Space Race

[11101]

First of all we had Jeff Bezos planning to fly himself, his brother, a random rich guy who paid $28 million, and an 82 year old to orbit on July 20th.

Now Richard Branson is trying to beat him to it with a sub orbital flight on 11 July with some of his friends - https://www.space.com/virgin-galactic-richard-branson-vss-unity-flight



Notwithstanding sub orbital flight has about 1% of the difficulty of orbital flight, it's all getting a bit weird. Across the whole lot there's only two test pilots and no actual astronauts in sight. The rest are sightseers. Elon Musk for his faults doesn't mess around. Everybody on his flights so far have been properly qualified and experienced astronauts.

 

[Raoul]

First of all we had Jeff Bezos planning to fly himself, his brother, a random rich guy who paid $28 million, and an 82 year old to orbit on July 20th.

Now Richard Branson is trying to beat him to it with a sub orbital flight on 11 July with some of his friends - https://www.space.com/virgin-galactic-richard-branson-vss-unity-flight



Notwithstanding sub orbital flight has about 1% of the difficulty of orbital flight, it's all getting a bit weird. Across the whole lot there's only two test pilots and no actual astronauts in sight. The rest are sightseers. Elon Musk for his faults doesn't mess around. Everybody on his flights so far have been properly qualified and experienced astronauts.

Countries used to compete to be the first to do things in space. Now it’s rich guys. I actually met a guy who said he’s going to make the first stock trade in space. The world is truly fecked.

 

[oates]

Am I the only one having unworthy thoughts but not wishing ill on any of the less famously and wealthy passengers?

 

[Tarrou]

two rich cnuts trying to out rich-cnut each other

 

[Hectic]

We should put him in an "invincible" iron man suit and launch him into a wall at 17,600 miles per hour.

 

[sun_tzu]

Will be interesting to see if China is still looking at manned moon landings (I think 2030 was the target date and a Russian Chinese agreement to build a joint moon base )... Not sure what the artemis programme is scheduled for but I suspect that if that slips and china continue to make progress we woud see much more US government involvement and potentially a 2nd space race involving countries rather than companies.

personally i cant wit for must to blast himself to mars

 

[e.cantona]

As much publicity as possible is only good in my opinion. Lets get to Mars and beyond as soon as possible. The risks are minor

 

[nickm]

I think its great. That it’s rich individuals competing is a good thing, because it shows that access to space is getting cheaper, more straightforward and is no longer the sole preserve of government monopolies hamstrung by confused politics. If we open up beyond LEO, it’ll because of this kind of activity.

 

[nickm]

First of all we had Jeff Bezos planning to fly himself, his brother, a random rich guy who paid $28 million, and an 82 year old to orbit on July 20th.

Now Richard Branson is trying to beat him to it with a sub orbital flight on 11 July with some of his friends - https://www.space.com/virgin-galactic-richard-branson-vss-unity-flight



Notwithstanding sub orbital flight has about 1% of the difficulty of orbital flight, it's all getting a bit weird. Across the whole lot there's only two test pilots and no actual astronauts in sight. The rest are sightseers. Elon Musk for his faults doesn't mess around. Everybody on his flights so far have been properly qualified and experienced astronauts.

Great, the more tourists the better, looks like it’s a developing market of admittedly rich early adopters but maybe not for long. How long till someone builds a hotel in orbit for Starship passengers to stay at?Reckon this stuff is a lot closer than you think.

 

[Raoul]

I think its great. That it’s rich individuals competing is a good thing, because it shows that access to space is getting cheaper, more straightforward and is no longer the sole preserve of government monopolies hamstrung by confused politics. If we open up beyond LEO, it’ll because of this kind of activity.

This would only be a US phenomenon, since the Chinese and Russians don't appear confused about anything. They are still moving ahead with the normal space programs as they have in the past.

 

[11101]

Am I the only one having unworthy thoughts but not wishing ill on any of the less famously and wealthy passengers?

Because we haven't had a human disaster for so long people seem to have forgotten how dangerous space flight is. Nobody thinks about all the unmanned tests that have exploded over the last few years.

 

[Raoul]

Why don't Musk and Bezos chip in about $50b each and do a proper manned Mission to Mars. If Musk didn't have a bizarre savior complex to do it all by himself.

 

[Snowjoe]

I hope they all stay there

 

[Balljy]

This would only be a US phenomenon, since the Chinese and Russians don't appear confused about anything. They are still moving ahead with the normal space programs as they have in the past.

The Chinese space program may be different, but the nationally run space programs are embarrassingly far behind the commercial ones now. Space X in particular has destroyed NASA for price, ability to produce the rockets, reuse of the vehicles and number of launches per year. When you look at the prices of Space X compared to the EU, US or Russian programs the difference is now beyond belief.

 

[oates]

Because we haven't had a human disaster for so long people seem to have forgotten how dangerous space flight is. Nobody thinks about all the unmanned tests that have exploded over the last few years.

Personally I'd rather try and drive an F1 car around Silverstone.

I've no time for these glory chasers. I'd mind them less if they paid the same rate of taxes I do, less even considering I pay tax in two countries.

 

[nickm]

This would only be a US phenomenon, since the Chinese and Russians don't appear confused about anything. They are still moving ahead with the normal space programs as they have in the past.

Arguably Russia has much of a space programme because NASA’s been writing them cheques for the last decade or so… which they won’t be any more so will be interesting to see what they do. China seem to have clear goals and the funding to do interesting things, although it’s still largely playing catch up.

 

[nickm]

The Chinese space program may be different, but the nationally run space programs are embarrassingly far behind the commercial ones now. Space X in particular has destroyed NASA for price, ability to produce the rockets, reuse of the vehicles and number of launches per year. When you look at the prices of Space X compared to the EU, US or Russian programs the difference is now beyond belief.

SpaceX has an incredible strategic advantage. Wish i could buy shares in it, because it’s going to be a behemoth.

 

[Raoul]

The Chinese space program may be different, but the nationally run space programs are embarrassingly far behind the commercial ones now. Space X in particular has destroyed NASA for price, ability to produce the rockets, reuse of the vehicles and number of launches per year. When you look at the prices of Space X compared to the EU, US or Russian programs the difference is now beyond belief.

I think SpaceX is a complete on off since Musk is an eccentric weirdo with too much money and a savior complex. In general, there aren't others like him, which is why even Bezos, for all his football stadiums full of cash, hasn't been able to gain much traction and Branson is basically poor compared to the others. If there was a proper Billionaire space race with the likes of Zuckerberg, Page, Brin, Ellison, Musk, Bezos all interested, then that would be an entirely different ball game.

 

[nickm]

I think SpaceX is a complete on off since Musk is an eccentric weirdo with too much money and a savior complex. In general, there aren't others like him, which is why even Bezos, for all his football stadiums full of cash, hasn't been able to gain much traction and Branson is basically poor compared to the others. If there was a proper Billionaire space race with the likes of Zuckerberg, Page, Brin, Ellison, Musk, Bezos all interested, then that would be an entirely different ball game.

I think it’s a rich mans hobby for Branson and Bezos. For musk, it seems to be something else. unlike the rest of them, he’s built a proper business and now effectively owns the bridge to LEO… which is he is using to launch a satellite comms network at prices nobody else can match…. So he’s on his way to monopolising that too. With starship, he’ll monopolise the heavy lift market too as well as all the things that enables. It’s something to behold. That might appear eccentric/weird today for people who put too much store in Twitter, but itll probably look completely different in 10 or 20 years.

 

[11101]

The Chinese space program may be different, but the nationally run space programs are embarrassingly far behind the commercial ones now. Space X in particular has destroyed NASA for price, ability to produce the rockets, reuse of the vehicles and number of launches per year. When you look at the prices of Space X compared to the EU, US or Russian programs the difference is now beyond belief.

They have different goals.

NASA is not interested in launching satellites and servicing the space station anymore, it's easier for them if a private company can do it for them. Their focus is on deep space exploration and militarisation, things no private company is getting anywhere near.

 

[Jippy]

Countries used to compete to be the first to do things in space. Now it’s rich guys. I actually met a guy who said he’s going to make the first stock trade in space. The world is truly fecked.

Imagine having that much money and that little imagination.

 

[Raoul]

I think it’s a rich mans hobby for Branson and Bezos. For musk, it seems to be something else. unlike the rest of them, he’s built a proper business and now effectively owns the bridge to LEO… which is he is using to launch a satellite comms network at prices nobody else can match…. So he’s on his way to monopolising that too. With starship, he’ll monopolise the heavy lift market too as well as all the things that enables. It’s something to behold.

The fact that one person is monopolizing all of this is probably a good sign that he needs to be broken up. Otherwise there will be no serious competition.

 

[nickm]

The fact that one person is monopolizing all of this is probably a good sign that he needs to be broken up. Otherwise there will be no serious competition.

Maybe. But at the moment he is the serious competition taking the risks others aren’t.

 

[Balljy]

They have different goals.

NASA is not interested in launching satellites and servicing the space station anymore, it's easier for them if a private company can do it for them. Their focus is on deep space exploration and militarisation, things no private company is getting anywhere near.

I agree with the exploration, science and future militarisation of space, but it's not true to say that NASA is focused on that. SLS has been and still is a disaster and is a heavy lift rocket which will be competing directly with the Falcon Heavy. It's billions over budget, over a decade behind timescale and we're still waiting for a test. When the test does occur we're told that it will be a once per year launch and expendable.

The problem with NASA is not their direction, it's the politics. SLS is still going because it gives jobs to states, not because it is needed in any way. Only a couple of weeks ago NASA have been made to do another test on SLS which will delay the project even more, is not needed as NASA have said and will cost around 1 billion. It will give jobs to the state doing the test though.

Edit - for exploration, NASA will be using the SpaceX Falcon 9 for selected missions now. That's the right way for them to go, use the cheap reusable rockets provided by commercial companies and focus on the exploration and science.

 

[Mickeza]

There’s a space hotel planned for 2027 based on a design by everyone’s favourite space Nazi Von Braun:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....hotel-voyager-station-gateway-foundation/amp/

 

[nickm]

There’s a space hotel planned for 2027 based on a design by everyone’s favourite space Nazi Von Braun:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....hotel-voyager-station-gateway-foundation/amp/

looks… ambitious.

 

[Raoul]

Maybe. But at the moment he is the serious competition taking the risks others aren’t.

The demand isn't there among the public when you factor in all the things the money could be invested in back on earth - like healthcare, jobs, and other things that have a tangible impact on the quality of human life. Therefore only ego-tripping billionaires are engaged on the space issue.

 

[nickm]

The demand isn't there among the public when you factor in all the things the money could be invested in back on earth - like healthcare, jobs, and other things that have a tangible impact on the quality of human life. Therefore only ego-tripping billionaires are engaged in space issue.

Not sure what you mean by that. It’s not as if the money being spent is going into thin air. Spacex employs 10,000 people and is building all kinds of infrastructure. Government agencies spent hundreds of billions since Apollo on fecking about with shuttles that did nothing useful and then blew up, space stations that go round in circles in LEO for no good reason. You should be angry about that waste, not the comparative pocket change spent by musk or bezos so far.

 

[Raoul]

Not sure what you mean by that. It’s not as if the money being spent is going into thin air. Spacex employs 10,000 people and is building infrastructure.

Its not about SpaceX for me. I'm sure they do very good work for the tiny sliver of humanity they cater to. Its more so about prioritizing space exploration over taking care of problems on earth first, and secondly, whether its a good thing that one person is basically monopolizing and commodifying what should ostensibly be some something that all of humanity has bought into.

 

[nickm]

Its not about SpaceX for me. I'm sure they do very good work for the tiny sliver of humanity they cater to. Its more so about prioritizing space exploration over taking care of problems on earth first, and secondly, whether its a good thing that one person is basically monopolizing and commodifying what should ostensibly be some something that all of humanity has bought into.

Why is it only space exploration that gets singled out in this problems on earth comparison? NASA spends feck all compared to almost anything you want to compare its budget to. Why not spend a bit less on guns? Or take medical care in the US. That’s not an issue of resourcing, it’s an issue of distribution. And on access to space, ultimately I suppose you could nationalise access to space again for all humanity, and get the usual results - bad technology, illusions of progress and rockets to nowhere.

 

[Raoul]

Why is it only space exploration that gets singled out in this problems on earth comparison? NASA spends feck all compared to almost anything you want to compare its budget to. Why not spend a bit less on guns? Or take medical care in the US. That’s not an issue of resourcing, it’s an issue of distribution. And on access to space, ultimately I suppose you could nationalise access to space again for all humanity, and get the usual results - bad technology, illusions of progress and rockets to nowhere.

Probably because traveling to other planets and other conspicuously flamboyant ideas of this genre are presently considered luxuries that do nothing to fix immediate problems on earth. If there was greater equality and access to resources among humans here, then it would be far more popular imo. There's obviously nothing stopping strange and eccentric billionaires like Musk pouring his money into projects like this, but just as going to the moon 50 years ago, space exploration shouldn't be done as a device for temporary escapism from problems on earth.

 

[Balljy]

Probably because traveling to other planets and other conspicuously flamboyant ideas of this genre are presently considered luxuries that do nothing to fix immediate problems on earth. If there was greater equality and access to resources among humans here, then it would be far more popular imo. There's obviously nothing stopping strange and eccentric billionaires like Musk pouring his money into projects like this, but just as going to the moon 50 years ago, space exploration shouldn't be done as a device for temporary escapism from problems on earth.

That's why I think this era of the commercialisation of space is important. If a company is in it to make money which SpaceX certainly are there will have to be valid reasons for them to continue to launch vehicles at a high cadence rather than escapism which is NASA's job.

At the moment that's satellites, the Starlink infrastructure and helping NASA out with transport missions. Medium term that will have to change into extracting materials and missions which have a material benefit for us.

The Starlink system is a beginning to that - internet for the whole planet from low earth orbit.

 

[Scarlett Dracarys]

As long as they don't bring back any alien species in their stomach.

 

[11101]

I agree with the exploration, science and future militarisation of space, but it's not true to say that NASA is focused on that. SLS has been and still is a disaster and is a heavy lift rocket which will be competing directly with the Falcon Heavy. It's billions over budget, over a decade behind timescale and we're still waiting for a test. When the test does occur we're told that it will be a once per year launch and expendable.

The problem with NASA is not their direction, it's the politics. SLS is still going because it gives jobs to states, not because it is needed in any way. Only a couple of weeks ago NASA have been made to do another test on SLS which will delay the project even more, is not needed as NASA have said and will cost around 1 billion. It will give jobs to the state doing the test though.

Edit - for exploration, NASA will be using the SpaceX Falcon 9 for selected missions now. That's the right way for them to go, use the cheap reusable rockets provided by commercial companies and focus on the exploration and science.

I'm not sure i agree with that. SLS and Orion is based on proven technology, has defined specifications, has been built and is almost ready to fly. It's also not designed for launching satellites, it's for putting people on Mars. They added the bit about cargo later on to keep politicians happy.

The Falcon Heavy is nowhere near as capable with less than half the payload capability, and not enough to get deep space kit into orbit. SpaceX aren't going to get it human rated anymore and will transition to Starship, though the rocket for that is still pie in the sky dreaming without defined specs or launch dates.

Musk has a history of promising the world and delivering somewhere in the middle. He's got LEO sewn up but I very much doubt we will see a SpaceX ship on the Moon or Mars any time soon.

Either way, i'm happy we have SpaceX providing proper rockets and spacecraft. It's these ill conceived billionaire toys that gloss over the risks and complexities that worry me.

 

[Balljy]

I'm not sure i agree with that. SLS and Orion is based on proven technology, has defined specifications, has been built and is almost ready to fly. It's also not designed for launching satellites, it's for putting people on Mars. They added the bit about cargo later on to keep politicians happy.

The Falcon Heavy is nowhere near as capable with less than half the payload capability, and not enough to get deep space kit into orbit. SpaceX aren't going to get it human rated anymore and will transition to Starship, though the rocket for that is still pie in the sky dreaming without defined specs or launch dates.

Musk has a history of promising the world and delivering somewhere in the middle. He's got LEO sewn up but I very much doubt we will see a SpaceX ship on the Moon or Mars any time soon.

Either way, i'm happy we have SpaceX providing proper rockets and spacecraft. It's these ill conceived billionaire toys that gloss over the risks and complexities that worry me.

Yeah, I meant to write "Super Heavy" rather than "Falcon Heavy". To be fair the Super Heavy is rolling out as we speak for the first test fire and looking at a test flight pretty soon. I personally would be placing bets on that reaching orbit before SLS but we will see. SLS got its latest delay a week or two ago.

You've got to admit that SLS has become a bit of a running joke though with it running a decade behind, costing billions more than expected and with no reuse options. It is really a dead end in terms of technology and won't be used in many flights as the cost is so prohibitive to rebuild it each time. They will need a different option for sustained trips as expendable rockets are just too expensive and are not good for high launch frequencies.

Remember that Nasa have signed a contract to use Starship on the moon. The plan is to use the Super Heavy to get Starship into orbit, use the SLS to get the crew via Orion to space and then transfer to Starship and go to the moon. It's a situation that seems to be finding a use for SLS as why wouldn't you just use the Super Heavy in the first place? It's also notable that the entire contract with SpaceX is the figure that NASA spend annually on the SLS.

I totally agree with the billionaire toys though. That's got nothing to do with real spaceflight and just masks the amazing things that are happening with spaceflight at the moment.

NASA’s bold bet on Starship for the Moon may change spaceflight forever | Ars Technica

 

[nickm]

I'm not sure i agree with that. SLS and Orion is based on proven technology, has defined specifications, has been built and is almost ready to fly. It's also not designed for launching satellites, it's for putting people on Mars. They added the bit about cargo later on to keep politicians happy.

The Falcon Heavy is nowhere near as capable with less than half the payload capability, and not enough to get deep space kit into orbit. SpaceX aren't going to get it human rated anymore and will transition to Starship, though the rocket for that is still pie in the sky dreaming without defined specs or launch dates.

Musk has a history of promising the world and delivering somewhere in the middle. He's got LEO sewn up but I very much doubt we will see a SpaceX ship on the Moon or Mars any time soon.

Either way, i'm happy we have SpaceX providing proper rockets and spacecraft. It's these ill conceived billionaire toys that gloss over the risks and complexities that worry me.

There's a space x super heavy booster just rolled out and being readied for ground testing at the moment with ambition to launch the next one, possibly with a starship for orbital launch this summer. Although sounds a bit optimistic.

 

[FrankDrebin]

Cant one of these billionaires put forward a space expedition to find the cure for bad old age make-up because Guy Pearce could really do with it.

 

[11101]

Yeah, I meant to write "Super Heavy" rather than "Falcon Heavy". To be fair the Super Heavy is rolling out as we speak for the first test fire and looking at a test flight pretty soon. I personally would be placing bets on that reaching orbit before SLS but we will see. SLS got its latest delay a week or two ago.

You've got to admit that SLS has become a bit of a running joke though with it running a decade behind, costing billions more than expected and with no reuse options. It is really a dead end in terms of technology and won't be used in many flights as the cost is so prohibitive to rebuild it each time. They will need a different option for sustained trips as expendable rockets are just too expensive and are not good for high launch frequencies.

Remember that Nasa have signed a contract to use Starship on the moon. The plan is to use the Super Heavy to get Starship into orbit, use the SLS to get the crew via Orion to space and then transfer to Starship and go to the moon. It's a situation that seems to be finding a use for SLS as why wouldn't you just use the Super Heavy in the first place? It's also notable that the entire contract with SpaceX is the figure that NASA spend annually on the SLS.

I totally agree with the billionaire toys though. That's got nothing to do with real spaceflight and just masks the amazing things that are happening with spaceflight at the moment.

NASA’s bold bet on Starship for the Moon may change spaceflight forever | Ars Technica

NASA is hedging its bets. The Starship might turn out to be brilliant, but it needs the SLS on tried and tested technology to guarantee a Mars mission.

Plus, i don't see a Mars mission going up on Starship any time soon. The weight penalty of it is going to be too great, it's twice the size of the SLS. It can't get to the Moon without refueling, something that has never been done anywhere near that scale before, and it can't be done far away from Earth. The SLS can get to the Moon and potentially Mars on it's own using current technology. Starship requires untested practices and technologies before it can do it, and that's a risk NASA can't take. Like i say, Musk has a history of promising the world and falling (slightly) short.

 

[e.cantona]

If people are worried about overpopulation(likely a non-issue)/food/water shortages/climate change/etc, a space race, moon/marsbase, etc, is close to the best thing that can happen. The innovation's gonna happen along with tech we already know of that will be sped up immensely c/would help revolutionize life as we know it. 3D printing/building, renewable energy, artificial foods, medicine, etc, etc. Just about anything tech related

 

[nickm]

NASA is hedging its bets. The Starship might turn out to be brilliant, but it needs the SLS on tried and tested technology to guarantee a Mars mission.

Plus, i don't see a Mars mission going up on Starship any time soon. The weight penalty of it is going to be too great, it's twice the size of the SLS. It can't get to the Moon without refueling, something that has never been done anywhere near that scale before, and it can't be done far away from Earth. The SLS can get to the Moon and potentially Mars on it's own using current technology. Starship requires untested practices and technologies before it can do it, and that's a risk NASA can't take. Like i say, Musk has a history of promising the world and falling (slightly) short.

Mars is a giant and very dangerous ask that I can't see happening soon but that goal is giving birth what could be a very flexible and capable cargo ship - I think it's going to be a game changer whatever happens with Mars.