Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

First Commercial Space Tourism Company 117

Posted by timothy from the quick-file-some-lawsuits dept.
uberdave writes "The Canadian Arrow team (one of the contenders for the Ansari X-Prize) has joined forces with Dr. Chirinjeev Kathuria, a leading American entrepreneur, to form a new corporation called Planetspace. The goal of the company is to make space flight available to the public within 24 months. Geoff Sheerin, President of Canadian Arrow, says that Planetspace has entered final discussions with partners who will establish a reality television show set in space, and with a company to hold an international lottery with space flight prizes. Planetspace expects to fly almost 2,000 new astronauts in the first five years of flying. Fares will start at USD $250,000 for a suborbital flight, including fourteen days training."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First Commercial Space Tourism Company More

First Commercial Space Tourism Company

Comments Filter:

  • What about Virgin? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Total_Wimp ( 564548 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @02:57PM (#12600188)
    This may be interesting, but these guys are definately not the first.

    TW
    • really? I can't find my space lotto ticket anywhere.. do you have the numbers of the last drawing?

      *grumble*

      I always lose the paper..

      • Re:What about Virgin? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by peculiarmethod ( 301094 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @03:27PM (#12600357) Journal
        incidentally.. you should know that America's finances during it's inception were secured thanks to a lotto. That, and extreme trust in the value of the newly printed money. (they gave up relying on english monies for various reasons, including taxation and govt control) Lottos are the very reason gambling is next to legal in most states these days. It's very profitable, and it WILL ensure the survival of this company if they can secure the safety in technology and insurance. Watch.

    • Re:What about Virgin? (Score:4, Informative)

      by oniony ( 228405 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @04:06PM (#12600587) Homepage
      Virgin Galactic was founded sometime last year.

      http://www.virgingalactic.com/en/ [virgingalactic.com]
      • This may be interesting, but these guys are definately not the first.

        Virgin Galactic was founded sometime last year.

        And MirCorp (who organized Tito's flight) sometime quite before that.

        • And MirCorp (who organized Tito's flight) sometime quite before that.

          Actually, Dennis Tito's flight to the ISS was brokered by Space Adventures [spaceadventures.com], not MirCorp. (Tito originally signed on with MirCorp, which was to fly him to Mir, but had to change plans when Russia decided to scuttle Mir. There is still some dispute between the two companies as to who should get credit for the deal.) Space Adventures also arranged Mark Shuttleworth's ISS flight a year later. The company has been around since the late 90

  • The amount of hot air that this 'news' has, is enough to give space tourism a big boost! :) *laugh*

  • Available to the public within 24 months (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Notice they didn't say which planet these 24 months were measured from.
  • Since these are suborbital flights, this may have the distinction of being the *quickest* reality show in history! (But maybe that's a good thing.)
    • Since these are suborbital flights, this may have the distinction of being the *quickest* reality show in history!
      I think that that's preferable to the inevitable moral questions that would arise the first time someone is voted "off the space station". ("Put him out the airlock!" "No, no! ARRrrgh ...")
  • of Virgin Atlantic/Cola/Radio/Records/Megastores/Trains/What ever has already started a company called "Virgin Galactic."
  • Lets see, with the pennies I earn, I should be ready to afford one in about 8½ years assuming I don't spend any of my money....

  • Yeah and (Score:5, Funny)

    by 77Punker ( 673758 ) <(ude.tniophgih) (ta) (40rcneps)> on Saturday May 21, 2005 @03:04PM (#12600232)
    You will be able to play Duke Nukem Forever on the Phantom game console during flight!

  • Total cost of space flight (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mothlos ( 832302 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @03:13PM (#12600275)
    So, if space flight really is becoming something consumers can do, what is the extra cost of all of the high atmospheric pollution and space junk? How are we going to keep low orbit from becoming the riskiest dodgeball court around?
    • There are two possibilities:

      1) You define "space flight" in relation to what they're currently doing. I.e., suborbital "couple minutes on an unscalable aerial rocketsled" as opposed to real space flight. There's no space junk, because if the craft isn't going to orbit, neither is the junk.

      2) You define "space flight" the way it has historically been viewed, as LEO or higher. No companies are offering this at this point, and won't be until costs can go way down.

      Craft like Canadian Arrow and SpaceShipOn
    • Pollution? Last I checked the space shuttle used hyrdrogen fuel ( = no pollution). Unless of course you want to start arguing that water vapor is harmful to the atmosphere.
      • From Wikipedia:

        The propellant mixture in each SRB motor consists of ammonium perchlorate [wikipedia.org] (oxidizer, 69.6 percent by weight), aluminum (fuel, 16 percent), iron oxide (a catalyst, 0.4 percent), a polymer (a binder that holds the mixture together, 12.04 percent), and an epoxy curing agent (1.96 percent).
  • Is it just me, or does the website look like 12-yr old's first try with HTML? does that mean i'm in good hands?
    • meta name="Generator" content="SiteDesigner"

      What does that tell you?

    • Is it just me, or does the website look like 12-yr old's first try with HTML? does that mean i'm in good hands?

      Yes, the site design is atrocious. But nobody else is promising to take people to Jupiter for $250,000.

      Okay, I'm being silly. What they should do with the site before they make any other much-needed changes is take away the Jupiter closeup, cause the passengers aren't going to be seeing that. They should put a big, beautiful, suborbital shot of Earth up on the front page, and carefully inser

    • Actually, I don't even think that's human created code. Look's awfully typical of a WYSIWYG editor to me. Unless of course the person has never ever looked at a decent piece of HTML code before. Case in point, every line has a new <font> tag on it. Grr... That's the reason that microsoft is crap: bloated code. And while I'm deviating, I guess I'll share my experience with a publisher exported web page. The page was no longer than 2 normal screen lengths, which would normally be about 2kb of cod
  • I don't really see the point in this, granted there are a lot of people in the world with that much disposable income but that can't seriously be enough to make this be a profitable venture. I didn't RTFA but how many people fit into this spacecraft?
  • Space Adventures helped broker the $20mil Space Station rides for Dennis Tito and Mark Shuttleworth. They are also partnered with a number of rocket companies and are ready to provide passengers to the first one with an operating system.

    http://www.spaceadventures.com/intro [spaceadventures.com]

  • So let me get this straight... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DaedalusLogic ( 449896 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @03:18PM (#12600306)
    A company that hasn't put anyone... anyone at all... into space, is starting a company to put people into space.

    One step at a time guys...

    If the guys financing hem have money to burn... I've got a company with a real product taat could use some investment.
    • If the guys financing hem have money to burn... I've got a company with a real product taat could use some investment.

      I hope it's not a spelling corrector!

      • Dont be silly and look at his name, obviously its some sort of human powered flying contraption. I believe the company is especially interested in hiring someone to fill the Icarus position to replace the previous incumbent who left the company in rather unfortunate circumstances.
    • A company that hasn't put anyone... anyone at all... into space, is starting a company to put people into space.

      One step at a time guys...

      Most companies start up doing something they haven't done yet. Very few companies start up doing something they've already done. Arguably, no companies do.

      How many companies have put people in space?
      Zero. Only governments have put people into space (assuming "space" is LEO or better). And you are suggesting no companies do so until they have done so.

      Worse than that y

  • Yes, this looks do-able (Score:3, Interesting)

    by anubi ( 640541 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @03:19PM (#12600311) Journal
    But should we?

    Given the present condition of the supply of energies we have available and our rates of consumption, is this yet another luxury for the few that will needlessly deplete our supply of fuels?

    Yes, I know the rich can easily afford it.

    And with yet more demand on a the growing scarcity of petrochemical fuels powering the whole shebang, I guess we just watch fuel costs for everybody step up another notch. Economics. Supply and demand.

    Sometimes I wonder where our head is at when we choose to expend limited resources so frivously.

    But then, I have wondered that for a long time on other matters... its a wonder to me that America is still a "superpower" given the way we squander our resources.

    • I expect more petroleum will be used for packaging of Hot Wheels cars and Playstation games for the upcoming Christmas season than would be used for a years worth of flights for this.

      Your point?

      • You have a very valid point.

        Useless packaging is another of my pet peeves.

        I often see more energy put into packaging than in the product. And it grieves me to see our resources being squandered so.

        If the rest of the world sees America as a pig, even as an American citizen, I feel they are justified.

        I am reminded of our wastefulness every Monday morning, which is trash day, and I see what I have for the trash man. 99% useless packaging.

        A simple paper box would have sufficed nicely, and if made

        • If you look at America's pollution versus GDP, we don't look nearly so piggish.

          Yes, America is one of the biggest polluters. America is also one of the biggest producers.

          But, of course, that doesn't make for a nice self-loathing sound bite, so it's never going to matter, will it?
    • Ok, all these experts say we'll run out of fossil fuels in about 50 years at our current consumption.
      When we run out of crap to burn, no more CO2, thus global warming will brought to an end.
      Sure, our economy will be doomed but, our kids can worry about that. They'll have some crazy national debt to deal with anyway.

      • Ok, all these experts say we'll run out of fossil fuels in about 50 years at our current consumption.

        It was recently posited to me that the military will likely solve the fuel problem within the 50 years needed. How can I be so sure? Well, we know that the fuel is running out. We know that other countries (such as China [china.org.cn]) are securing long-term access [alternet.org] to these limited resources. It becomes a strategic imperitive to ensure our military can function on a limited supply.

        Now, I'm not big fan of the

    • This is a huge boon for spaceflight.

      I'd guess another 500 flights/year could come because of this. This is going to mean a huge infrastructure will spring up because of this.

      That is going to mean it's going to be much easier to build more spacecraft, the cost of launching per tonne will go down, meaning things like helium extraction from the moon could become viable, along with space-based power collection (set up a solar panel fab in space and get the needed raw materials from space).
    • Well considering this 'shebang' like the original design it is 'inspired' by, flies on liquid oxygen and alcohol.. No petrochemicals are harmed in the process..
      • And just what energy source powered the synthesis of the liquid oxygen and alcohol. Granted we could probably distill the alcohol from plants, but what is powering the compressors that manufacture the liquid oxygen?

    • But should we?

      Yes.

      Given the present condition of the supply of energies we have available and our rates of consumption, is this yet another luxury for the few that will needlessly deplete our supply of fuels?

      Only to those with limited scope, vision, and foresight. By increasing access to space, you eventually lead to the lower cost of said access, and the increasing likelihood of it becomming a commodity.

      These are necessary to future energy needs of the human race. Examples include future fusion fue
  • lance will finally fulfill his dream of being a space cowboy.

  • The goal of the company is to make space flight available to the public within 24 months.

    Is that like two twelvemonths? That is just so cool, imagine being able to say happy new twelvemonth and watch the fireworks from space!

  • Sadness (Score:4, Funny)

    by MynockGuano ( 164259 ) <hyperactiveChipmunk+slashdot.gmail@com> on Saturday May 21, 2005 @03:32PM (#12600383)
    ...and today, a new standard of total sadness was achieved as it was announced that the first commercial venture to put humans in space will be in the form of a reality television show.
  • But charging 250,000 dollars for something is not bringing it to the public, its bringing it to a wealthy elite.
    • But charging 250,000 dollars for something is not bringing it to the public, its bringing it to a wealthy elite.

      Yeah, because rich people aren't people are they?

      • Of course they are people, but they are not the community or people as a whole which is what public means.

        If you are in a position to be able to drop a quarter mill on a trip then good for you but dont try and market it as something available to the public when clearly it is beyond the means of all but a tiny elite.
        • You gotta start charging high if you're gonna raise the capital to develop the technology to make it available to everyone.

          And it's when you can start making it available to everyone that you can start making serious money.

          Look at refrigerators, microwaves, cars. All of them originally rich peoples' toys, but nowadays, they're nothing special at all.

          And none of it was made a bit easier by class warfare games.
        • Hate to break it to you, but by that definition air travel isn't really available to the public. After all, a welfare mom isn't really able to aford a $300 trip across the country without impacting her electric bill.

          Many of the working poor can't afford to buy a new car, or even a decent used one, especially if you factor insurance, gas and maintenance into the deal.

          I get your point, that only an elite few will be able to afford space travel. Please try to get my point that a decent percentage of Americ
    • Economies of scale. Once this becomes popular, the infrastructure, research, demand, and the like will allow it to become cheaper. Lots of technologies start as toys for the rich, and then get bootstrapped into everyday use this way.
    • Yeah, those people who build companies and have busted their asses to get rich (or are the beneificiaries of those who busted their asses to make themselves and their children rich) don't deserve to spend that money on anything! They should be obligated to give it away to the poorer among us, who use our average incomes to buy playstations and toys to decorate our cubicle office.

      Yeah, fuck those stupid entrepranuerial cocksuckers! HOW DARE THEY!
    • This may be a new concept for you, so bear with me: Rich people can do things that poor people can't, and they tend to be able to do things before poor people can. This is a fact of life.

      However, bear in mind that once a company is formed that can make a profitable round-trip to space for $250,000, they will have the funding to research and make the next generation of space vehicles that can do it for $200,000. Then $100,000.

      Think of the first automobiles. Only a few 'wealthy elite' could buy them, b

  • "Eventually, our goal is to make PLANETSPACE a public company," said Mr. Sheerin

    Uh, yeah. Because there's no other reason for it. $250,000 for zero g? How much to tandem jump? Lot's of problems here. Buyer beware.
  • I'm already a certified space cadet. Do I get a discount?
  • Somewhat morbid, but it's a sure-fire bet that sooner or later (my guess is sooner) one of these things is going to crash and burn. There may be a lot of excitement now and people queing up to thrown money at private spaceflight, but I wonder how big the market will be after the first few wealthy folks are burnt to a crisp on re-entry or make thier very own crater in the desert?

    I'm surprised Virgin have staked their brand on something so risky.

    • You gotta start somewhere. This has a lot in common with the worldly exploring our kind has been doing for 200,000 years (give or take).
    • The same way accidents in commercial airliners [wikipedia.org] have not grounded commercial flying, a small percentage of accidents in spaceflight will not stop people from going to space.

      However, I think this will start as a rich person "extreme sport" analogue, which is done knowing the risks involved, just like bungee jumping, parachuting or cave diving.

  • I can see it now... (Score:3, Funny)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @03:47PM (#12600459)
    "...discussions with partners who will establish a reality television show set in space..."

    Captain: Do you see any signs of intelligent life on that planet?

    Science officer: Most definitely not, sir!
  • "Planetspace expects to fly almost 2,000 new astronauts in the first five years of flying"

    Those guys will be as much astronauts as i am a pilot when im flying to vacation.
    • No, if I'm remembering the definition correctly an astronaut is anyone that's travelled into space. (The exact definition of that varies - above 100km for most people, about 50 miles for the US, if memory serves). There's also the issue that different countries call their astronauts different things, and I'm not sure if cosmonauts/taikonauts(sp?) etc. count as astronauts - probably depends on who you ask.

      When you fly in a plane you are not a airplane pilot, you are however an "aeronaut" (I think that's a
  • ...when I say: SCREW SUB-ORBITAL FLIGHT.

    If I want a quick rush I'll get on a damn roller-coaster.

    Put me in orbit for a week, and bring me back safely.

    • I agree with you. I want to actually go into space, not "sub orbital space" ... but actual space, and I want to stay there for a while. Sub-orbital flight, especially at $250000 a pop, is a rip-off. I wouldn't pay that price for space flight, but I'd pay that price for the chance to do grunt-work for scientists who secretly work on top secret projects throughout the solar system. I'd pay to work!
  • Well, one advantage of this form of travel is that if the plane malfunctions, there's no meddlesome debris to deal with. On a more serious note, would a black-box like recording system be plausible for this? I.e. wouldn't it burn up in re-entry if the plane blew up? Or does sub-orbital imply that there isn't enough atmosphere?
    • The black box would be made out of something that wouldn't burn up. You can't make rockets out of such stuff because it's too heavy and you'd never get off the ground, but a black box is small enough to make it practical.

      I believe the space shuttle has such a black box and they found the Columbia's one shortly after it burned up.

  • not extensible (Score:2, Interesting)

    by deathguppie ( 768263 )

    This is basically a single stage booster system based on 50 year old technoligy.

    In order to move to higher "orbital" flights the cost of design and equiptment goes up in multiples using this old school rocketeering tech. It means that the average cost per person will go from $250,000 to more like $1.5M and that makes it highly unlikely that we will see anything more than suborbital shots from this. It's a cheap thrill ride but says nothing of our future space exploration.

    • In order to move to higher "orbital" flights the cost of design and equiptment goes up in multiples using this old school rocketeering tech. It means that the average cost per person will go from $250,000 to more like $1.5M and that makes it highly unlikely that we will see anything more than suborbital shots from this. It's a cheap thrill ride but says nothing of our future space exploration.

      The real obstacles to space tourism aren't technology but economic and political. As you noted, it is feasible to

    • This is basically a single stage booster system based on 50 year old technoligy.

      In the same way that the 2005 Honda Prius is based on technology a century old - I.E. not really. The aerodynamics are different, the structure is different, the control system is different, the materials are different... It's a two stage vehicle vice one stage of the original, it incorporates recovery systems not present in the original...

      That being said; one wonders how much hype is involved here. For a vehicle that's p

      • Re:not extensible (Score:3, Informative)

        by uberdave ( 526529 )
        They've done engine tests, and capsule recovery tests, and they've got plenty of signs of flight hardware. It was recently touring Chicago. These [canadianarrow.com] are not photoshopped pictures. The rocket is a real thing. I've seen it.
    • It's a cheap thrill ride but says nothing of our future space exploration.

      No, it bridges the mental gap between what people think we CAN do and what we really CAN do. Right now people tend to believe anything beyond airliners is unreasonably hard and the sole domain of governments. When that barrier is broken down, investment for further fights and trips become more available.
  • Uh.. with it's original design based on a V2 rocket. I hope it does not carry any warhead :)

  • Now all they need is a working rocket!

    *cough Vaporware cough*

  • De vinci and Canadian Arrow and Hot Air (Score:3, Insightful)

    by augustz ( 18082 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @06:03PM (#12601137)
    First the daVinci project made a TON of noise about their October 2004 launch plans. Did those ever happen?

    Then we have aera corp, which is selling tickets for rides NEXT YEAR. They are ALREADY selling these. This is without demonstrating anything, or even having an engine, much less a space vehicle that can support a crew of humans. They have THIRTY flights scheduled for 2007.

    "We're using such plain-vanilla technology that very little detailed testing is required," Sprague said.

    MOTHER OF GOD!

    Now we have this Canadian Arrow group. I mean, NONE of these guys has even gone to space ONCE with even a test pilot! I guess I'd just be a little cautious going up in things from these operations, hopefully folks considering this get some good advice before signing up.

    The one contender I have some faith in is Burt Rutan and the Virgin Galatic effort.

    These guys actually test, have actually gone to sub-orbital space and back with real live people inside their vehicle. Solid history building actual flying machines that don't kill people, and met some folks with great things to say about the group.

    Curiously, I also noticed they don't have as many hot air releases.

    So, while some folks seem to get tons of PR and are ALREADY selling tickets, I'd keep the eyes away from the Golden Palance Casino Davinci Project, Aerea Corp or Canadian arrow, and on Burt Rutan and his gang.
  • It's a two-stage rocket. The first stage is reusable, which is nice, since it should keep costs down.

    What worries me is that the second stage is propelled by four solid-fuel rockets. Suppose one of these babies doesn't work for some reason. The other three will fire, giving asymmetrical thrust, causing the second stage to spin. Being solid rockets, they can't be stopped once they are lit, so you'll just keep spinning faster and faster until the fuel runs out, at which point (aside from having passed o

  • timothy is an idiot moderator (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This about the fourth commercial space company.

Slashdot Top Deals

BLISS is ignorance.

Close