Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

PayPal Founder Wants To Launch Satellites 197

Posted by Hemos from the go-up-up-up-going-up-up-up dept.
XNormal writes "Elon Musk, founder of Zip2 and PayPal is planning to build a launcher for small satellites. Much of his personal fortune come from the IPO of PayPal and subsequent sale to eBay. The amount of money he plans to spend on this project is not much more than Denis Tito spent on his space station visit. The difference is that this venture actually tries to do something productive. Elon is also behind the Life to Mars mission."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PayPal Founder Wants To Launch Satellites More

PayPal Founder Wants To Launch Satellites

Comments Filter:
  • I guess hes now going to want to carve his name int the moon too
    • Wonder what would happen if a major corporation.. say Microsoft wanted to launch a machine to the moon that would carve a HUGE M$ logo into it. hehe Yes I know that wouldn't be very feasible, or possible, but it sure makes for good pondering. Could you imagine how much advertising they would have then?
  • Who can blame him really? If I had an IPO like that, you can bet I'd be spending it on cool stuff. My own Hubble Scope maybe?

  • I have an idea... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by packeteer ( 566398 )
    Maybe this guy and Jon Carmack should get together. Not only can they afford it but i bet they could pull it off.

  • Productive? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by duncan bayne ( 544299 ) <dhgbayne@gmail.com> on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:26AM (#4799023) Homepage
    The difference is that this venture actually tries to do something productive.

    Excuse me? I thought that Tito purchased an orbital holiday for ~ $20 million.

    Now, I can imagine how much I'd enjoy an orbital holiday. It'd be a lot of fun: an exciting new sensation that I'd be unlikely (in the present climate) to experience ever again. I imagine Tito felt the same.

    So, how was this purchase not productive? Tito gained (an orbital holiday), the Russians gained (money for the space project). I suspect your criticism of it as being unproductive is in part due to the fact that it was unashamedly self-interested (good on him for it!), and in part because you couldn't afford it yourself.

    • I don't think the ~$20 million went to anywhere productive. The Russians simply don't have enough rubles to fund their space program (or much of anything else) and USD$20 million wasn't enough to save it. They're so out of it to the point that NASA's planning an exit strategy for the ISS project.
      • I don't think the ~$20 million went to anywhere productive.

        Okay, so worst case it made no net difference to the Russian space program. Even if you consider their past administrative balls-ups reason to disregard a $20M gain, Tito still gained a holiday.

    • Re:Productive? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bravehamster ( 44836 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:35AM (#4799077) Homepage Journal
      Hear, hear! I'm tired of hearing people bitch about how rich people throw their money away doing frivolous things. It's not like Tito pushed the money into the vacuum of space. He paid peoples salaries, and helped the Russians keep up their part of the ISS bargain. Just because someone spends money on something you may consider stupid doesn't mean that money is gone. I have yet to see a single economic report that says that spending money is a Bad Thing(tm).

      • Heh, reminds me of a quote from Neal Stephenson's In the Beginning was the Command Line [spack.org]:

        This is all strongly reminiscent of the heyday of Communism and Socialism, when the bourgeoisie were hated from both ends: by the proles, because they had all the money, and by the intelligentsia, because of their tendency to spend it on lawn ornaments.

      • Re:Productive? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by nomadic ( 141991 ) <nomadicworld@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @02:06AM (#4799405) Homepage
        Agreed. The opposition to Tito's flight from the slashdot crowd is mainly jealousy that they didn't have a chance to do the same thing. The opposition from the NASA crowd is over the fact that someone from outside their little clique had the gall to get himself up there. Bunch of overbearing elitists with square haircuts who forget who pays their salaries; space was supposed to be opened up for everyone, not just them.

        The ironic thing is Tito is a former NASA engineer, with the same background as the many of the other astronauts.

      • It's not like Tito pushed the money into the vacuum of space. He paid peoples salaries, and helped the Russians keep up their part of the ISS bargain.

        The other way of looking at this is that society sacrificed the the other possible outputs of those people.

        • The other way of looking at this is that society sacrificed the the other possible outputs of those people.

          If we were talking about a society with too many jobs and not enough people, this argument would make sense. I think these days it's the other way around in Russia (and most other places).

    • Re:Productive? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Tseran ( 625777 )
      Not sure if you realize this, but being in space is not something a lot of people would enjoy. Why? While in space, free-floating in 'weightlessness' you have the sensation of falling....constantly. In essence, you are falling. You are falling around the earth. Now, I don't know about you, but unless you enjoy the feeling of falling, this would be very nauseating. I have been in small planes doing dives before, nowhere near freefall speed, and that was enough to churn my stomach. Weightlessness is not pleasant to everyone. If you don't believe me about the falling sensation, ask a physics professor.

    • Not just that. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by TheLink ( 130905 )
      He was a pioneer. His space trip was probably one of the most useful space experiments the ISS will ever do in its lifespan. It was also successful.

      Remember, NASA were asses about the whole thing initially. After the Russians and Tito proved them wrong, NASA changed their tune. Now space tourism is at least being given consideration.

      USD20 million is nothing, NASA and others have wasted that and more on far less useful stuff.
    • So, how was this purchase not productive? Tito gained (an orbital holiday), the Russians gained (money for the space project). I suspect your criticism of it as being unproductive is in part due to the fact that it was unashamedly self-interested (good on him for it!), and in part because you couldn't afford it yourself.

      I can afford to go to Germany, I have gone to Germany. There was no productivity. Holiday is free from productivity. I think the point that was being made is that this rich kid is doing something that benefits others while Tito does only that which benefits tito. Nothing wrong with that but a rose by any other color still lacks productivity.
      • I can afford to go to Germany, I have gone to Germany. There was no productivity. Holiday is free from productivity.

        Yeah...that's why there's no such thing as a tourist industry.

  • Lifetomars... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by packeteer ( 566398 )
    The life to mars site is pretty cool too. I think the best idea is the comm sat on mars. If there were soem dedicated communications satalites up there maybe some of the problems with failed missions could be avoided.

  • Shoulda known (Score:4, Funny)

    by LostCluster ( 625375 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:26AM (#4799026)
    It always seemed like PayPal was founded by some kind of space cadet. We shoulda seen this coming.
    • hope this works better than paypal, because they are so unreliable and i have heard so many horror stories that i will never trust my credit information with them. and now were supposed to trust the same dude with whatever cargo is precious enough to be shot into space. please.

  • im confused now (Score:5, Funny)

    by rainman31415 ( 576575 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:26AM (#4799027)
    Elon is also behind the Life to Mars mission.
    i thought janet reno sent him back to cuba or something....

    no .sig, dont smoke rainman
  • multi-millionaires and space travel? Does the money really "go your head" so much that you must "look down" upon the world from space because you're better than everyone else? Just look at that n'Sync idiot Lance who never got to go in to space; he just didn't have enough money. Clearly merchantilist cretins like Dennis Tito [cnn.com] think they're better than everyone else "down on earth" and have this sickening Freudian complex. What'll we see next? Bill Gates building a space platform in Redmond to look down from his private space elevator? Sometimes I think millionaires have nothing better to do than be condescending!
    • ... non-multi-millionaires that seem to know better how to spend the millions that other people have.
      He is not better than everyone else, but certainly is richer... and though Paypal is fairly evil, he is sorta entitled to spend his money the way he likes...
      I am pretty sure that if one day you have too many millions to count you might take a different perspective on the space travel...

  • productive? (Score:2, Informative)

    by binarybum ( 468664 )
    Didn't Tito's money go into the russian space program? Just because he had more fun than most of us doesn't necessarily mean his actions were completely unproductive. $$ can = productivity (as well as the obligitory $= PROFIT!!!)

  • Better use... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:29AM (#4799037)
    Maybe he should put some of that vast fortune into preventing paypal from sucking [paypalsucks.com].

    • well, at least my mastercard did its part in this glorious hi-tech venture...
    • Considering that the service no longer belongs to him, but rather to eBay, this guy can't be held responsible for it sucking. He also can't be expected to improve upon a product that he no longer controls. The opinion that it sucked before the sale is irrelevant.

      If it sucks, don't use it. Most of the people I know who have used PayPal don't have problems with it. If PayPal isn't protecting you from fraud, you should focus on your credit card company. You aren't any more responsible for transactions you can't complete any more than the ones you don't make.

  • Rocket-pal (Score:5, Funny)

    by MrLint ( 519792 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:29AM (#4799040) Journal
    You too can invest in this state of the art method of sending stuff into space. But be forwarned, just because rocket-pal sends things into space they arent an actualy aero-space firm, so ifyou lose all your investment/cargo with them its not insured!

    Fly rocket-pal today!

    • Re:Rocket-pal (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      For Immediate Release:

      Pay-Pal can not only send your money to oblivion, but it can also send your auctioned items to oblivion via its Space-Aged Fast Escrow (SAFE).

      To save you extra money, we have avoided any Federal or International regulations by setting up a mailing address and cubicle on the moon after intense negotiations with the lunar embassy [lunarembassy.com].

  • And of course.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Large Green Mallard ( 31462 ) <lgm@theducks.org> on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:30AM (#4799041) Homepage
    He won't have to get approval for his space mission because it's not a space flight, it's an interstratum transport venture, which isn't regulated like space flights are

    (cf: PayPal not being a bank and thus have responsibilities to the FED and FDIC :)
    • it's not a space flight, it's an interstratum transport venture

      Re "interstratum transport venture":

      (1) What the heck is it?

      (2) Could you say "interstratum transport venture" 6 times fast?

      Thx. :)
      • Assuming you know the meanings of "transport" and "venture," I'll venture to define "interstratum."

        Actually, I imagine you're familiar with the prefix "inter-," meaning "between," already as well.

        "Strata" are, uh, layers, basically. Generally stacked up on top of each other, as layers tend to do. Like geological layers, or the layers of a parfait or a Slurpee in one of those cool Strata cups. Or atmospheric layers. You know our atmosphere has layers, right? Troposphere, and, um, and so on. Oh, and "stratum" is the singular form of "strata," natch.

        So what we've got here is a venture to transport something between atmospheric strata. Which is a fancy way of saying, it ain't going all the way into space so it doesn't count.

        I guess. Your kilom't'rage may vary.

    • I was joking. But given PayPal's view about it's own position, I was insinuating that he might try a similar thing to this to avoid government regulation, just as paypal has :)

  • I'm unimpressed... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by WolfWithoutAClause ( 162946 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:30AM (#4799044) Homepage
    His projected cost per kilogram is about $20K. That's similar to the cost of the space shuttle per kg, but that launches 40 times more stuff. Big flippin' deal.

    By comparison, the Russian Proton rocket is down at $2.6K/kg.

    But if he really wanted to do something impressive he would design a 2 stage fully reusable rocket. That could probably launch for $0.5K/kg to $1K/kg.

    • of course if you count the cost of the satelites lost due to failed insertion, things get a wee bit more expensive. What was the bottom line on the 1K loss ? does anyone have a figure or a link ?

    • Re:I'm unimpressed... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Tyler Eaves ( 344284 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @01:04AM (#4799201)
      The problem with that argument is that the "FLIPPIN'" space shuttle always costs the same per launch [1], so that if all you need is to launch a 400kg sat into LEO it's kind of wasteful. Shuttle is basically never used for private sector stuff anyway.

      As for the Russians, well with satelites, the cost of the sat usually exceeds that of the launch. The proton, IIRC, tends to turn into little bits and peices about 10% of the time.

      As for being ruseable, hogwash! That adds complexity to the system, as well as refurbishing costs. It'll add weight to the launch vehicle which either translates into a larger launch vehicle (= more money) or lower payload (= smaller market). Not a good choice.

      [1] - Yes, yes, I know, it will vary a bit, but not related to payload or anything...
      • The Russian launchers have, in general, better success records than average. The Proton has a 92% success rate, the R7/Soyuz [astronautix.com] even better -- by 2000, 1,628 had been launched with an unmatched success rate of 97.5%. US launchers like the Atlas and Delta families don't have better success rates.
      • As for being ruseable, hogwash! That adds complexity to the system, as well as refurbishing costs. It'll add weight to the launch vehicle which either translates into a larger launch vehicle (= more money) or lower payload (= smaller market). Not a good choice.

        Yes you get a lower payload relative to the same size rocket- so you make the rocket slightly bigger for the same payload, which makes the initial cost higher- but a few times higher at most, and you can aim to reuse it 100x. Refurbishment costs? You don't refurbish after each mission unless you've seriously screwed something up; engines with good margins are needed, unlike the Shuttle.

        The problem with that argument is that the "FLIPPIN'" space shuttle always costs the same per launch [1], so that if all you need is to launch a 400kg sat into LEO it's kind of wasteful.

        Actually, no, they load more than one payload at one time; IRC the Space Shuttle launched two satellites once; other vehicles routinely launch multiple payloads. They used to launch partially empty most times, because satellites rarely fill the entire cargo bay. But they wised up and that's gone now.

        Nice misquoting BTW.

    • Looking at the cost per kg is not really relevant when comparing a rocket carrying a 12.5 ton payload with a rocket designed for a 470 kg microsatellite. The cost/kg is always higher for small payloads. For a small payload this is actually pretty cheap - about half the cost of the Orbital Sciences Pegasus [orbital.com].

      BTW, the first stage of Musk's Falcon LV is supposed to be reusable. Getting down to $0.5K $1K range is possible only if you make dozens of launches per year but the market for microsatellites just isn't that big.
    • Where did you find your numbers? I've been looking around a bit and couldn't find anything showing that the Proton launches payload for $2600/kilo.
    • Hear, hear. That's the real problem with targetting small satellites: you can't launch anything for less than $1M. Even a half-gram microsatellite. But the people who go small typically do so because they have very constrained budgets - i.e., they can't afford $1M per launch.

      He's projecting launch costs over $1M per. No surprise that he isn't finding any takers.

  • So.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by su007 ( 530279 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:31AM (#4799049) Homepage
    They will take your satellite, hold onto it for a few months, and ignore you if you ask about the status. When you do finally get a hold of someone, they will remind you that per the terms of the service, your satellite was %100 at risk. At that point they will inform you that they have flagged your satellite for possible abuse, and already reviewed your case and decided to keep your satellite. If you wish to contest this you will have to go into binding satellite arbitration. http://www.paypalsucks.com/news.shtml
    • As much as i dislike paypal this is not true. They dont fuck over those who pay them a lot of money. Have you noticed they never fuck over large accounts. They only mess with the people who they can get money from but not enough to make it worth going to court over.
      • And it's only fitting that eBay bought them. The company that never punishes people who generate them a lot of money, even if it's through fraudulent practices.

  • Evil (Score:3, Informative)

    by mao che minh ( 611166 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:32AM (#4799052) Journal
    *sarcasm* What a great company this guy created, he so deserves the millions that line his pockets!:

    PayPal horror stories: Boycott-PalPal.com [boycott-paypal.com]

    Google search of "beware of paypal": Beware [google.com]

    PayPal Warning [paypalwarning.com]

    Petition to shut down PayPal [petitiononline.com] My skin is crawling - really.

    • Re:Evil (Score:4, Funny)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:37AM (#4799082) Journal

      Before: "Sorry, Your money is locked in the Limbo account."

      After: "Sorry, Your money is circling above the Earth."
    • Paypalwarning.com is a web site that appears to be on the same servers as http://www.jacobylawyers.com and and appears to be administered by the
      same person. Jacoby and Meyers are the lawyers pursuing the class action suit against Paypal.
      I question the integrity of any site sponsored by a bunch of lawyers looking for a big payoff.
  • that way when you give him your credit card so that he can launch your sattlite into space he can clean you out just like with Paypal [paypalsucks.com] sounds like a lot of fun
  • Is it supposed to make me feel any better about the $150 Paypal stole from me?

    How ridiculous is it that a charge can be disputed for 4 purchases over a span of 4 weeks 6 weeks after the first purchase is made and Paypal then puts the burden on you to prove they actually got anything. The buyer of the goods must do nothing to dispute it besides say, "I didn't get anything." And if you can't, tough shit. Oh yeah, and it costs you $10/case for Paypal to look into it whether you get your money back or not.

    Rot in hell, Musk.

  • Farscape? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MacAndrew ( 463832 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:41AM (#4799103) Homepage
    If this guy is really into space, and has a lot of money, what do you think the chances are we could talk him into buying an inexpensive $800,000 fan-financed episode of Farscape [slashdot.org]? Wishful thinking? Anyone know his address? :)

    These rich folks and their diversions put my hobbies to shame..... They put even my hobby aspirations to shame!

  • Do not be fooled! (Score:3, Funny)

    by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi AT yahoo DOT com> on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:45AM (#4799130) Journal
    It is a front for the construction of his EVIL Space Fortress! When the lasers are raining hot, burning death upon us all, YOU will be sorry you used Paypal to buy that anime video!

  • Vision (Score:4, Interesting)

    by andyring ( 100627 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:46AM (#4799131) Homepage
    Like it or hate it, admit it. This guy's got vision. Not only did he start one of the few remaining "dot coms", he seems to have another idea that could really take off (no pun intended). Perhaps he'll be able to come up with a cheaper and/or easier method for deploying satellites, in fact it sounds like that's what it's all about. Satellites work wonders already, and if they become more within the reach of a wider market, I can see only good things coming from it. Who knows, maybe better satellite 'net access, cheaper satellite phones, more amateur radio satellites, increased competition all around.

    More power to ya!

  • Sometimes you need a small load (Score:5, Insightful)

    by astrashe ( 7452 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:53AM (#4799149) Journal
    If you go to the warehouse grocery store, you pay less than you do at 7-11. And if you use a big vehicle, you get a better price per kg. There are economies of scale.

    But what if what you're lofting doesn't weight 40x as much? Wouldn't it be nice to get the good price anyway? Wouldn't it be nice to be able to go to 7-11 and the a single can of soda for the same price you pay for a can when you buy a case at the warehouse store?

    This guy is no dummy, and I'm sure he's identified a market.

  • It's all so clear (Score:4, Funny)

    by dirkdidit ( 550955 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:55AM (#4799157) Homepage
    Heh, so thats where all that "lost" PayPal money went.
  • I like projects like this. Since NASA most certainly isn't doing a very good job (I don't blame NASA, I blame politics), it's great to see rogue projects like these coming along, giving us some hope of further exploration of space.

    If he's got the money and the interest, I'm all for it.
    • I agree completely. It's obvious that no major space missions are going to get off the ground(pun intended)just by relying on NASA and the other space agencies around the world.
      The commercialization of space is just what we need if we want to get to Mars by 2025 or if we want to establish a lunar colony. Sure this is only a small step in an area where many small steps will have to be taken for it to be successful, but this little bit will help a lot down the line.

  • Safe Trading Precautions (Score:5, Informative)

    by man_ls ( 248470 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @12:59AM (#4799179)
    With all of these horror stories, I am going to open myself up to moderation as flamebait and share some tips with you.

    I have routinely had over $500 in my PayPal account, at times bordering on $1000. For me, I use it as a place to stash my "mid-term savings" pool. It's easy enough to get the money out if I need it using the MasterCard-branded debit card; but it's not cash in my wallet that I'll shove into a soda machine or cafeteria line at lunch.

    I also do quite a bit of trading on eBay and have even dealt in the more "dangerous" auction fields like playerauctions.com.

    For eBay trades, send the thing with some proof that you sent it. USPS Delivery Confirmation if you're cheap or don't care about things like tracking; USPS Registered if you're hung up on USPS. UPS is decent; they have tracking. FedEx has a very good security policy...you can specify to leave the package with no signature, try to get it signed but leave it if waived, or require a personal signature -- no waivers accepted. Of course that costs extra, but if you are worried about being defrauded by your buyer, that's not too much extra to ask.

    For PlayerAuctions, my Thawte (www.thawte.com) S/MIME certificate, for signing and authenticating e-mails that I send, is sufficient. A signed message with the account key(s) contained inside it.

    It's impossible to forge the digital signature saying I sent the thing; just like it's impossible to convince the FedEx man to leave the package without a signature, when it says "signature required -- no waiver accepted"

    Common sense states these things. Online trading is fundamentally about trust. Cover yourself in your auctions -- Seller reserves the right to end the deal at any time; even after payment has been remitted (If payment has been remitted, it will be returned to you.) A bid contract is a legally binding agreement; if they don't like your terms, they don't have to buy it from you.

    If you cover your back with these sorts of things, you're virtually guarenteed to have a good reputation in the online community. On the off chance someone still tries to fraud you, you have hard proof that they are lying. And guess what? That's a crime.

    The Federal Government and the FTC don't look too kindly on interstate commerce fraud and mail fraud.
    • For eBay trades, send the thing with some proof that you sent it. USPS Delivery Confirmation if you're cheap...
      Note that USPS delivery confirmation isn't good enough any more. You have to use signature confirmation if you want Paypal seller's protection. And if you are sending to an unconfirmed address (which 50% of my sales are), you have no protection whatsoever from paypal.

      Personally, I keep my Paypal account empty. It costs nothing to immediately move money that a buyer has deposited there into your backup bank account. Once in the real bank Paypal cannot touch it. It is simply far too easy for a buyer to claim they never received the item and Paypal will immediate reverse the funds back into the buyer's account.

  • "But does he have staying power?" asks NASA official.

    Good question... is that a mutant power, like telekinesis?

    "STAND BACK, Batman, he has STAYING POWER!".

    -- Terry
  • This is slightly offtopic (it does have to do with the encroaching commercial exploitation of space), but doesn't it seem to be time for a space lottery?

    It only costs $20 million to send someone into space.. (with promotion, taxes and stuff, I bet it would cost about $30 million to run a lottery that would do this) lots of lotteries these days run into the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of prize money.. and I think they'd get even more people than usual going for a trip into space. I'm assuming most geeks are too mathematically inclined to throw money away (buy lottery tickets).. but even I would take the chance for an opportunity to go into space.

    I'm positive the Russians would love it. (NASA wouldn't be too keen on the idea). The only potential pitfall would be if the person didn't meet the health requirements.. for which case you could easily just give the person the money. That and a bunch of safety disclaimers, and they'd be set.
    • I agree. You go out and get the money (No big deal these days. venture capital being so readily available), and I'll buy a ticket.

      Sarcasm aside, I *would* buy a ticket for a space trip lottery (if the odds were, say a five dollar ticket for a one-in-a-million chance) and would love it if somebody did a thing like that. As you pointed out, it would even be good business and good for keeping Russian scientists doing good stuff. But folks are a *wee bit* short of the ready these days. Maybe in ten years.
      Rustin

  • PayMars, in its sole discretion, reserves the right to terminate this Planet [PayMars], access to its Space Docks, or access to the Planet Communications for any reason and at any time upon notice to you.
  • "Anticipated U.S. Air Force demand for small launchers, meanwhile, is no better than NASA's." Doesn't seem like a good business plan. The market is, as they say, saturated. "There are 2 or 3 espresso stands on every corner, and more inside the lobby, and then there are those government-owned stands, but I'm going to start one with Vision". Please. There are so many other areas that fit his criteria, and probably a better fit to his "Benefit Mankind" stipulation.
  • If it costs $20 million to launch 420kg into space, it is all well and good that someone can do it for $10 million. But I don't weigh 420kg.. I weigh 85kg, that's just over 1/5th, so shouldn't it cost $4 million to shoot my ass into low earth orbit? $16 million is a little expensive for a room on a space station don't ya think? How much does it cost to make a space station anyways? That's what our Space X friends should be doing, offer $5 million trips to LEO space stations, undercut the russians and herald in a new era of space tourism (for rich bastards).

    When we have that, then we'll need reusable vehicles (i.e., next generation X-Prize winners) but until then there's no-where to go! The X-Prize will be won by 2005, and we'll be able to pay a small fortune to "touch" space (but not LEO) in a reusable vehicle, will we have to wait until 2010 to get a reusable LEO vehicle for space tourism? By then, will there be anywhere to go?

    It just doesn't add up. My kingdom for a business plan.

    • while i am certainly no expert on the matter of shooting things into space, there are certainly many other variables one must consider for the cost of shooting you (A PERSON) into space that doesnt concern an inanimate 420kg load. for example, air, you are breathing it, the hunk of metal isnt and it costs money to provide that air. also, liability and insurance issues must be of some concern.
    • You may weigh 85kg, but the air you breathe, the water you drink, the food you eat, and the space you take up all weigh a lot more than 85kg.

      Basically, it might cost $4 million to send 85kg worth of inanimate objects in to space, but you are not an inanimate.
    • If it costs $20 million to launch 420kg into space, it is all well and good that someone can do it for $10 million. But I don't weigh 420kg.. I weigh 85kg, that's just over 1/5th, so shouldn't it cost $4 million to shoot my ass into low earth orbit?

      Umm, you were planning on taking a life support module with you, right? Could be that weighs 335kg.
    • So other than your preference for a seat in the oxygen-breathers section, and the amount of luggage you're planning to carry (unlike most US airlines, you're probably allowed to bring oxygen tanks on board with you...) how much gravity are you willing to put up with? Compare that with the G-forces that a hunk of satellite equipment can put up with if it's padded adequately.
  • Scientists are trying to figure out how to visit other planets without accidentally carrying earth microbes, and this guy wants to dump them for fun.

    For the sake of science and possibly other life forms, let's hope that that kind ecological terrorism won't be tolerated by governments. Bringing rabbits to Australia was bad enough.

  • He can send the order to randomly freeze another 200 accounts! Let the interest roll!

  • Let me get this straight (Score:4, Interesting)

    by USC-MBA ( 629057 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @02:06AM (#4799403) Homepage
    Here we have Elton Musk, boy genius, whose company, PayPal, in spite of the fact that its business model consisited essentially of investing its customers' deposits and pocketing the returns while performing currency exchanges (think: how high could the overhead possibly be on such a service? And variable costs are essentially zero!) while at the same time collecting fees off Business and Premier PayPal accounts, still took four years to acheive profitability.

    Mr. Musk is now going to enter into the commercial sattelite launch industry, an industry whose barriers to entry are (ahem) astronimical, and compete with far cheaper Russian services [ad-astra.net]. Since Mr. Musk is not utilizing any new technological innovation, he will presumably rely purely on his business know-how to make his sattelite company as efficient as PayPal...

    Oh, the things a measly 1.5 billion and dollars will do to a man's ego...

    • Barriers to entry aren't as bad as you might think, in terms of hardware anyway. it's all decades-old engineering now. Stop me before I say it isn't rocket science...

      Where a startup is going to have problems is with getting launch insurance. The companies that insure satellites have been burned badly. They're probably going to want a statistically significant flight record before they write coverage for birds sent up on a new launcher. So the first N launches have to be from customers who don't care if they suffer a total loss with no insurance.
      • So the first N launches have to be from customers who don't care if they suffer a total loss with no insurance.

        You know what they say... "First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price."-Hadden, Contact

  • For those who weren't aware. Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation has to lease their space center from Kazakhstan which wouldn't be much different than if canada wanted to start a space program and use houston+florida. Except I don't think the Kazaks put any funding into this, they just reap some monetary rewards by having the space center on their soil.
    • Quite right and the Russians are none to happy about the situation. So they're planning to move many of their operations to Plesetsk in the Russian Arctic. This used to be the busiest site in the World, launching military satellites into a polar orbit on an almost daily basis. Since the fall of the USSR, its been much less busy.

      The problem with the site is that it is so far North that it is much more difficult to transfer into an equatorial orbit and the rockets get much less of a kick from the Earth's spin. So its possible that some rockets such as Soyuz and Proton will have to be retired.

      The Russians have been working on a big new booster called Angara which should be fired for the first time next year. It's based on the existing successful Zenit rocket and has engines very similar to those built by the Russians for the new Atlas V.

      I have no idea what is planned for the manned missions should the Russians abandon Baikonur.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

  • Much of his personal fortune come from the IPO of PayPal and subsequent sale to eBay.

    Let's not forget all the money he took from his customers.... [paypalsucks.com]
  • At least us "gotta-have-it" people will have more wireless things at our finger tips with more objects orbiting the earth that can deliver some sort of content. More money changing hands means the economy will go up. I don't know by how much but... couldn't hurt (that bad) hehe
  • Nobody's flown solo into space since the Mercury program. Could this make it feasible?

    The Falcon LV will be able to orbit 473 kg, or a little over half a ton. The Mercury spacecraft, built with 1960 materials and technology, weighed about two tons. What would it weigh today, with judicious use of kevlar, Demron and other high-tech lightweight materials? Seems to me that it might be feasible to loft a passenger in his own spacecraft for $20 million, and let him orbit for as long as his supplies (and psyche) allow.

    And here's one more thought, useless as it might seem--how about using it as a one-man ground-to-ISS transfer vehicle? You could even send it up unmanned to provide for evacuating a single injured or ill crewmember from the station.
  • This project will fail. If he ever gets close to launching commercial payloads, Bush and his gub'ment cowboys will shut them down because "missiles can carry nukes", and "war on terror", and "think of the children", some dumb shit like that. Count on it. And going to a foreign country doesn't work either, space doesn't respect borders. You can't just launch a missile into orbit that only stays over Farawayland. It's gonna pass over someone our gov't cares about, and the Defense Dept will get their panties in a knot.

    Good idea, bad government.

  • I was doing some more thinking on this and came to the same thoughts I did on the Space Trip journey thing. Is this really the best use for his money? I mean come on, I walk down my street and there's homeless people struggling for food, abused kids and whatnot... How about helping some life here? Oh yah and it doesn't help that your business ethics are about as positive as well, my karma rating.
  • After watching vapor about terraforming Mars for 5 years I realized it would be more productive to terraform Earth. There are millions of square miles of useless desert which would be far easier to convert to forests and lakes than terraforming Mars. Once we converted all the Earth to useful land we could think about terraforming Mars and might be better equipped.
  • Musk came to the university I work at and gave a talk about Space X. They definitely have a lot of ambition, vision, and ideas.

    However, they might be a tad light in pragmatism. They only have 1 guy writing the avionics/flight code. They expect to only have something like 25 full time employees. They are really riding the edge of what is possible.

    They do have a lot of interesting ideas. Outsource as much as possible. Instead of having the tanks manufactured by the normal space vehicle companies they bid it out to companies that make large tanks for other things. That was a big cost savings. They are using LOX and RP1. Much easier to deal with than LOX and LH2. Oddly enogh this is what the Atlas V vehicle is using for propellants as well. All this outsourcing and such means that Space X will be primarily and assembly company. It reminds me a little bit of auto makers. Ford and such do the design work, have suppliers make most of the parts, and then assemble the vehicle themselves. Quality control should be a nightmare of a job.

    It was fun to put a multi-millionaire on the spot but it was more fun hearing about someone that is willing to try something bold and daring regarding space.

    Like I wrote above, these folks have a very big task ahead of them. They also have a lot of drive, too. Personally, I hope they succeeded. If nothing else it will be a big kick in the butt to NASA and the other launch vehicle companies around the world.
    2) Space X assembles everything
  • I remember a Slashdot article sometime ago that Indian space research organisation (ISRO) send satellites for a price less than the russian agency ... I think it will be very difficult for this guy to beat the indian price :)
  • It may have been free on Monday, but today it's in the Subscribers-only section of the web site....

Slashdot Top Deals

Serving coffee on aircraft causes turbulence.

Close