Space Tourism Industry Gains New Competitor

mattnyc99 writes "There's a new entry in the race for the first space tourism jet: XCOR Aerospace, a California-based rocket builder. The company says its clean-burning, two-seat Lynx spacecraft will lift off by 2010. After we only saw a mockup of Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo a couple months back, you'd think this was serious competition in the 'New Space' race, but these photos show that Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites is well on its way with construction."

Two Notes

As far as I know Virgin and Scaled Composites are the same endeavor, they are both signed to a two year deal to build SpaceShipTwo.

Also, it should be noted that there was a an accident involving two deaths last year [slashdot.org] at Scaled Composites and prior to that their buyout by Northrup Grumman [slashdot.org].

Honestly, I kind of expected that endeavor to fail as a result of those two news stories, I'm pleased to find out they are continuing on their contract although I question further contracts with Virgin.

Re:

Somewhat O/T, but I just finished the book Strange Angel by George Pendle, which chronicles the origins of professional rocketry programs in the U.S. I have a whole new appreciation for how far we have come now that I know more about where things started.

What's more...

its clean-burning, two-seat Lynx spacecraft will lift off by 2010

What's more, it will include web browsing capabilities.

This Will Be Newsworthy...

When they have more than "Artist's Conception" drawings.

I want very badly to be excited about the private space race, but with only three serious "New Space" firms with hardware in the sky (Bigelow, SpaceX, and Scaled Composites), I'm still not sure I'll r

Re:

I'm sick of these companies with no real credentials claiming to build the next big rocket. Until you've got a prototype that can actually go into space, then STFU. Any jerkass can put together some drawings and animation.

Re:

This Will Be Newsworthy... When they have more than "Artist's Conception" drawings.

I want very badly to be excited about the private space race, but with only three serious "New Space" firms with hardware in the sky (Bigelow, SpaceX, and Scaled Composites)

Not really that great.

The xcor is designed to go with 2 ppl to 63 miles, will use rockets the entire way, and hits mach 2 at the top of the peak. OTH, SSII is designed to take 8 ppl to 120 Miles, will use jet to get up to 600 MPH, and hits mach 3. In addition, the SSII can be modified to carry small cargo and launch it. It is possible for SSII to launch small rockets akin to Orbital's, but carrying more payload.

What I am waiting to see is Virgin to decide to talk to Bigelow. In fact, I would be surprised if he has not talked to both Spacex AND bigelow. The reason is that he will want to put up a hotel and get the traffic going. Once he has traffic to a hotel, then it will make pursuing the SSIII quite a bit easier.

Re:

What I am waiting to see is Virgin to decide to talk to Bigelow.

A lot of people were hoping that yesterday's announcement would have been a deal between Virgin/Scaled and XCOR. Scaled has fantastic airframe experience but minimal rocket engine experience,

cover some ground

As I understand it, these companies both plan on sending people straight up and returning them to the same place they took off from. This is wonderful, but impractical for anything but a joy ride. How about creating something that lands you at some other place on the earth's surface? I don't even care if it can only travel from East to West.

Bigtime future investment

Virgin Galactic may bet he first one to fulltime commerical spaceflight, but this industry has not even begun to bloom. It will be one of the biggest lucrative business secters in the coming decades, and I wholeheartedly look forward to the first commerica

Lonely mile high club

I guess it will be kind of difficult to join the mile high club with only one passenger on board at a time...then again it would be over quicker.

Ugly, very ugly

It's the ugliest spaceship I ever saw.

Not to say it won't fly - I am sure it will - but there is some relationship between beauty and function that seems to prevent flying machines from being ugly. This is a level of ugliness I think no flying machine ever

Better article; more points worth noting

The linked article is a little sparse on info, so here's XCOR's press release [xcor.com] and a more informative article: XCOR Unveils New Suborbital Rocketship [space.com]

Also, some additional points worth noting:

• XCOR [wikipedia.org] isn't just some random wannabe company which recently hopped onto the "space tourism" bandwagon. They're a small (30-person) but well-respected private company noted for their expertise in building reusable liquid-fueled rocket engines.
  
• In 2001 they first flew their XCOR EZ-Rocket [wikipedia.org], which made regular demonstration flights at air shows for a few years and in 2005 set the distance record [space.com] for a point-to-point rocket powered takeoff and landing.
  
• XCOR has a reputation for not tooting its own horn, instead working quietly and being rather conservative about its announcements.
  
• Their first version will go up to 61km, and they're planning on making incremental improvements to produce a second version that goes to 110km.
  
• Estimated total project cost is $10 million, with a passenger ticket price of ~$100K (half of Virgin Galactic). XCOR isn't planning on selling tickets directly to customers though, instead selling to ride operators who will deal with customer themselves.
  
• They already have a deal with a private research lab to fly multiple research flights for them each year.
  
• This quote from XCOR chief Jeff Greason explains their philosophy quite nicely: Lynx is seen by XCOR Aerospace as one piece of a larger roadmap of vehicles -- a start small and then add performance approach -- eventually culminating in a piloted orbital system, Greason said. "We've selected the basket of technologies ... technologies that we believe position us very well for the suborbital market, but also put us on the road for later, higher-performance systems," he explained.
  

image of Earth's curvature from Lynx's cockpit

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/7373/celestal.htm#earth [geocities.com]

And here's the shot of Mars:
                  .

200,000 feet

I guess 200,000 feet could be defined as "space." It's certainly suborbital. The X-prize required 80 km though, didn't it? That's about 262,000 feet.

Re:Pretty Impressive

"Right now...unless you have more money than God, you are pretty much out of luck."

Bad analogy.

Linus has certainly made some coin via free stock options from Linux companies, various donations, trademark royalties etc. but he's not THAT rich.

Re:Pretty Impressive

Which raises the question: can God create a vacation so expensive that He Himself cannot afford it?

Re:

If he's using the accounting system of the American government, he can borrow endlessly and get Hell to pay.

Re:

God doesn't need a spaceship. Keeps costs down.

Re:

Which raises the question: can God create a vacation so expensive that He Himself cannot afford it?

Could God create a religion so crazy, even He couldn't believe in it?

Re:

You aren't getting much a space vacation with the ventures so far. A few minutes of microgravity in sub-orbit, is it really worth even a few thousand dollars?

Re:

These guys (and whoever's keeping them in business) seem to think so:

• www.gozerog.com/
• www.spaceadventures.com/
• www.incredible-adventures.com/zerog.html

Re:

For most people, no. But for some people it certainly is. It's abundantly clear that there is at least a moderate size market for these flights -- enough to make the operation profitable.

If you want a better ride, wait a bit -- but the right way to get

Re:Space tourism will be banned

Why? Climbing Mt. Everest isn't banned -- and I believe there has been 1 climbing season since it was first climbed that there *hasn't* been a death. Adventure tourism regularly claims lives, and hasn't been banned. Now, I doubt the company that had a fatal accident would survive, but there are a lot of dedicated engineers working very hard to make accidents both unlikely and survivable.

Disclaimer: I've interned at XCOR. Assuming I go back, I'll be getting a ride on this vehicle -- not as an option, but as a job requirement. It's part of the way they do safety. Anyone who works on the vehicle rides on it. That way everyone is directly motivated to work on making it safer.

Re:

Where do you arrive at that conclusion? Having interned at XCOR, that's not at all my understanding. They are building the Rocket Racer, they built and flew the EZ-Rocket, and they've been publicly discussing Xerus in vague terms for years. (Xerus is th