Private Space Exploration? Can it be open source?

[bmlbrandsllc]

You have organizations and operations like http://cstart.org/wiki/CLLARE and http://cstart.org/ and articles like this http://opensource.com/life/11/4/future-space-exploration-publics-hands-what-can-collaboration-do pose the same question.  So what can WE do as a community with an open source project.  Can it be done as a true open source project?
Lets get this discussion going and see what kind of answers come out.

[tigerade]

I'm not sure what all this is suggesting, but I doubt it with ITAR and all that.  Also there are lot of proprietary concerns.

[bmlbrandsllc]

I guess what I am asking is does anyone think its possible to develop a program using open source technology in some components?
Here is where I am at this.  I am a business owner, I am a space enthusiast but not technically there yet. I want to learn all i can and I truly want to foray into this world. I just need some guidance

[tigerade]

Welcome to the forum by the way   If you are a space enthusiast this is the right place to be!

I see no reason why an open source project wouldn't be a neat idea, maybe it would spark some innovation or at least be educational in value.  It is very unlikely that any commercial companies would share much of their secrets though, for legal and competitive reasons.  So you won't get ULA or SpaceX to teach you how to build their engines.

I am interested in what you are proposing here though.  Some kind of idea exchange between space enthusiasts could be helpful as long as they are economically/technically viable. 

[bmlbrandsllc]

Exactly. A think tank, a collaboration of ideas that may or may no mold itself into something viable.  It may not all be open source, it may just be use of open source.  I am just convinced collaboration is the key

[Crispy]

A non-commercial body that does fundamental research and makes the results of that research available to commercial bodies? What a novel idea :p

[bmlbrandsllc]

Who better?  Enthusiasts and Purists who come to a mutual agreement on the absolute best way for it to be done to the betterment of the project.

[Jim]

Who better?  Enthusiasts and Purists who come to a mutual agreement on the absolute best way for it to be done to the betterment of the project.

He was being facetious, the description is one of NASA's tasks.

[bmlbrandsllc]

Rocket guys are a tough crowd 
I am so very interested in this idea.  I would be the first to throw my hat into a think tank ring commit myself and my resources to the project.
If not for nothing more than educational tools for future generations.

[dcporter]

Rocket guys have been applying real physics and politics to big dreams for their whole careers.  Definitely important to develop some thick skin around here.

I think open-source rockets are off the table, due to ITAR and due to the insane amount of money required to actual bend metal and test an open-source design.  (Kickstarter ain't gonna do it here.)  I'd love to see it, but I don't see how.

There are certainly other challenges in space, however, that might be amenable to the "everyone contributes knowledge on the weekends" model, and with a more realistic level of funding required.  My favorite examples of people solving those smaller problems are Altius and their StickyBoom, and the various super-ISP engine concepts going around, the best example of which is probably VASIMR right now (scheduled for test and use on ISS in the middle of the decade).

What sort of challenges could be amenable to open sourcing with relatively small capital requirements?  Propellant depot design maybe?  Something smaller?

Whatever challenge you tackle, it's not going to fly for a while, which means it's not going to produce for a while, which means it'll be easy to lose your shirt to a huckster.  Soooo basically you probably want to keep this forum in the loop, as there's a strong anti-huckster bias hereabouts.

[Robotbeat]

There are groups going for the Google Lunar X-Prize who do have a relatively open-source approach.

There are some ways around ITAR, including having your work published. But there are all manner of legal issues lurking around this sort of thing, and no one currently pursuing an open-source approach can afford any kind of legal battle to prove that they aren't violating eye-TAR (and yes, considering the cost of a court battle, it may as well be effectively a "guilty until proven innocent" issue).

At the hobbyist level, "open-source" (or something that looks that way) is an option for making rockets:
http://rocketmoonlighting.blogspot.com/

Armadillo Aerospace has done a lot with respect to documenting their efforts in relative detail, though not as much recently (now that they're more of a business).

Open-source rocketry is not a worthless idea, but there are pretty big roadblocks standing in the way. Most of all, the very high barrier to entry in the field, where to get even a small bipropellant liquid rocket engine running will run you thousands of dollars. A small VTVL rocket will run you $100k.

But there is something akin to the PC revolution which enabled the open-source movement going on in the cubesat (or smaller) realm right now, though it's still quite expensive.

It will happen eventually. Not overnight.

[bmlbrandsllc]

I am willing to put what I need to into this field. I believe whole heatedly in it.  Maybe open source is not the right term or even the right way to go about it.  All i know is there are some brilliant people reading this forum who have talents going to waste.  Why not bring them together and let brililance shine?

[Jim]

You got $$$$?

[bmlbrandsllc]

Thats a pretty forward question Jim. I have the resources to make things happen yes. But i am not just going to throw my business out there for the world to see. I want a good team together, then we will talk the finances.

[Robotbeat]

You got $$$$?

Exactly.

The difference between the software open-source movement and a potential aerospace open-source movement is the enormous difference in cost. Computers are practically free. Writing and running a program is essentially free (well, takes a lot of time to write). Making a significant rocket costs thousands of dollars at the amateur level. To make something that is even approaching something NASA may be interested in (such as a VTVL testbed or cubesat) costs a minimum of $100k, if you're lucky. A commercially viable spacecraft is going to cost millions, while a commercially useful application can be made using only time and a computer.

There's an open-source hardware movement going on at thingiverse.com because of the introduction of cheap 3d printers which can print out plastic, but rockets can't be made just out of plastic.

Who knows what the next century will bring, but there's a long road ahead.

bmlbrandsllc, Join the arocket mailing list. It's the next best thing (and they did have an open-source project to make a rocket igniter, but the project now seems to be dead):
http://www.arocketry.net/forum.html

FWIW, I am making a rocket igniter myself and am blogging the efforts and will likely post the source code for the microcontroller that controls the whole thing (probably only a page of code... incredibly simple stuff) plus detailed calculations on different qualities and probably a full parts list, but that's still a ways off from anything close to a full up open-source orbital rocket or something like that.

[apace]

You want open source space flight? Why not simply join http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/ ?

[Robotbeat]

You want open source space flight? Why not simply join http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/ ?

...who are also on the arocket mailing list.

[Namechange User]

"Private space exploration" does not really make sense in the hear and now.  In order for it to be private, there has to be a business case - even if the technology to do it was availalbe and "open source" to any and all. 

Without that business case and without that value proposition, there would be no rationale to invest the money to go anywhere because there is no promise of return on investment. 

I firmly believe that for the forseeable future, true space exploration (i.e. boldly going where no one has gone before -  or where a dozen people went a half-century ago) will be the domain of governments who have the will to do so. 

That does NOT mean that companies will not be intimately involved.  It will just be under the direction or funding of a government(s). 

[Jim]

Thats a pretty forward question Jim. I have the resources to make things happen yes. But i am not just going to throw my business out there for the world to see. I want a good team together, then we will talk the finances.

My point was generic, an answer to "Why not bring them together and let brililance shine?"   

Unless you have access to resources of 8 figures, then it is pointless to even form a team.

[Robotbeat]

Thats a pretty forward question Jim. I have the resources to make things happen yes. But i am not just going to throw my business out there for the world to see. I want a good team together, then we will talk the finances.

My point was generic, an answer to "Why not bring them together and let brililance shine?"   

Unless you have access to resources of 8 figures, then it is pointless to even form a team.

6 or 7 figures means it's not impossible to imagine a cubesat-scale probe to study, say, the Earth's ionosphere, magnetosphere or even the solar wind (as a secondary payload on a GTO trajectory). Difficult, not impossible. A "team" in that case would be probably all volunteers.

Manned + orbital? Nope. 8 or (most likely) 9 figures, maybe.