Space tourism by EADS

[hektor]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1909818.ece

[simpl simon]

Quote from the article:

"A spokesman for EADS Astrium said: “We are going to reveal a space tourism project next week for the Paris air show.” The scheme is thought to be the first step in a plan to take space tourists into orbit and even to dock at a “space hotel”."

There are no plans by European space agencies to start space tourism so does Francois Auque intend to develop this capability commercially?

If EADS can raise commercial funding for a sub-orbital vehicle (as the last in a long line of well-meaning "new-space" companies), why can't EADS finance the work to man-rate Ariane 5 and give Europe a real chance at an autonomous manned space capability, and promote orbital space tourism too.

Oh, I forgot: There is no demand for a man-rated Ariane 5 (because no Agency program).

Has EADS really got its priorities right?

[SIM city]

simpl simon - 10/6/2007  4:11 PM


Quote from the article:

"A spokesman for EADS Astrium said: “We are going to reveal a space tourism project next week for the Paris air show.” The scheme is thought to be the first step in a plan to take space tourists into orbit and even to dock at a “space hotel”."

Is this manned Soyuz from Kourou?  EADS is a 35% owner of Starsem.

[Danderman]

Its a hybrid jet/rocket that will take off from a runway, and carry 4 passengers to 100 km in 2012. All they need is one billion euros, for which I assume they are looking for government money to compete against Virgin Galactic. The ticket price is 200,000 euros, twice the price of Branson's ride, which should be flying a couple of years before this proposal is realized.

I believe this is a FUD attempt, with the secondary objective of maybe getting some ESA study money.

[hektor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear%2C_uncertainty_and_doubt

[nacnud]

Ok here is the press release from eads-astrium Astrium rockets into space tourism You can get to some images by clicking on the multimedia link off the press release. Here is a link to a movie of the concept.

It seems they have a twin jet canard with a methane rocket engine mounted on the rear. Not sure how the re-entry works, perhaps it's like Fagets straight winged orbiter.

[Ventrater]

"""He said Astrium has surveyed other space-tourism projects, mainly in the United States, and found most of them lacking in engineering or business-model seriousness. "There are those who think you can design a rocket plane in a garage," Laine said. "Suffice it to say that that is not our niche.""""

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/AstriumEadsweb_061307.html

[Danderman]

"Canard" being the key word here. What are the odds that Astrium will generate the one billion Euros from private financial markets? Until and unless Virgin Galactic is successful, I suspect that the money people will stand back and wait and see.

[neviden]

I don't get why anybody with even limited understanding of physics would support “space flights” on what is basically glorified Vomit comet. Unless someone comes up with engine that has more than 450 s isp and is capable of 10 km/s delta-v, the only way to get into space and stay there will be on multistage rockets.

Tourist SUBORBITAL flights are useless for anything other than entertainment. You go up, ran out of fuel, you fall down. It doesn’t matter if you get 30, 100, 500 or 10000 km high “into space”. If you don’t have enough speed you will fall back to the Earth right away.

Tourist ORBITAL flights on the other hand bring people to LEO. And you need to get to LEO if you want to get anywhere else in space. In LEO you have enough speed (10 km/s) so that you don’t fall back to Earth.

Suborbital “YES!! I am in space!!” flights make as much sense, as me saying: “If I hold my breath long enough, I will be able to explore the worlds oceans”.

[02hurnella]

I agree sub-orbital is fairly pointless. BUT... It might make money.....Hopefully it will generate interest and capital for real spaceflight. I can't say I would pay 200,000 euros for that but don't tell anyone...

[Ventrater]

02hurnella - 14/6/2007  6:11 AM

I agree sub-orbital is fairly pointless. BUT... It might make money.....Hopefully it will generate interest and capital for real spaceflight. I can't say I would pay 200,000 euros for that but don't tell anyone...

Between 150 000 and 200 000euros in a first time and less than 50 000 later...  
and also:
scientific experiments
esa could be interested
an interesting technical step  
etc...
ans look at the video (great!):
http://www.lefigaro.fr/sciences/20070614.FIG000000110_astrium_devoile_son_projet_d_avion_fusee.html

[pippin]

nacnud - 14/6/2007  12:25 AM
[...]  with a methane rocket engine [...]

Methane Engine, hmmm...
So they're going to do technology development on this as well.
Really sounds like just a claim to get funds

[neviden]

Hmm,. what scientific experiments?

ESA might be interested, but only as par of the astronaut training. But since ESA doesn’t even have its own space ship, it could use vomit comets from Russia (if they would go in orbit with Soyuz) or USA (if they would go on Orion) as part of the usual training they would do anyway. ESA would be MUCH more interested in the actual access to LEO. Without it they really don’t need suborbital flights (for training or something like that).

Interesting technical step would be true, if the problems would be technical. They are not. It’s physics. 450 s isp + 10 km/s.

“Intrest in space”.. well.. there will be few of them that will spend that kind of money to say “I was in space”, but is the market really that big? Will it be once the novelty wears of? My guess it will be simply repeat of the dotcom story, without anything useful that could be used after the bust. Dotcom left us with developed internet, but the suborbital flights will leave us: high priced vomit comets..

[whitewatcher]

1.) One flight per year with 6 tourists onboard. First flights will have the "pioneer"/"adventure" bonus. 6 x $200.000 = $1.200.000

2.) ESA/Commercial flights: Not so much for astronaut training but for tech developement. Expanding the 30s parabolic flight duration to a let's say 8-20 minute phase (depending on the amount of fuel available on the craft) would create a much better testbed for Orbital Sickbays or similar. Let's say one flight per year for $400.000.

3.) It's the first step to a private crew LEO transportation system. Even if it doesn't pay off, its successors will.

4.) Safety and reliability is what makes the difference to the american startups. EADS is a trustworthy and experienced company. I bet on a hybrid or methane engine. ;-)

Ventrater - 14/6/2007  6:47 AM


Between 150 000 and 200 000euros in a first time and less than 50 000 later...  
and also:

How does that compare to a climb on the Himalayans I wonder?

[Danderman]

My sources say it is merely an attempt to get study money from ESA. If you check back in a year, you might hear about the study, otherwise this will disappear. EADS/Astrium is not likely to actually float bonds to make this happen.

[nacnud]

bhankiii - 14/6/2007  4:59 PM

Ventrater - 14/6/2007  6:47 AM


Between 150 000 and 200 000euros in a first time and less than 50 000 later...  
and also:

How does that compare to a climb on the Himalayas I wonder?

Rather that climbing in the Himalayas as a whole lets focus on Everest instead. IIRC the summit fee from the Nepalese side of Everest is around $10,000 while an all in expedition can cost $65,000 plus months and months off work. You can do it a lot more cheaply but you have to be much more self sufficient.

You could, in theory, take one of these space trips in a long weekend.

[pippin]

Hey, we will see wether this is a valid business case if branson succeeds. I could imagine it is, and if not... it's his money (and his investors').
But I FEAR, that Astrium is going for my valuable tax Euros through ESA and THAT is something I don't want to see, especially in a market currently driven by entrepeneurs...
There it goes, the European pest...

[Ventrater]

Danderman - 13/6/2007  7:04 PM
"Until and unless Virgin Galactic is successful, I suspect that the money people will stand back and wait and see.

No! No! No!
François Auque says:
"""« Nous avons choisi ce concept d'avion autonome capable d'assurer les deux phases de vol, aéronautique et spatial, parce que c'est incontestablement la meilleure solution en terme de sécurité, de confort et de coût »"""
http://www.lefigaro.fr/sciences/20070614.FIG000000110_astrium_devoile_son_projet_d_avion_fusee.html
this concept is indeniably the best,
indeniably a best safety,
indeniably a best comfort and
indeniably a best cost...  
This project is a killer!
This morning Branson was green... and now he is red...

[meiza]

Could it be cheaper per flight than Spaceshiptwo as it doesn't need newly cast solid fuel cylinders for every flight?
I doubt though...
1) I doubt it will be built at all
2) No intermediate steps / tech demonstrators / hubris -> delays and problems