orbit?) in 12 years.
That, in my eyes, is a level of breakthrough not unequal to simply discovering the stuff in the first place. And they still haven’t addressed the main tactical problems of lofting the elevator, even if the material were there to actually pull it off. Lightning (I’ve been reading that the nanotubes they’re assembling are somewhat conductive, what keeps this thing from becoming an oversized lightning rod?), weather, security, the lift vehicle itself, the satellite anchor, orbiting debris (this one REALLY scares me).
I’ve not seen much released to date that realistically addresses the challenges of the space elevator beyond the materials science.
January 2nd, 2006 at 4:18 pm
The material is currently in the less-than-a-centimetre range. Longer pieces ARE needed, but they needn’t be 36,000 km (22,500 miles) long either (actually 72,000 km, since it must go TWICE the distance for GEO so they can hang the counterweight). Like a good hemp rope, carbon nanotubes can be molecularly twisted and woven. And, laminated with other light materials can bring the strength from 75 times need to only 30 times need so that the safety factor is only 3000% rather than 7500%… Even NASA would go for that degree of over-engineering and over-kill… And Carbon Nano-Tubes (CNTs) aren’t all that rare. You can go make some right now by lighting a candle. They form naturally in the soot that comes of the top of a candle. Using Carbon Arcs in a Helium atmosphere just gives you MORE and PURER deposits.
As to actually lofting the elevator, you should see the tape climbing competition they have every year (I believe they had a helium weather balloon last year up to a height of 1½ kilometres (~1 mile), that they climbed, though usually they use a stiff ribbon on a large crane under a LOT of tension to simulate the real thing. (exempli gratis: If you were to PUNCH the real few-millimetres-thick ribbon, you would almost certainly do much damage to your hand, cause no perceptible change to the ribbon itself, and if the dull thud of your blow where to reverberate at all, you might actually get a very low frequencey “bong” — though it would more likely be like hitting a steel girder).
As to lightining, yes, CNTs *can* conduct electricity, but to where? It will have the same charge as the surrounding air. It will remain essentially neutral as it will change potentials to match it’s surroundings. Besides with, CNTs are extremely versatile. By doping the material with other atoms (gallium arsinide, or hydrogen, et al) you can make it into an *insulator*. Theoretically, you could have one CNT on the OUTside as insulator and a CNT on the INside as the conductor. This is an all-around amazing substance!
Weather? This thing is being built in the most weatherless portion of the Pacific, near the equator, where there is virtually no lightning or winds or storms, so that is not really an issue. It’s out of the shipping lanes, off all the air-routes, and or no interest to anyone not headed to space. And if it needs to be defended, you can mount a few Sidewinders on the platform to discourage tourists…
You mentioned “orbiting debris”, and you are right to be concerned, but it is all under complete scientific control (shades of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy!). You see everything has a period and the elevator will be no exception. It will move and swing and gyrate (albeit not too noticably for the passengers) but it will move MILES laterally and this motion can be easily controlled and directed so as to avoid Ed White’s lost glove and Alan Sheppard’s lost wrench. Remember, all these things are constantly being tracked — we know where they are — and the elevator operators will be told, just like the shuttle or any craft in orbit, when an approach in imminent so they can “do the dodge”.
You also said “I’ve not seen much released to date that realistically addresses the challenges of the space elevator beyond the materials science.” and this is why I was suggesting a couple of the websites to look at, so you could actually see some of the interesting things they’ve managed so far. They’re worth a peek.