Commercial Spaceflight overtaking Government?

[scienceguy]

So I was just wondering what people here think. From what I've read from other posts, some people think NASA is making a mistake with ARES-I (because Obama might cancel it), and that Direct is the only way to go but NASA might not do that. I think someone said that NASA is just going to go with another shuttle if Obama wins. Is NASA being flushed down the toilet?

So do you think private companies will overtake government space programs? If so, how far away is this?

[Jim]

Define overtake

[scienceguy]

More launches per year.

[Lee Jay]

scienceguy - 13/4/2008  6:16 PM

More launches per year.

??

That happened a long time ago.

[edkyle99]

Commercial payload launches outnumbered government launches for a year or two during the late 1990s, back when the Iridium and Globalstar constellations were being put up, but government launches (mostly for defense purposes) have outnumbered commercial flights since (and before) then.  This year, for example, there have so far been four commercial launches (one a failure) out of 15 launches worldwide.  Five launches were ISS-related.  Take away the manned programs and commercial nearly equals defense launches this year.

 - Ed Kyle

[scienceguy]

I apologize for my ignorance. For some reason I thought most launches were done by government space programs.

What about manned launches? Doesn't government have more manned launches per year?

[Lee Jay]

Okay, perhaps we're defining these differently, and I'm probably defining them wrong.  I was thinking of government owned and operated (or operated by subcontractors) launch vehicles versus vehicles owned and operated by commercial companies.  A ULA launch that carries a government payload would count as commercial in my definition (commercial *launch*, government payload).

[tnphysics]

Then the only US government launches are shuttle.

How does Arianespace fit in to all this?

Private companies will never overtake government space programs until we all start to speak Galactic.

Obama is not going to cancel Ares.

NASA is not returning to the shuttle.

[edkyle99]

Lee Jay - 13/4/2008  7:34 PM

Okay, perhaps we're defining these differently, and I'm probably defining them wrong.  I was thinking of government owned and operated (or operated by subcontractors) launch vehicles versus vehicles owned and operated by commercial companies.  A ULA launch that carries a government payload would count as commercial in my definition (commercial *launch*, government payload).

The definition I use, and the clearest one for me to understand, is to ask this question:  Who paid for the payload and for the launch services?  If a purely commercial company paid, it is a commercial launch.  If a government paid, whether for a civil or defense payload, crewed or not, it is a government launch.  

 - Ed Kyle

[edkyle99]

bhankiii - 13/4/2008  9:19 PM

Obama is not going to cancel Ares.

Not Ares I/Orion, on the face of his statements, but delaying the lunar landing program for five years, which is essentially the same as killing it - and Ares V.

 - Ed Kyle

[Lampyridae]

In terms of putting fleshbags above the atmosphere, Virgin Galactic will overtake NASA / Russia after its first few flights. Bigelow *may* have 7 people in space at any one time, with even 1 launch per year they will overtake NASA with zero people per year until 2015 (unless we get DIRECT). Manned circumlunar flights are already offered for $200 million; two very rich people need to fork out for that to happen. If that happens anytime before 2017 or so, then you could assert that commercial spaceflight overtook government (for a time, although the circumlunar flight is still Russian govt. hardware and support...)

edkyle99 - 13/4/2008  10:35 PM

bhankiii - 13/4/2008  9:19 PM

Obama is not going to cancel Ares.

Not Ares I/Orion, on the face of his statements, but delaying the lunar landing program for five years, which is essentially the same as killing it - and Ares V.

 - Ed Kyle

Yes - like Reagan was going to do away with the Dept of Education, and Bush wasn't going to be the policeman for the world.  Obama doesn't care enough about space to blow the political capital on it that it would take to win against a pro-NASA congress.

My (D) congressman tells me that Obama's science advisers are already redrafting that bad idea.

[vt_hokie]

In terms of long term research and exploration, I don't think private industry will ever overtake the government.  There are certain areas where profit-driven enterprises are not well suited to take over what has traditionally been the role of government.

[cpcjr]

In terms of Human capcity to orbit once the shuttle is retiered all space x has to do is get the manned varient of their Dragon space craft operational and overtake goverment.

Shenzhou - 3
Soyuz ----- 3
Orion ------ 4-6
Dragon ---- 7

[Lee Jay]

edkyle99 - 13/4/2008  9:31 PM

Lee Jay - 13/4/2008  7:34 PM

Okay, perhaps we're defining these differently, and I'm probably defining them wrong.  I was thinking of government owned and operated (or operated by subcontractors) launch vehicles versus vehicles owned and operated by commercial companies.  A ULA launch that carries a government payload would count as commercial in my definition (commercial *launch*, government payload).

The definition I use, and the clearest one for me to understand, is to ask this question:  Who paid for the payload and for the launch services?  If a purely commercial company paid, it is a commercial launch.  If a government paid, whether for a civil or defense payload, crewed or not, it is a government launch.  

 - Ed Kyle

Okay, I understand.  I still find it odd.  I'd call a Direct TV satellite launched on Shuttle a "Government launch of a Commercial payload", and an Orbital launch of a government satellite a "Commercial launch of a Government payload".

In other words, if speaking of launches I'd think of the provider, not the customer, just like I'd think purchasing a BMW in the USA is a foreign purchase even if the customer is American.

But I'm not in the industry and if you all have generally accepted lingo, I should accept it too.

[Jim]

cpcjr - 14/4/2008  11:26 AM

In terms of Human capcity to orbit once the shuttle is retiered all space x has to do is get the manned varient of their Dragon space craft operational and overtake goverment.

Shenzhou - 3
Soyuz ----- 3
Orion ------ 4-6
Dragon ---- 7

Yes, it is just that easy

[aero313]

edkyle99 - 13/4/2008  11:31 PM

The definition I use, and the clearest one for me to understand, is to ask this question:  Who paid for the payload and for the launch services?  If a purely commercial company paid, it is a commercial launch.  If a government paid, whether for a civil or defense payload, crewed or not, it is a government launch.  

 - Ed Kyle

I guess I'll challenge that.  The second launch of the Taurus vehicle was a commercial, FAA-licensed space launch (and we used a Castor 120, not a Peacekeeper on that flight).  The customer (defined as who signed the check that we cashed for the launch) was Ball Aerospace.  The payload was the US Navy Geosat Follow-On spacecraft.  Ball was paid by the Navy.  I call this a commercial launch service, since our contract was to deliver a satellite to orbit, not to deliver launch vehicle hardware and our customer was a commercial entity.

[aero313]

cpcjr - 14/4/2008  11:26 AM

In terms of Human capcity to orbit once the shuttle is retiered all space x has to do is get the manned varient of their Dragon space craft operational and overtake goverment...

All?  ALL??!!??!    :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

[Jim]

aero313 - 14/4/2008  12:58 PM

edkyle99 - 13/4/2008  11:31 PM

The definition I use, and the clearest one for me to understand, is to ask this question:  Who paid for the payload and for the launch services?  If a purely commercial company paid, it is a commercial launch.  If a government paid, whether for a civil or defense payload, crewed or not, it is a government launch.  

 - Ed Kyle

I guess I'll challenge that.  The second launch of the Taurus vehicle was a commercial, FAA-licensed space launch (and we used a Castor 120, not a Peacekeeper on that flight).  The customer (defined as who signed the check that we cashed for the launch) was Ball Aerospace.  The payload was the US Navy Geosat Follow-On spacecraft.  Ball was paid by the Navy.  I call this a commercial launch service, since our contract was to deliver a satellite to orbit, not to deliver launch vehicle hardware and our customer was a commercial entity.

Same thing applies to GOES on D-IV