-
#160
by
CJ
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:12
-
This is IMHO huge. No human being has gone past LEO in my lifetime - so anything beyond Earth Orbit is an enormous step forward IMHO.
I'm even more excited by the nature of the funding; private passengers. That is truly wonderful, because paying passengers (Space tourism) are a potential huge driver of space infrastructure.
Is there a market for manned lunar landings too? If so, this is the gateway to it - and if there is a market, we'll see the capability created - which will then be available, at comparatively cheap cost, for other purposes as well.
As a side benefit, I have a hunch that a potential market like this might speed up the development of Dragon 2 and FH.
-
#161
by
QuantumG
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:13
-
That was not boring!
-
#162
by
raketa
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:13
-
Wonder if this will torpedo Russia's lunar tourism program:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20311.360
No private person will fly on SLS or Atlas V, if they could achieve the same trip for 10 times less. When there was a plan to use Soyuz, price was around 200 million. This trip will be around 20-30 milion, this is a big difference.
SLS will cost at least billion and with Atlas V at least 500 million. To see private person flight this hardware is pipe dream. The only, who could afforded, will be NASA astronauts sucking 1/3 of NASA yearly budget. I am hoping Trump will stop such waste.
-
#163
by
MATTBLAK
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:16
-
I hope this speeds up the prospect for a small 'Mini-Mir' Lunar orbit space station - a great place to park a reusable lunar lander; send crews there by either upgraded Dragon or Orion on Vulcan/ACES or... SLS (if it survives now).
-
#164
by
eric z
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:22
-
Could NASA offer use of the DSN and TDRSS networks, etc in return for a seat? As long as the flight is not bogged down with even more bureaucracy-addled requirements than CC? Maybe offer Jack Schmidt a slot as capcom as they slide around the moon?
-
#165
by
raketa
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:22
-
Space tourism is a side show. I hope these stunt persons paid full price for this. Seems to have little upside and many possible pitfalls. This make SpaceX seem less serious.
Matthew
It provides them with 'deep' space tracking and control experience, long-ish term ECLSS experience, BEO reentry experience and brings in hard cash. Can't see how this is anything but a win-win-win-win situation.
Well the Lose part comes when they somehow manage to die on the mission 
1/Launch failure will cover by escape system.
2/Failing to enter free moon return trajectory will be very low, it is not so difficult, they showing ability with every launch to control this part very precisely
3/Provide air for 1 week of trip sounds trivial
4/Landing they are able to control right now Dragon with offset point center gravity pretty preciously, I didn't see it as big deal. Their heat shield looks very robust.
5/Parachute landing was demonstrated without any issue.
6/The only new piece is F9H
-
#166
by
jpo234
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:23
-
Perhaps some wealthy Sheikhs from Saudi Arabia or UAE
Time for Chris Bergin to create another predictions thread regarding "who are the two customers?"
The announcement says "two private citizens", which probably means US citizens.
-
#167
by
mme
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:27
-
I'm somehow glum about this announcement. I mean, it's great that this move is happening - that the technology and processes will be developed to further humanity into space. But at the same time - to have that first great leap in 50 year go to ... tourists!?. This hurts and makes me a bit angry. People with extreme amounts of money are yet again able to buy their way though life. I would have been happier if the announcement read: "Wealthy private individuals donate significant money to SpaceX to train and launch two engineering citizen scientists on a free return orbit of the moon. The two future private astronauts will be chosen based on merit, education, and their ability to stimulate and captivate the future generation of space explorer..." (you get the idea).
Am I alone in this?
It's SpaceX. They will absolutely find ways to use this flight to add to their knowledge of HSF beyond LEO. I don't begrudge the lucky billionaires funding the flight.
-
#168
by
DOCinCT
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:28
-
Wonder if this will torpedo Russia's lunar tourism program:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20311.360
No private person will fly on SLS or Atlas V, if they could achieve the same trip for 10 times less. When there was a plan to use Soyuz, price was around 200 million. This trip will be around 20-30 milion, this is a big difference.
How did you arrive at the 20-30million? Seems the operative figure was something inline with a crewed ISS mission. Best estimate would be that of the Red Dragon figures floated last year ($300 million).
-
#169
by
NWade
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:28
-
This hurts and makes me a bit angry. People with extreme amounts of money are yet again able to buy their way though life.
I've seen some other responses on this thread and I just want to point out that there
are people in this world who have gotten rich by being smart and working hard. Yes, there are people who cheat the system or have gained success by being cruel to others; but let's not brand them all with the same label. Having money carries some benefits in our current society, and you can argue that they are perhaps outsized or unfairly applied... But having money does not make one evil (or lazy or stupid or anti-science).
Until we know who is paying for this, it could be anyone. And that means that it could be people who are smart and wealthy engineering-types or big science buffs or promoters of advanced technology who simply want an experience in return for "investing" a couple-hundred-million $ into SpaceX.
--Noel
-
#170
by
Kansan52
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:29
-
Yes to adventurers. No to tourists.
I am neither mad nor sad. Not mad because this isn't instead of something that someone without money would have. This wouldn't happen without people paying their own costs.
Well, maybe a little sad that it took so long and it won't be me.
There is still a chance that the people going have a scientific background and can accomplish some science on the way. Because without something to do it will be a long road trip locked in a van with latrine smells.
change spelling
-
#171
by
montyrmanley
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:30
-
Elon says lots of stuff, and we all know enough by now to add a "s**t Elon says" multiplier to any timeline he throws out. Still, if SpaceX can pull this off, it would be literally awesome. It's still just a baby step, but at long last, it's another human venture beyond LEO after all these years! God knows if I had the money, I'd spend my last dime to take such a journey -- even given the non-negligible possibility that I'd die in the effort. It would be worth it.
Also, if SpaceX succeeds in this effort, there'll be so much investor money flowing into NewSpace (not just SpaceX) that it'll be mind-boggling. BO, ULA, and Boeing can only benefit from this.
Elon is already rich, but if this works he'll be so rich that he'll be able to burn money just to keep his other money warm.
-
#172
by
philw1776
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:34
-
I dunno. There are some pretty smart people out there - you generally don't acquire large amounts of cash without some level of intelligence (unless you inherit it - Trump?). Did the training the Apollo guys get enable them to duct tape containers together? Or is that something any intelligent person could do. Of course, there are lots of switches in Apollo to learn - that's not the case in Dragon where everything is automated, or computer controlled.
Well, it's not about duct taping things, it's more about not panicking and keeping focus on the situation.
As a D-day veteran put it: 'Training is what makes you do the correct things when people are shooting at you'
In space, no one can hear you scream
-
#173
by
RobW1
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:35
-
"The passengers were “nobody from Hollywood”, Musk said."
Matt Damon and Jimmy Kimmel?
You do
NOT send Matt Damon. He needed rescuing in "The Martian"; he needed rescuing in "Interstellar". Putting him on a real mission around the Moon is just asking for trouble. You only even begin to think of sending him after you have built Pad 39C and have a Rescue Dragon standing by, all checked out and ready to go.
-
#174
by
Kansan52
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:37
-
My guess, full reuse of the the FH. ISS trip now $35 mill (if memory serves). So $35 million US times 2 so $70 million.
-
#175
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:42
-
-
#176
by
Darkseraph
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:42
-
In a clear minority here, but I have similar reservations about this idea that I had about the recent idea to put a crew on EM1: It's a dangerous stunt that superficially demonstrates progress in BLEO flight. A fatal accident on such a flight wouldn't just be tragic to the passengers and their families, it could set back SpaceX by years or worse.
-
#177
by
MATTBLAK
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:42
-
An adaptation of the the most basic Lunar Soyuz mission paradigm once touted: a slightly modified Soyuz is launched on a Soyuz 2 booster (has slightly more payload capability over the previous version). Soyuz has a high-gain antenna, a thicker 'Zond' type heatshield and 1x extra propellant and 1x extra oxidizer tanks. Second launch is a Proton - or Angara A5 - with a Blok-DM upperstage with a second, spherical Soyuz Orbital module-based Hab module mounted on it - albeit one with a couple large 'picture' windows. The Soyuz docks with the Blok-DM & Hab stage and departs on a low energy, free return trip around the Moon...
This mission honestly could have been done years ago - they even had financial incentive from interested parties, apparently. Never mind - the time is finally here for a similar alternative, I suppose.
-
#178
by
jongoff
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:43
-
My guess, full reuse of the the FH. ISS trip now $35 mill (if memory serves). So $35 million US times 2 so $70 million.
I'm skeptical they can do a FH + DV2 flight for $70M. I haven't seen the original quote so far, but I find the interpretation that it's similar to the cost of an ISS mission (ie ~$140M divided by 2 passengers, so $70M *each*) to be more realistic. It would still be an awesome price point, and one that's likely to get several takers.
~Jon
-
#179
by
DigitalMan
on 27 Feb, 2017 22:45
-
Looking forward to hear those words again... "You are GO for TLI"... 
This brings tears to my eyes.
