New Space - In 20 Years Will Old Space Matter?

[mr. mark]

Just some examples of new space. Virgin Galactic will be starting to launch hundreds of people to suborbital space in less than 2 years. Spacex and Boeing will be launching private and government astronauts to multiple orbital space stations. After that, who knows? Bigelow has called for a moon base beyond LEO and we know all know about Elon Musk. Will government run space really matter in the 20 years?

[ugordan]

"old space" != government run space

[Chris Bergin]

Just some examples of new space. Virgin Galactic will be starting to launch hundreds of people to suborbital space in less than 2 years. Spacex and Boeing will be launching private and government astronauts to multiple orbital space stations. After that, who knows? Bigelow has called for a moon base beyond LEO and we know all know about Elon Musk. Will government run space really matter in the 20 years?

You sound like Bolden trying to defend the since-defeated FY2011. Didn't exactly help his career.

Posting a picture of a suborbital joyride for Paris Hilton and other overly rich Z list celebrities does not inspire me. Do not forget you need a ton of money to stand a chance of even that ride, and Branson - well known for talking utter bollocks over here - insulted Shuttle when he said SS2 would be "safer than the space shuttle" (comparing a scooter with an 18 wheeler), and then ignored the 30 years of Shuttle dominating space flight with his little picture logo on the side which stupidly placed SS2 in the same league as Apollo.

The real new space will be BEO, and guess who's going to be doing that.

SpaceX will be interesting, but NASA will always lead.

[neilh]

"old space" != government run space

An important point.

[mr. mark]

Chris, I would not take Branson for a fool. Anyone who can take a record company and spin it off into a corporate giant is no fool. He knows exactly what he's doing. Burt Rutan is no slouch either. He developed a feathering reentry system, not bad. Both Scaled Composites and Virgin Galactic know where they are going. As announced last year, Virgin/Scaled will be developing a point to point suborbital vehicle that could revolutionize travel times here on Earh for average people. The vehicle that will do that will be called SS3. Going to the Moon and to Mars may be cool but turning spaceflight into a practical application is what most average people want. If they can fly suborbital point to point say from LA to Tokyo in several hours, that's a practical benefit, something NASA does not seem to want to be engaged in.

[Lars_J]

SpaceX will be interesting, but NASA will always lead.

I sincerely hope not. NASA has done great things, but if NASA is still in the lead of spaceflight - say 50 or 100 years from now - I will consider it a sad state of affairs. If only because there is only so much exploration that can be done within NASA's budget, and I would hope for much more than that. We will never become a true multi-planet species under the lead of NASA. One would hope by then NASA (or whatever it has evolved into by then) has evolved into an entity that can assist those goals instead of insisting on being in the lead.

[Jim]

something NASA does not seem to want to be engaged in.

Which it shouldn't be engage in either.  Point to point travel is not NASA's job, it is industries.

NASA/=US HSF.

[Chris Bergin]

Chris, I would not take Branson for a fool. Anyone who can take a record company and spin it off into a corporate giant is no fool. He knows exactly what he's doing.

Rutan is great, but on the above you need to read up on the history of what RB did to his companies (many of which no longer exist). Virgin Records was a bloodbath.

[brihath]

For private companies to be involved in space, there has to be either profits or massive government support.  If private companies can make money at it, they will play in that space.

As for BEO exploration, I believe that governments will have to carry that one for the foreseeable future.  It is too cost prohibitive for anything else.

[Nathan]

something NASA does not seem to want to be engaged in.

Which it shouldn't be engage in either.  Point to point travel is not NASA's job, it is industries.

NASA/=US HSF.

People do seem to forget this don't they?
NASA's role in the commercial sector should be to be a space business incubator and customer where appropriate. But NASA's main job is to push the frontier, to pave a trail for commercial enterprise to follow.
NASA won't ever be profitable but it does produce a strong return on investment that cannot be ignored.

[ugordan]

But NASA's main job is to push the frontier, to pave a trail for commercial enterprise to follow.

And in this role NASA will have the lead, as Chris said. It's not an either-or with NASA, "old" and "new" space.

[hop]

Just some examples of new space. Virgin Galactic will may be starting to launch hundreds of people to suborbital space in more or less than 2 years. Spacex and/or Boeing will may be launching private and /or government astronauts to multiple one or more orbital space stations.

I've made some adjustments to more closely align your examples with reality.

[SpacexULA]

Just some examples of new space. Virgin Galactic will may be starting to launch hundreds of people to suborbital space in more or less than 2 years. Spacex and/or Boeing will may be launching private and /or government astronauts to multiple one or more orbital space stations.

I've made some adjustments to more closely align your examples with reality.

But that is the nature of all things is it not?  SDHLV 1st stage MIGHT get completed some time in the next decade, and somewhere at or way above the current cost estimates.  NASA might still have it's 20 Billion dollar  budget, maybe a little more, maybe a lot less.

The only thing that can be said to be sure, in 20 years, if Virgin, Armadillo, SpaceX, Masten, etc survive, they will no longer be Newspace, they will be just other Aerospace firms offering services.

If SpaceX is successful at reducing costs, ULA will adjust their business model to compete (and likely take a few senior VP from SpaceX to emulate anything they need), if Virgin is successful, the space ship company can sell their vehicles to other buyers (Virgin only has a lot on the 1st less than a dozen airframes).  If Armadillo/Masten are successful the Up! and the like will adjust their business model to compete.

The market will adapt, our demands will grow, and evenatually all that is novel will be old hat.

[vt_hokie]

I sincerely hope not. NASA has done great things, but if NASA is still in the lead of spaceflight - say 50 or 100 years from now - I will consider it a sad state of affairs. If only because there is only so much exploration that can be done within NASA's budget, and I would hope for much more than that. We will never become a true multi-planet species under the lead of NASA. One would hope by then NASA (or whatever it has evolved into by then) has evolved into an entity that can assist those goals instead of insisting on being in the lead.

There will always be a need for a NASA-type agency for cutting edge research & development, and true exploration, imo.  When technology becomes proven, and we move from exploration to exploitation, that's where the commercial side comes in.  The two are complementary, not mutually exclusive, imo.

[docmordrid]

Chris, I would not take Branson for a fool. Anyone who can take a record company and spin it off into a corporate giant is no fool. He knows exactly what he's doing.

Rutan is great, but on the above you need to read up on the history of what RB did to his companies (many of which no longer exist). Virgin Records was a bloodbath.

ALL record companies were destined to be bloodbaths as soon as MP3 was invented, some sooner than others.  Just look at CD sales for proof.

Also, Branson sold it to Thorn EMI for a cool $1 billion, so from his standpoint it wasn't too bloody

[FinalFrontier]

Just some examples of new space. Virgin Galactic will be starting to launch hundreds of people to suborbital space in less than 2 years. Spacex and Boeing will be launching private and government astronauts to multiple orbital space stations. After that, who knows? Bigelow has called for a moon base beyond LEO and we know all know about Elon Musk. Will government run space really matter in the 20 years?

Yes I think it will. Regardless of the legacy of "old space" I think that if the new SLS program is executed properly one could consider just as new space as anything else (after all it would be THE most cost effective program NASA has ever run, and one of the most cost effective government programs around if not the most). Additionally it will open up space to us again. I think commercial will also become big, and ultimately will be a big explorer and driver for more wide-scale exploration (and eventually colonization) of space. But I think that government may always be there and will likely be the pioneers (i.e. the first to go to new destinations and new places) with commercial helping out tremendously in what "came before" (in the immediate future LEO), and in deep space exploration.

I believe that NASA will go there, and commercial will get us there Make sense? 

[Paul Adams]

Chris, I would not take Branson for a fool. Anyone who can take a record company and spin it off into a corporate giant is no fool. He knows exactly what he's doing.

Rutan is great, but on the above you need to read up on the history of what RB did to his companies (many of which no longer exist). Virgin Records was a bloodbath.

As someone who worked for Richard, I can say he threw amazing parties!

[hop]

But that is the nature of all things is it not?  SDHLV 1st stage MIGHT get completed some time in the next decade, and somewhere at or way above the current cost estimates.  NASA might still have it's 20 Billion dollar  budget, maybe a little more, maybe a lot less.

I agree completely. I'd rate SpaceX chance of succeeding as commercial crew provider is at least as likely as NASA flying an SDHLV, but that's a pretty low bar to meet.

My complaint was Mr. Mark taking the success of the new space ventures he mentions as a given.

[savuporo]

Posting a picture of a suborbital joyride for Paris Hilton and other overly rich Z list celebrities does not inspire me. Do not forget you need a ton of money to stand a chance of even that ride

Why this derogatory angle ?

Armadillo calculated their suborbital ticket prices in the range of low tens of thousands, which is NOT out of reach of any enthusiast, willing to sell their car.

[alexw]

Posting a picture of a suborbital joyride for Paris Hilton and other overly rich Z list celebrities does not inspire me. Do not forget you need a ton of money to stand a chance of even that ride

Why this derogatory angle ?
Armadillo calculated their suborbital ticket prices in the range of low tens of thousands, which is NOT out of reach of any enthusiast, willing to sell their car.

    Chris's choice of wording may be florid, but not inaccurate:

The CRuSR funding is a relative drop in the bucket, but that small investment is being held up as one example of how commercial space vehicles can serve national science interests and not just taxi wealthy tourists into space and back. A trip to suborbital space will cost a 100-kg tourist or science experiment between $100 000 and $200 000, says Armadillo Aerospace vice president Neil Milburn. “Our gut feeling tells us that the scientific-payload market is probably as large as, if not larger than, the market for space tourists.”

http://scitation.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_63/iss_10/28_1.shtml    dated this month.
-Alex