Elon Musk - Gatekeeper to Space

[guckyfan]

So I think Blue just might get a fully reusable orbital launch system first.

New Glenn is also not planned to be fully reusable, only the booster.

The likelihood of ITS being the first fully reusable system is still high.

[corneliussulla]

SpaceX has about 5 years start in reusable boosters over BO. By the time New Glenn is flying Falcon 9 will have something like 7 years flying and been enhanced through numerous iterations. Dragon 2 will have been flying for probably 2 years whereas BO has no development at all going on on Man rated spaceship such as Orion or Dragon 2. Meanwhile Musk isn't standing still. He has 4000+ engineers etc working on moving the goal posts. I don't fancy BO chances of catching up any time soon.

[Kryten]

Dragon 2 will have been flying for probably 2 years whereas BO has no development at all going on on Man rated spaceship such as Orion or Dragon 2.

Blue's track record should have already shown people that them not having announced something doesn't mean they're not working on it. We do in fact know that they're working on an orbital crewed capsule, it's repeatedly mentioned in the launch site planning application.

[Coastal Ron]

When Los Angeles sees one of its own providing a comfortable and safe way to space, how many Hollywood celebs wouldn't want a ride?

Musk is not part of Hollywood, and those in Hollywood don't try to copy each other.

Also, why are you thinking only people from Hollywood would be interested in flying in space?  Of the 7 space tourists we've had so far, 5 made their money in tech, one made their money in money, and one is in performance art  - in Canada.

How will it change our idea of space to see it becoming accessible like that? Will it be demystified, banalized, perhaps tarnished?

Likely very few (if any) of the people on NSF will be able to afford to $$$$ to go, so why does it matter what we think?  We'll have to wait for version 8.0 or so, where it will be inexpensive enough to merit putting a dent in the retirement fund.

Or will the sense of wonder increase when we get to experience it vicariously through the eyes of exceptional communicators wearing VR gear?

A friend of mine is a professional diver, and I would never go where he goes because I think the risk would be too high - despite the beauty I see in his pictures and videos.  And so it is with space travel at this point in our history.

But there will be a proliferation of VR "experiences" that we'll all have access to, so we'll be able to see how utterly UNAPPEALING floating around in a small aluminum for 6 days can be.

If SpaceX can get a proper conveyor belt of flights going I imagine that it could become a main source of income.

My prediction is that tourism will only be a supplemental income for SpaceX, not their main source.  The market for space tourism at this price, especially once everyone watches the documentary on the first one, will be very small.

[TomH]

For sure SpaceX won't try to monopolize access to space,

SpaceX cant monopolize space... ffs

No need for the "ffs", please. Keep it civil.

Of course SpaceX cannot monopolize space: nobody said so.

You said they will not try, which actually assumes it is possible. As for the ffs, I merely see that as mirroring Jim's saying that your comments have been over the top.

Blue Origin is still far away from anything that can go to LEO, let alone be reusable, which is a precondition for *affordable* access. Same with the Russians, Boeing, the Chinese, etc.

That does imply that Musk is going to have a monopoly for an extended period. Steve Jobs revolutionized computers with microcircuitry and GUI, but it took very little time for Bill Gates to prevent an Apple monopoly. Underestimating Bezos, Branson, and others is a mistake. It is akin to counting Tom Brady out when he is behind 28-3 in the Super Bowl. As they say, It ain't over 'till the Fat Lady sings.

The others have some capability but lack all the necessary parts of the equation. To be both safe and affordable you have to be a commercial entity
1) with a certain track record,
2) with a proven willingness to "sell seats" and
3) fly reusable to keep the price down.

"Commercial entity" because it is the best guarantee that they will want to sell seats (Notwithstanding the cash-strapped Russians, most state actors - NASA, ESA, the Chinese - are not really offering seats for sale).

"With a certain track record" to substantiate the required level of safety.

"Willing to sell seats": SpaceX' recent announcement shows that they are in the game.

"Flying reusable", obviously to keep the price within reason for the many multi-millionaires who would be interested in a LEO flight. 

Only SpaceX will soon reunite all of those requirements. No other actor gets anywhere near in the foreseeable future.

That is way too dramatic and reflects a shallow knowledge of the history of science and technology. The Wright brothers were eclipsed from the get/go. Henry Ford revolutionized auto production with the assembly line, but other car makers copied him immediately. De Havilland jumped out into the lead with commercial passenger jets, but catastrophic failures from pressurization metal fatigue doomed them; Douglas jumped ahead, but it was quickly overwhelmed by Boeing. In the late 50s/early60s the USSR was the first to orbit, first to put an animal up, first manned orbit, first space walk. The uninformed masses panicked that we were hopelessly behind in all of technology. Our scientists and engineers knew that was incorrect and within a few short years it was apparent who had The Right Stuff and who didn't. This is not like China keeping the silk worm secret for centuries. People know what Musk's plans are, how his technology works, and cannot only copy it, but might even leapfrog it. In the 1980s, Japan was planning a new television broadcast standard that was based on advanced analog technology. The US decided simply to leapfrog the Japanese and go to digital. The Japanese plan never got off the ground. Thinking Elon has it made is naïve. If this lunar tourist thing literally blows up, or the tourists get Lost in Space, that could be a crippling blow. To stay ahead, he will have to never take the stance you are taking, but rather constantly innovate, yet still avoid and rebound from setbacks. Even then, underestimating Bezos, Branson, et. al. is a serious mistake. The Patriots won the Super Bowl; that is something one ought not forget.

[ChrisWilson68]

For sure SpaceX won't try to monopolize access to space,

SpaceX cant monopolize space... ffs

No need for the "ffs", please. Keep it civil.

Of course SpaceX cannot monopolize space: nobody said so.

You said they will not try, which actually assumes it is possible.

No, that definitely does not assume it's possible.

I won't try to build a faster-than-light warp drive, but my not trying doesn't assume it's possible.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

My prediction is that tourism will only be a supplemental income for SpaceX, not their main source.  The market for space tourism at this price, especially once everyone watches the documentary on the first one, will be very small.

I have to disagree with the last point. Have people stopped climbing Everest or doing a host of other riskier/adventurous activities because it's no longer new/original?  There will always be people who want to experience it for themselves.

I can see space tourism, including circumlunar trips, becoming a major source of SpaceX income depending on just how much SpaceX can lower the price. (Safety matters too but given how many people die on Everest etc a relatively high level of risk will be expected/accepted.)

[Zed_Noir]

My prediction is that tourism will only be a supplemental income for SpaceX, not their main source.  The market for space tourism at this price, especially once everyone watches the documentary on the first one, will be very small.

I have to disagree with the last point. Have people stopped climbing Everest or doing a host of other riskier/adventurous activities because it's no longer new/original?  There will always be people who want to experience it for themselves.

I can see space tourism, including circumlunar trips, becoming a major source of SpaceX income depending on just how much SpaceX can lower the price. (Safety matters too but given how many people die on Everest etc a relatively high level of risk will be expected/accepted.)

In theory, Dennis Tito's Inspiration Mars flyby mission can be carried out in 2021 after the ECLSS systems get some shakedown Lunar free return trips. Of course the accommodations will be a bit Spartan with a small hab module. Someone will probably be willing to inspired SX with wads of green to be the first human(s) to loop around Mars. IIRC the 2021 mission date requires a flyby of Venus first (a bonus side trip).  There can only be first human flybys of Venus & Mars once after all. Think of the glory if successful and the historical footnotes if not.

[wes_wilson]

There is very limited demand for orbital space tourism. The suborbital variety that Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic will cater to costs a couple hundred thousand dollars and is an easy 1 day amusement park ride sort of experience. That really is tourism. There are hundreds of people who put deposits down for this and it's likely a real if small market.

Orbital space tourism like SpaceX lunar flyby or past trips to space stations costs more than a hundred times as much and requires a much bigger commitment of time and attention.

There are only a few people who have the tens of millions of dollars to spend and the passion to go through the trouble involved. Calling them tourists is a put down and deceptive. They're millionaire adventurers. This isn't a vacation, it's a lot of work and risk and extremely expensive. There just aren't very many people waiting to do this.

The reward for doing it first is a place in history. Being the 15th person to do it not so much. This SpaceX moonshot is an opportunity to do something really historic. Some people may be motivated to repeat it, but that won't generate the same publicity. This will be the first time humans have left near earth orbit in decades and the furthest people have ever been from the earth. They will be the first people to leave NEO in the 21st Century. That's a huge opportunity, but doing the same thing repeatedly isn't.

I agree but see the moonshot as creating an intermediate step on their path to mars that didn't exist before.  With ITS under construction, there was no profitable use for it between now and flights to Mars.  However, if they can load it up with 100 people for Mars they may be able to carry 200 or 300 people for a shorter week long trip around the moon.  Much like a week long cruise that many people buy for vacations with the accompanying cost reduction of sharing the cost among so many passengers. 

They may quite literally be creating a market to shake out ITS before Mars flights.  And ITS will be much like a cruise ship given people will travel on it for 6 months. 

[Jim]

My prediction is that tourism will only be a supplemental income for SpaceX, not their main source.  The market for space tourism at this price, especially once everyone watches the documentary on the first one, will be very small.

I have to disagree with the last point. Have people stopped climbing Everest or doing a host of other riskier/adventurous activities because it's no longer new/original?  There will always be people who want to experience it for themselves.

I can see space tourism, including circumlunar trips, becoming a major source of SpaceX income depending on just how much SpaceX can lower the price. (Safety matters too but given how many people die on Everest etc a relatively high level of risk will be expected/accepted.)

Ron is right.

[envy887]

My prediction is that tourism will only be a supplemental income for SpaceX, not their main source.  The market for space tourism at this price, especially once everyone watches the documentary on the first one, will be very small.

I have to disagree with the last point. Have people stopped climbing Everest or doing a host of other riskier/adventurous activities because it's no longer new/original?  There will always be people who want to experience it for themselves.

I can see space tourism, including circumlunar trips, becoming a major source of SpaceX income depending on just how much SpaceX can lower the price. (Safety matters too but given how many people die on Everest etc a relatively high level of risk will be expected/accepted.)

I'd wager that climbing Everest is more about the personal accomplishment than the view, for most people. Maybe flying in a can for a week gives the same sense of accomplishment? I can't say.

At this price point the market is absolutely very small. There aren't many people who can and will drop $100M on a week trip. Launching and operating commsats has far more revenue potential, and like tourism can also grow substantially with lower launch costs.

[mme]

Shouldn't the announcement of New Glenn have made this thread completely moot?

I know they haven't announced an capsule for it yet but it's not like they can't/won't develop one. The stated goal of Blue Origin is to get 1000s of humans working and living off of Earth.  In a pinch, what about a collaboration with Sierra Nevada or Boeing?

Sorry, anytime someone suggests that only one company will dominate spaceflight I get twitch like when Chief Inspector Dreyfus hears Clouseau's name.

[Jim]

After the bombshell of the Lunar slingshot, I got around to thinking about this seemingly evermore plausible scenario:

In a couple of years Elon Musk may control the only safe and affordable opportunity for well-off people to buy a trip into LEO. With reusable Dragon 2's and Falcon 9's perhaps piling up, there should be plenty of opportunity for SpaceX to earn serious money on space tourism. Every successful flight would only make the order books grow I imagine. When Los Angeles sees one of its own providing a comfortable and safe way to space, how many Hollywood celebs wouldn't want a ride?

Nonsense, Spacex is not or going to be the Taco Bell of spaceflght.

[TrevorMonty]

Shouldn't the announcement of New Glenn have made this thread completely moot?

I know they haven't announced an capsule for it yet but it's not like they can't/won't develop one. The stated goal of Blue Origin is to get 1000s of humans working and living off of Earth.  In a pinch, what about a collaboration with Sierra Nevada or Boeing?

Sorry, anytime someone suggests that only one company will dominate spaceflight I get twitch like when Chief Inspector Dreyfus hears Clouseau's name.

Blue were working on crew capsule as part of CC. A 6-7 crew capsule would be undersized for LEO if using NG, I'm guessing it will be BLEO capable. Along with 3rd stage would enable DSH missions.

Blue would also use it for LEO missions while developing a larger version to make most of NG lift capabilities. The larger version maybe 20-30 passengers, probably sized for a reusable 2nd stage.

If larger capsule is BLEO capable then it could fly on NA to lunar orbit.

With fully reusable NG and 20-30 passengers a flight, $5m seats are possible.

This is all conjecture but it would follow Bezo's step by step philosophy.

[Zed_Noir]

Shouldn't the announcement of New Glenn have made this thread completely moot?

I know they haven't announced an capsule for it yet but it's not like they can't/won't develop one. The stated goal of Blue Origin is to get 1000s of humans working and living off of Earth.  In a pinch, what about a collaboration with Sierra Nevada or Boeing?

Sorry, anytime someone suggests that only one company will dominate spaceflight I get twitch like when Chief Inspector Dreyfus hears Clouseau's name.

The New Glenn will not be entering service until NET 2020. Then Blue will have to developed an orbital capable crewed spacecraft to match the Falcon 9/Dragon 2 combo. Seems like NET mid 2020's for Blue to put a manned orbital spacecraft of their own on top of a New Glenn.

So it does looks like the folks from Hawthorne will dominate human spaceflight to LEO & cos-Lunar for at least a few years.

IMO, the only way for the Boeing Starliner & the Dreamchaser to be on top of the New Glenn is if Blue acquired them. From historical Amazon behavior with competitors.

[AncientU]

Shouldn't the announcement of New Glenn have made this thread completely moot?

I know they haven't announced an capsule for it yet but it's not like they can't/won't develop one. The stated goal of Blue Origin is to get 1000s of humans working and living off of Earth.  In a pinch, what about a collaboration with Sierra Nevada or Boeing?

Sorry, anytime someone suggests that only one company will dominate spaceflight I get twitch like when Chief Inspector Dreyfus hears Clouseau's name.

The New Glenn will not be entering service until NET 2020. Then Blue will have to developed an orbital capable crewed spacecraft to match the Falcon 9/Dragon 2 combo. Seems like NET mid 2020's for Blue to put a manned orbital spacecraft of their own on top of a New Glenn.

So it does looks like the folks from Hawthorne will dominate human spaceflight to LEO & cos-Lunar for at least a few years.

IMO, the only way for the Boeing Starliner & the Dreamchaser to be on top of the New Glenn is if Blue acquired them. From historical Amazon behavior with competitors.

You mean acquired that tiny piece of Boeing, not Boeing in total, right?
Not a ULA asset.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Elon wants to revolutionize access to space.

He is not after a monopoly.

He wants others to follow his lead and even to compete successfully with him. In this last point the goal to revolutionize access to space will be realized.

The revolution/transformation of the access to space has started. The costs are on a downward trend. The methodologies being pushed forward allows for the increase in reliability (when you get your hardware back you can find what is marginal and what is robust in your design).

Costs are decreasing.
Reliability at worst will remain the same or get better.

But the result is that new demand will be created due to the lowering costs and increase in reliability. This is the revolution. Elon realizes it and so does Bezos and even Tory Bruno (ULA CEO).

[DOCinCT]

[snip]

I have to disagree with the last point. Have people stopped climbing Everest or doing a host of other riskier/adventurous activities because it's no longer new/original?  There will always be people who want to experience it for themselves....(Safety matters too but given how many people die on Everest etc a relatively high level of risk will be expected/accepted.)

According to Wikipedia  Over 280 people have died trying to climb it and in the last few decades, fatalities have occurred every year.  Note: there were 22 fatalities in 2015.

[macpacheco]

I'm quite positive there's plenty of people that just want the experience of seeing the moon up close or even landing on the moon, staying there for a few days, making an EVA and a moon walk and coming back with the pics and 4k BluRay to prove he/she done it.

As well as tens of thousands would love to stay a couple of weeks in LEO at a space hotel, including a couple EVAs just for fun. That's if the price is low enough.
Like under a million USD.

But here's the conundrum. The economic tipping point for that only happens after ITS is flying, able to carry hundreds to space at a time.
Also, people won't go if they see yearly deaths in space. And space tourism might shutdown for a while after each death.
Its an elective activity after all.

SpaceX will never have a monopoly at access to space. There's Blue Origin, REL/Skylon, the Russians, Ariane, ULA, Indians, Chinese. I think at least 3 options will remain worldwide at all times. Space is a strategic avenue. Even the US government wouldn't accept a SX monopoly (and Musk clearly doesn't seek one, but lowering the cost of access to space by 2 orders of magnitude will certainly kill a bunch of competitors due to their own inability to compete).

My bet is after SX achieves routine booster reuse (and start to offer prices half off Ariane V) the Europeans will freak out and put a few billion on REL. Perhaps Ariane will purchase REL outright and make it their mini Apollo program.

[Darkseraph]

My bet is after SX achieves routine booster reuse (and start to offer prices half off Ariane V) the Europeans will freak out and put a few billion on REL. Perhaps Ariane will purchase REL outright and make it their mini Apollo program.

I wouldn't bet on that after Brexit happens. Skylon is a very expensive long term proposition and not the fastest path to a comparable capability. It is more likely Prometheus/Callisto gets a significant shot in the arm and that the European Space Agency begins to give relatively small amounts of money to some european launch startups.