Wired dot com article on this year's most audacious private space plans

[Mongo62]

The Year’s Most Audacious Private Space Exploration Plans

Ratings:

Golden Spike Company -- 6/10
Planetary Resources, Inc -- 7/10
B612 Foundation -- 7/10
Mars One -- 2/10
SpaceX Falcon Heavy -- 9/10
Google Lunar X-Prize -- 3/10
Private Space Tourism -- 5/10

[Jason1701]

What are members' own opinions on the ratings?

Mine:
Golden Spike Company -- 3/10
Planetary Resources, Inc -- 3/10
B612 Foundation -- 2/10
Mars One -- 0/10
SpaceX Falcon Heavy -- 9/10
Google Lunar X-Prize -- 2/10
Private Space Tourism -- 5/10

[Robert Thompson]

If Mars One wants to last longer than hot air in Valles Marineris it should do a Mars 500 x 2 or a 6 month mission in an arctic setting. 'Your oxygen is free. Your sunlight is free. Here's what PV and MRE you brought in. Go.' Biosphere 2 lasted 2 years. Educational / reality / discovery programming with paid advertising and endorsements.  The income to expense ratio will be gossamer enough to simulate their intention of record.

[Mongo62]

My own ratings?

SpaceX Falcon Heavy -- 10/10
Planetary Resources, Inc -- 8/10
Golden Spike Company -- 7/10
B612 Foundation -- 6/10
Private Space Tourism -- 4/10
Google Lunar X-Prize -- 3/10
Mars One -- 0/10

[Hauerg]

Golden Spike Company -- 4
Planetary Resources, Inc -- 6
B612 Foundation -- 6
Mars One -- 0
SpaceX Falcon Heavy -- 10
Google Lunar X-Prize -- 3
Private Space Tourism -- 5

[Warren Platts]

Golden Spike Company --> 8
Planetary Resources, Inc --> 2
B612 Foundation --> 9
Mars One --> 0
SpaceX Falcon Heavy --> 10
Google Lunar X-Prize --> 6
Private Space Tourism --> 5
MoonEx --> 5
Bigelow Private Space Station --> 4
Cryo Upper Stage for FH --> 7

[muomega0]

Cost:  For the low, low price of $1.5 billion to land 2 on the moon and return...with no new technology..

"Given the expense, the company is targeting governments without large space programs that may be looking for a little international prestige."  Is this what NASA is doing too?

A whole new definition of "commercial markets" -governments!  And they say the government does not create jobs

So taking the ratings as the answers above, what was the the question?
A- possibility of obtaining private funding
B- possibility of obtaining government, "commercial" funding

They say a picture is worth a thousand words...

[Star One]

Falcon Heavy must be the most odds on of those to come to fruition.

The B612 Foundation seems a good prospect with some smart people behind it.

[pippin]

Golden Spike Company -- 2/10
Planetary Resources, Inc -- 0/10
B612 Foundation -- 3/10
Mars One -- 0/10
SpaceX Falcon Heavy -- 10/10 (5/10 to launch already in 2013)
Google Lunar X-Prize -- 5/10 (Google will probably prop up the price if no entrant step in)
Private Space Tourism -- 8/10 (1/10 to fly in 2013)

[Rugoz]

Golden Spike Company
1.5b for a two person crew? Haha, 0/10

Planetary Resources
Asteroid Mining, seriously wtf, 0/10

B612 Foundation
They may get some additional government funding for their telescope, 3/10

Mars One
Bold but also very attractive, 0.1/10

SpaceX Falcon Heavy
10/10

Google Lunar X-Prize
don't know

Private Space Tourism
9/10

[Lars_J]

Do they mean audacious in the doable sense, or audacious in the "what are they smoking" sense? I read the article, and it still isn't clear to me.

[jcm]

Do they mean audacious in the doable sense, or audacious in the "what are they smoking" sense? I read the article, and it still isn't clear to me.

Well, I think Jeff and I were both singing the same tune to Adam, which is that best of these are 8/10 for technical merit but most are 2/10 for business case
(except Falcon Heavy which I agree is real)

[Robotbeat]

I find it surprising people rate Golden Spike as higher than the Google Lunar X-Prize, when the Google Lunar X-Prize has far more relevant hardware being developed and is much further along.

Also, Planetary Resources is just a satellite manufacturer now (with aspirations for eventually capturing small asteroids) and that's an established market and legitimate business, so I don't know why people are giving them such low ratings compared to Golden Spike, which has much less real backing and a much higher initial bar to jump over. Planetary Resources has a significant chance of launching something in the next few years, even if they remain self-funded, since they can get by with microsats.

Mars One deserves the horrible ratings.

[Mongo62]

I love how (almost) everybody is giving Mars One a zero out of ten.  No less than they deserve, really.  Impossibly ambitious goals with no hope of financing them.

MoonEx --> 5
Bigelow Private Space Station --> 4
Cryo Upper Stage for FH --> 7

Bigelow and SpaceX are my two most liked newspace companies.  They present realistic chances for the provision of two (three, actually) of the foundation pieces needed to truly move into deep space: cheap launch services in useful mass ranges (and cheap manned spacecraft), and practical and fairly cheap space stations.  If SpaceX succeeds with their Mars Colonial Transport, there can be little doubt that they will be regarded as pivotal in humanity's expansion into the Solar System.

My third choice would be Planetary Resources.  On the short term, large numbers of orbiting telescopes would be invaluable for various scientific and other purposes, and on the longer term, asteroid mining is exactly the sort of economic incentive that can give people a reason to move into deep space.  I do hope that they succeed.

[JohnFornaro]

Do they mean audacious in the doable sense, or audacious in the "what are they smoking" sense? I read the article, and it still isn't clear to me.

Seing as how it's "Wired", excellent question.  Thanks for reading the article and commenting.  Now I don't have to.

[Rugoz]

I love how (almost) everybody is giving Mars One a zero out of ten.  No less than they deserve, really. Impossibly ambitious goals with no hope of financing them.

To be fair selling moon flights for 1.5bn or mining asteroids are even more absurd, the economics of both are totally ridiculous.

In fact the mars one business plan could at least work in theory, even though its highly unlikely.

[xanmarus]

mining asteroids are even more absurd, the economics of both are totally ridiculous.

First step - mining water and fuel like methane. Should be "easy" enough and economically viable.

[guckyfan]

To be fair selling moon flights for 1.5bn or mining asteroids are even more absurd, the economics of both are totally ridiculous.

What part of selling moon flights for 1.5bn do you see ridiculous?

I doubt there will be a market, but the price seems OK, even on the safe side with a good margin.

[Robotbeat]

The plan of reaching an asteroid and returning it or large amounts of material from it isn't that far-fetched. We've already done asteroid sample-return, and there are some small asteroids that are actually temporary moons of the Earth. An unmanned spacecraft launched on an Atlas V could return it to the cislunar system, possibly even closer such as LEO (using high-Isp propulsion, as commonly found on comm sats). That is at the end of a decade or three of developing much smaller spacecraft, though, for recon purposes, selling the data and the spacecraft on the market. They are well-heeled with real billionaires putting significant weight behind them, enough that they are building hardware right now. Their plan is more realistic than Golden Spike, who have a sort of all-or-nothing approach and aren't backed as well and have no hardware to speak of. But I think the reason why people rate Planetary so poorly is because it /sounds/ scifi and it isn't just repeating what was done 40 years ago.

Planetary is much more realistic, because they can last as long as they need to, by selling their Arkyd spacecraft as a series of Earth imaging sats  or doing tech development for NASA. Planetary Resources is taking the only approach you CAN take unless someone signs you a check for like $1 billion before you have anything to show them. I'd rather see  Planetary Resources or a Google Lunar X-prize contestant, showing real hardware they're working on, than one big grand approach with just powerpoints and no plans to do anything until a big ol' check comes in. Build as you go is superior to Hail Mary, as far as business plans go.

[Rugoz]

^

Even if you manage to mine a ton of pure platinum, thats ~50m on the market. Not nearly enough even to launch a spaceship to an asteroid to only bring back the stuff.

Not saying it will never happen, but IMO not in the next 20 years.

Obviously I am not talking about their satellite business.

What part of selling moon flights for 1.5bn do you see ridiculous?

I doubt there will be a market

Right, they have to find six customers who are willing to pay 1.5bn for landing two people on the moon. Governments can be ruled out, since spaceflight is about national prestige, not paying an american company to do it. NASA has more ambitious plans, which leaves..

..private companies in need of a marketing campaign or filthy rich individuals.