Space tourism

[Shadowfax]

Well, a lot of people would like to make a trip into space, I assume. I certainly would like to do that.
Currently, the pricetag is app. 20 million dollars, to be paid to the russians for a one-week trip to the ISS.
And places aren't really easily obtained.


A few years the X-prize was created..IMO a really good idea to promote the idea of space tourism. The price is 10 million dollars, plus infinite fame.
I personally don't think that private companies will be able to succeed this challenge within the next 3 ~ 4 years, but some people are saying that 2003 will be the year...we'll have to see about that

from the X-prize website:

The X PRIZE is a $10,000,000 prize to jumpstart the space tourism industry through competition between the most talented entrepreneurs and rocket experts in the world. The $10 Million cash prize will be awarded to the first team that:

- Privately finances, builds & launches a spaceship, able to carry 3 people to 100 kilometers (62.5 miles)
- Returns safely to Earth
- Repeats the launch with the same ship within 2 weeks

Source: here

So, how do other people think about space tourism? You think it's gonna be possible within the upcoming 5 years? Or are we risking too much? Personally I think the chances that people will die in this contest is really high....but I might be wrong...
So, what are your ideas on this?

 

[Jeslek]

I would pay $20 million yes. I don't think the competition is going to do a lot though, its been there for years. We need more technology especially in advanced physics. All our computers can't do shit if we don't get an antigravity drive or at least something like repulsors or impulse drives.

 

[Shadowfax]

That's the whole problem with space travel in general at the moment.
Back in the 1930's to 1970's, there was a lot of innovation. New ideas who were thought to be impossible were becoming reality.

I don't want to speak anything bad of the current developments, because there are a LOT of people putting much effort into space travel. And there are still new ideas being developed, but they're not radical anymore.
There isn't as much innovation as there once was.

In the beginning people thought that liquid fueled rockets were impossible, but Goddard and Von Braun thought it could be done, so they put all their efforts into achieving that goal

The most 'radical' development I've noticed in the last years, when it comes to propulsion, are the ion-engine developed for Deep Space 1, and the Aerospike engine for the X-33.
It required a whole other approach that with traditional rocket engines, and that new way of thinking ended in new designs.
I wish that there would be more fundings for new developments
I would so much like to participate in that!

Too bad that money is still the biggest issue....


If anyone likes some more info on the Aerospike engine, this is a nice link

Some pictures from the ion-engine...

Deep Space 1

 

[outside looking in]

Advanced propulsion hinges on a better understanding of fundamental physics. And, it is quite possible that when we have mastered that understanding, we will know that we are as advanced as we will ever be.

 

[Aunty Em]

Since the introduction of the space shuttle, space flight has become a physical reality for greater numbers of ordinary people due to the fact that you no longer have to be superfit to withstand the pressures of escape velocity. This has been reduced from the approx 7-8Gs of Gemini and Saturn V rockets to 3Gs, which is lower than some of the bigger rollercoasters will pull on a fun day out.

They also hold a crew of seven and since they only require one pilot and one co-pilot per mission that frees up 5 places for other scientists, etc. So don't forget to apply when NASA and ESA next put out the call for new astronuts! Let them pay you!

 

[Shadowfax]

Since the introduction of the space shuttle, space flight has become a physical reality for greater numbers of ordinary people due to the fact that you no longer have to be superfit to withstand the pressures of escape velocity. This has been reduced from the approx 7-8Gs of Gemini and Saturn V rockets to 3Gs, which is lower than some of the bigger rollercoasters will pull on a fun day out.

Don't know about the G force on Gemini missions, but the G-forces on the Saturn V missions were a lot higher than the current ones on the Space Shuttle flights, because they needed enough speed to escape the earths gravitational influence completely.
Space Shuttles stay in orbit around the earth, and don't have to escape that force, so the acceleration can be lower than those needed on the Saturn V missions.

 

[Aunty Em]

enough speed to escape the earths gravitational influence completely

Yes I said that. That's what "escape velocity" means - the acceleration required to escape the gravitational influence of the Earth. I just assumed most people would know the term - obviously I was wrong, but then I'm a scientist and I've been following the human space program since Apollo 8 on and off.

At the moment I'm following the joint NASA & ESA EOS program(Earth Observation) - satillite remote sensing - which is trying to determine the longterm effects we are having on our environment.

 

[Shadowfax]

Yes I said that. That's what "escape velocity" means - the acceleration required to escape the gravitational influence of the Earth. I just assumed most people would know the term - obviously I was wrong, but then I'm a scientist and I've been following the human space program since Apollo 8 on and off.

OK, didn't know that
Most people define escape velocity as the speed that is needed to orbit the earth, not to escape the gravitational force completely
I knew the meaning, but didn't know you knew

 

[Aunty Em]

Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups...

Yep - I often screw up by making too many assumptions - maybe one day I'll learn not to .... but I haven't so far so I doubt it. LOL!