NASA - Commercialization of Space transport

[TaunTaun]

NASA takes one giant leap into commerical space flight - FederalNewsRadio.com

With the scraping of the NASA Space Shuttle program, and several disasterous failures of the Soyuz rocket from Russia, there has been a very lacking ability to reliably launch missions to space. Whether for the international space station, or launching higher weight payloads, the only thing recently going into space at a cost effective means have been satellites.

SpaceX is scheduled this week to launch one of their Dragon Spacecraft using the Falcon 9 launching system.

This will be the first pure commercial space launch using a low-cost transport option. Prior to this, a few companies have been able to do satellite launches, but this will be the first Paid For launch of a system with the capability to do cargo or human transport.

For reference, SpaceX is also developing commerical spaceflight transport. Looks like paid for launches wont begin there for tourism until about 2015.

I find this some pretty exciting stuff.

 

[rambone]

How much is it gonna cost the taxpayers?

 

[TaunTaun]

$1.7 Billion initial development for Falcon 9 system.(Only part of this was govt funded. Not sure on hard number)

$27 million per launch for SpaceX Dragon capsule with Falcon 9 rocket system.

Space Shuttle Missions generally costed $500 mil a piece. But divided out with refurb/development/etc costs, average price per launch came out to $1.5 Billion.

 

[rambone]

Put that on my tab.

 

[strahd71]

this is my opinion and its just an opinion only

i like NASA, i like the space program but at this time it should be suspended and revamped. a big part of it should be privatized. nothing will drive the cost down like free market competition, and nothing will speed up development like free market competition.

with all the problems we have with spending and debt i just dont see how this is a wise expenditure at this point. i'm not saying dismantle it completely but its another area that seems to be completely out of control and i'm not sure how much we've really benefited from it.

jake

 

[bobzilla]

....but its another area that seems to be completely out of control and i'm not sure how much we've really benefited from it.

jake

You typed that because of one of the boggest benefits from NASA. Computer processing speeds, micro-chip development were all driven by the need for faster, more accurate and lighter computing power. When you're launching 500 tons into low earth orbit, weight and accuracy are both important.

There have also been medical advancements from low gravity experiments etc.

 

[strahd71]

You typed that because of one of the boggest benefits from NASA. Computer processing speeds, micro-chip development were all driven by the need for faster, more accurate and lighter computing power. When you're launching 500 tons into low earth orbit, weight and accuracy are both important.

There have also been medical advancements from low gravity experiments etc.

like i said i'm not sure. unlike a lot of folks on here i'm ok with the possibility of being wrong i wont run a thread up a couple hundred pages just to argue a point, and i'm not offended if someone has a different opinion, and i did preface my post with "its just my opinion" so my disclaimer was in place.

but i would still question if the benefits have been worth the billions? i dont know and i doubt anyone else really does either, how do you put a price tag on that?

jake

 

[eldirector]

We have reaped TONS of benefits from space research and exploration. Tang, anyone?

That said, I agree that NASA has outlived its usefulness. Plenty of commercial enterprises are ready and willing to take it from here. IF (big if) the .gov spends anything, it should be relegated to research grants.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I can see both sides of the coin. While I wouldn't eliminate NASA as it is useful for purposes very beneficial to us individually and nationally, it should not be a closed fiefdom but rather be more inclusive of the private sector. A big part of its problems as I see them is the philosophical inbreeding that happens in a giant closed room in which no new outside thoughts are permitted to enter. Finding more new purposes and more outside participation could make it very worthwhile both in terms of general utility and national interests.

I almost forgot to add that when the private sector is brought in, there is much more incentive to perform than there is with people who will be paid the same regardless of outcome.

 

[bobzilla]

like i said i'm not sure. unlike a lot of folks on here i'm ok with the possibility of being wrong i wont run a thread up a couple hundred pages just to argue a point, and i'm not offended if someone has a different opinion, and i did preface my post with "its just my opinion" so my disclaimer was in place.

but i would still question if the benefits have been worth the billions? i dont know and i doubt anyone else really does either, how do you put a price tag on that?

jake

I'd say from 1960 to about 1984 they were worth every dime we spent twice. From the Challenger explosion forward.... no. It turned into typical gov't run silliness. We still gained much valuable information, technology and medical breakthrough's throughout that time period, but the benefit per dollar was no where near what it was earlier in the program.

All my opinions here as well. In the 60's there was no one but Nasa that could have developed what they did in the time they did it. Now, with the private sector growing, technology being grown and expanded more there than in the gov't sector it's time to transition Nasa into a joint venture with the private sector. Let NASA (gov't) run/maintain the launch facilities (infastructure) and let the private sector develop the delivery vehicles and personnel.

 

[strahd71]

I'd say from 1960 to about 1984 they were worth every dime we spent twice. From the Challenger explosion forward.... no. It turned into typical gov't run silliness. We still gained much valuable information, technology and medical breakthrough's throughout that time period, but the benefit per dollar was no where near what it was earlier in the program.

All my opinions here as well. In the 60's there was no one but Nasa that could have developed what they did in the time they did it. Now, with the private sector growing, technology being grown and expanded more there than in the gov't sector it's time to transition Nasa into a joint venture with the private sector. Let NASA (gov't) run/maintain the launch facilities (infastructure) and let the private sector develop the delivery vehicles and personnel.

your opinions sound quite reasonable my friend! and i agree with allowing the gov to maintain the facilities for now at least unless a better option comes along, but having been to cape canaveral twice, thats gonna be tough to do i think. its pretty impressive but then again i dont know jack

jake

 

[bobzilla]

your opinions sound quite reasonable my friend! and i agree with allowing the gov to maintain the facilities for now at least unless a better option comes along, but having been to cape canaveral twice, thats gonna be tough to do i think. its pretty impressive but then again i dont know jack

jake

yeah, I've been a space junkie since I could remember. Space Academy in 1990 (8th grade) and followed it since. More tours through Cape Canaveral than I can remember. The facility is nice, they have the infastructure to handle multiple launches at the same time etc. It would be a waste to ignore all that to build something else.

 

[indykid]

As a child of the space age, the son of someone directly responsible for some of the greatest achievements in our space age, I have to agree that getting NASA on the sidelines of manned (tourist) space flight, my fear that good honest civilian competition, as a free market should be would go down the drain the first time a group of civilians come to grief as any manned endeavor can do.

Like a plane crash, the first civilian space craft to crash will bring out every lawyer from under every rock, and we will slowly see the government start to regulate, and thereby take over the civilian space flight program, if not end it because we are not perfect.

Still, I would love to ride a Boeing Spaceliner into orbit!

 

[strahd71]

yeah, I've been a space junkie since I could remember. Space Academy in 1990 (8th grade) and followed it since. More tours through Cape Canaveral than I can remember. The facility is nice, they have the infastructure to handle multiple launches at the same time etc. It would be a waste to ignore all that to build something else.

correct and i know this is a dirty word here but "oversight" wouldnt be a bad idea and NASA has been doing it the longest, it would be silly to ignore the brains there since up to this point they have written the book.

As a child of the space age, the son of someone directly responsible for some of the greatest achievements in our space age, I have to agree that getting NASA on the sidelines of manned (tourist) space flight, my fear that good honest civilian competition, as a free market should be would go down the drain the first time a group of civilians come to grief as any manned endeavor can do.

Like a plane crash, the first civilian space craft to crash will bring out every lawyer from under every rock, and we will slowly see the government start to regulate, and thereby take over the civilian space flight program, if not end it because we are not perfect.

Still, I would love to ride a Boeing Spaceliner into orbit!

well if we can ever get a good conservative government and get good torte reform maybe this doesnt have to be? wouldnt hold my breathe on it.

technology is pretty amazing right now, i'm only 40 and the changes just in my life time is mind boggling.

i would love to see us do stuff like moon bases and real space travel or whatever the smart guys decide is the right things to do. but we need to do it from a position of strength not bankruptcy

jake

 

[TaunTaun]

correct and i know this is a dirty word here but "oversight" wouldnt be a bad idea and NASA has been doing it the longest, it would be silly to ignore the brains there since up to this point they have written the book.



well if we can ever get a good conservative government and get good torte reform maybe this doesnt have to be? wouldnt hold my breathe on it.

technology is pretty amazing right now, i'm only 40 and the changes just in my life time is mind boggling.

i would love to see us do stuff like moon bases and real space travel or whatever the smart guys decide is the right things to do. but we need to do it from a position of strength not bankruptcy

jake

I agree, it does you no good to have the fastest, prettiest, most elegant car in the road if you don't have the money left to pay for gas and the occasional new tire.

 

[giovani]

Every day every American comes into contact with something invented by or improved by NASA .
For me it was the first thing i touched the scratch resistant lenses in my specs.

 

[bobzilla]

I remember in 3rd grade NASA was planning a manned mission to Mars. They had devised an ingenuous plan to create a greenhouse before the astronauts made it there. It would land and set up via remote robots so that by the time the astronauts landed, their "base" would already have breathable air.

That's somethign I would love to see still happen.

I'm 36 (turn 37 in December) and I remember as a kid that the idea that people would have mobile devices that would allow them to video call another person so they could bot hsee each other was the things of sci-fi movies. Now.... it's common place. A computer was something that weighed a lot and was not very practical. CD's were just coming into popularity. Cars were just getting away from Carb's to that mysterious fuel injection. TV's? No one had a TV bigger than 27" that I knew of.

So many things have happened in our lifetime.... the cure for many cancers. Most common diseases from the first half of the 20th century are nothing to even bother with. Technology has exploded around us both for the good and bad.

 

[TaunTaun]

Commercial space race at make-or-break moment with looming launch | Fox News

Fox just came in with an article on it. Invoking the name of Solyndra.

Updated numbers of costs from Fox:

The unmanned SpaceX launch set for Saturday is for cargo only, not crew. It's tied to a NASA contract worth up to $1.6 billion to fly a dozen cargo missions to the station. One other company, Orbital Sciences, has a similar NASA cargo contract.
SpaceX, which has received $381 million to date for cargo mission development alone, is optimistic but stresses that success is not guaranteed during the launch.

Second Article from Fox speaking on the cost of space travel.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/05/17/what-will-commercial-spaceflight-cost/