Trouble In Branson-Land, As Would-Be Space Tourists Get Antsy Over Delays 77
schwit1 (797399) writes "Rumors are flying that some of the individuals who gave Virgin Galactic deposits for space tourism flights on SpaceShipTwo are demanding their money back. It appears that the most recent delay, revealed by Branson on David Letterman, is the cause." How much would you pay to go to space, if the ticket was only good starting 10 years from now? How about 20? How about, as Branson claims, if it was early next year?
They're not astronauts, they're ballast. (Score:5, Funny)
It seems some are claiming they won't consider themselves astronauts if the flight doesn't go above a certain height. Given that they add nothing to the mission other than weight, I say they won't be astronauts no matter how high the flight goes...they are just...ballast.
Re:They're not astronauts, they're ballast. (Score:5, Funny)
*Bob, tied to the sailboat* "I'm a sailor! I sail!"
Re: (Score:1)
I am a sail.
How much? (Score:2)
For a flight that doesn't reach orbit and stay there with the environment in 0G for at least a few orbits, I wouldn't pay anything. Heck, I won't pay a commercial airline to fly because the ratio of inconvenience to convenience+enjoyment is too high between the (id|patr)iot act's enforced paranoia and the seating designed by one-legged, one-armed engineers. Now an oceangoing cruise liner, that's something else again. I loves me a nice cruise. It's even worth going first class, which it definitely isn't in
Re: (Score:2)
$5,000 probably wouldn't even pay for the fuel required to lift a person that high. That would explain the ~$200,000 price tag.
Re: (Score:3)
"However, for a flight that *does* go to orbit and stays a few turns, and doesn't require a spacesuit"
Its probably a good idea to be wearing a spacesuit in case something goes wrong. Theres a lot of junk in low orbit, and if your small craft hits something and starts leaking it could get very uncomfortable. In a bigger craft you would have more time to get your suit on if there was an accident.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck, I know people who wear space-suit levels of protection and work within a couple of thousand feet of sea level. (what level of protection would you use to repair pumps and valve gear in a working sewage plant? Pretty comprehensively air-ti
Re:They're not astronauts, they're ballast. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:They're not astronauts, they're ballast. (Score:4, Informative)
Like the Mercury and Vostok guys, then?
"No, not spaceman. Specimin." - von Braun, in "The Right Stuff", speaking of the Mercury astronauts.
Re: (Score:2)
"No, not spaceman. Specimin." - von Braun, in "The Right Stuff", speaking of the Mercury astronauts.
You actually have that backwards. In the movie, von Braun is trying to say "spaceman" in his thick German accent and LBJ misunderstands it, asking "specimen?" To which von Braun shouts "spacey-man!" LBJ also misunderstands von Braun's pronunciation of "chimp." It's a pretty darn funny scene either way.
Not Like Mercury (Score:3)
Don't know about Vostok, and don't want to look up the other Mercury missions, but on the second manned orbital Mercury flight, Mercury-Atlas 7, the astronaut on board manually controlled the reentry due to equipment malfunction in the spacecraft. "At the retrofire event, the pitch horizon scanner malfunctioned once more, forcing Carpenter to manually control his reentry, which caused him to overshoot the planned splashdown point by 250 mi (400 km). ("The malfunction of the pitch horizon scanner circuit [a
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
According to Google (https://www.google.com/search?q=define+astronaut), an astronaut is "a person who is trained to travel in a spacecraft". It doesn't say you have to "add" to the mission.
Re: (Score:3)
Webdefinitions are one of the things I hate on google: People think it is google, while in fact it is Wikipedia. Instead of proper attribution (naming the author, the license, and so on), they just add a link to the site, and call it "web definition". And people who don't read the link think the information comes from google.
Re: (Score:3)
Since the results of "define astronaut", "a person who is trained to travel in a spacecraft", don't appear in the wiikpedia page at all, you may be completely wrong. Otherwise, though, nice off-topic anti-google rant.
While I see a big difference between crew, scientists, and paying passengers, once I put aside my incredible envy of anyone who can leave this small rock I've got to admit that they all deserve the term "astronaut". Wow!
Re: (Score:1)
That seems along the same lines as someone flying in an aircraft is "leaving this small rock". The only difference is altitude. Ohh you get outside Earth's atmosphere; big deal. I have no envy for them. To me sub-orbital passenger flights are a waste of money. Someone who contributes nothing other than cash and takes up space and cargo capacity is better described as "paying ballast".
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I see. Google has different versions of the "define" functionality running. The version with "a person who is trained to travel in a spacecraft" doesn't rely on wikipedia.
Re: (Score:2)
once I put aside my incredible envy of anyone who can leave this small rock
They're having a quick trip a few miles up in the air, not colonising the fucking galaxy.
Re: (Score:2)
attribution (naming the author, the license, and so on)
You're wrong, it means something different! [google.com] (Jokes aside, I don't think that the astronaut definition came from Wikipedia - unless your Google displays something else than my Google does, which happens to be a Wordnet entry [princeton.edu].)
Re: (Score:2)
According to Google (https://www.google.com/search?q=define+astronaut), an astronaut is "a person who is trained to travel in a spacecraft". It doesn't say you have to "add" to the mission.
According to that definition then someone who is trained and never leaves the ground has more right to that name
than someone who pays $250k to be a passenger on a spacecraft. I don't think being called an "astronaut" should
be the goal but rather that you've been to outer space.
Personally, the description of what you're buying, to me, leaves a lot to be desired. Before I would buy a ticket,
I would want to know there was ample time to experience weightlessness and take pictures out the window.
Does anyone kn
Re: (Score:3)
You're "weightless" in a parabolic arc, just like on on NASA's DC-9 "vomit comet", and you get more "zero g time" on the Vomit Comet than you will in Branson's carnival ride.
Second, Branson is redefining "space". The generally accepted edge of space is 62.x miles. Virgin Galactic is having trouble meeting 60.0 miles and is looking at switching fuels at the last minute to meet that more limited 60.0 goal. If 2.x miles doesn't sound like much, Mt. Everest is 5.5 miles high. This is like getting a 68%
Re: (Score:2)
This is like getting a 68% and calling it a C grade average.
That's not much of a curve. I've seen 18% considered the low end of C grade.
Re: (Score:2)
Either way, you didn't meet the standard definition...
Re: (Score:2)
Would you say Alan Shepard's 15 minute Mercury Seven suborbital flight which carried him to an altitude of 116 statute miles qualify him to be called an "astronaut"?
the virgin galactic craft isn't even a spacecraft (Score:5, Insightful)
more to the point, the virgin galactic craft doesn't go anywhere. it has no destination other than downrange. so all branson is selling is a roller coaster ride. and an expensive one at that.
the russians (and soon spacex) at least have a space station as a destination.
Re:the virgin galactic craft isn't even a spacecra (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
You need training and evaluation to go to the ISS though, if only to make sure you don't go nuts and push all the buttons. What Virgin offers is more like a normal flight, where the damage you can do is fairly minimal and the only training needed is an annoying video.
Re: (Score:3)
For space tourism flights to the International Space Station, they're regarded as spaceflight participants [wikipedia.org] rather than 'proper' astronauts (or cosmonauts).
Having seen quite how much training fully qualified astronauts and cosmonauts have to go through, I wouldn't be surprised if they become some vaguely protected terms in the not-so-far future...
Re: (Score:3)
So if you're primarily a scientist there to do zero-g experiments on the ISS, are you still an astronaut? Why, because you're a professional - but not really in space flight? If we ever get to airplane-like conditions, is the steward(ess) an astronaut, is it like the crew? Or do you have to actually have a part in flying the spaceship, like is the cook on a big sailboat a sailor? Not that it really matters, but...
Re: (Score:2)
they are just...ballast
On a ballastic trajectory...or ballistic, whatever. ;-) The masturbation substitute for space travel!
Any color as long as it's black (Score:2, Interesting)
If you have to ask (for your money back) you can't afford it.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have to ask (for your money back) you can't afford it.
What if you're just asking for your money back as a matter of principle?
Re: (Score:3)
Ready when its ready. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ready when its ready. (Score:5, Funny)
Passengers are actually Self-Loading Cargo.
Passengers are loaded into Cattle Class no matter how much they pay for their fodder.
Passengers are treated like toothpaste - forced in at one end, squeezed out at the other end.
Height is distance above ground (dirty brown stuff,)
Altitude is distance above mean sea level (dirty wet stuff)
Auto pilots were made so that Captain Speaking and First Officer Here (heroic chaps!) could check their stock options and give peace of mind to the Trolly Dolly - Cynthia Strapin, that for at least some portion of the flight the aircraft was actually under proper control.
I for one salute the brave, bold, adventurous, noble souls that want to go to the edge of space and have a peek, but I would rather spend the time in a broken down elevator with late '60s muzak and a herd of incontinent goats.
Re: (Score:2)
i want it now even if it kills me
What a misleading summary (Score:5, Informative)
"Some" is actually "one". Who will demand his money back if they can't make the altitude requirement, not because of delays. Other than that, everything about the summary is accurate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As for the price to flying to space I can't really comment since I wouldn't be buying tickets at all. Maybe one day when we have colonies somewhere to actually travel to, but not as things currently are.
Real zero-g (not Vomit Comet or theme park rides) would be pretty damn cool. Right now I'm looking at SpaceX and I really don't see a good reason why Dragon doesn't take more than 7 passengers, it seems they have plenty space [wikipedia.org] and it's supposed to be able to return 2500kg of pressurized cargo, so from what I can tell they should be able to put more like 20 people in that cabin if they stack the seats nicely. It's $140m/flight so that'd bring it down to $7 million and that's for a genuine LEO flight. If they
Re: (Score:2)
Real zero-g (not Vomit Comet or theme park rides) would be pretty damn cool.
Well, the Vomit Comet is exactly the same as LEO zero-g, it's just much shorter. All the Virgin Galactic guys are doing is extending that time from 30s to 300s. And at tremendous cost, I might add.
As for 140 people for a suborbital flight on Falcon 9, that sounds about right, maybe even a bit pessimistic. By my reckoning, the second stage with propellant and max payload masses somewhere in the vicinity of 100 tons, more than the MTOW of a Boeing 737-800 and at that mass, the first stage is enough to give t
Re: (Score:2)
Do you realize how big the hypersonic glider would have to be to seat 140 people? (Hint: Boeing 737 doesn't even seat 140 people)
Your weight estimates could be correct but there is no way you're gonna fit a 140-seat glider in the Falcon 9 fairings.
Anyways 5 minute weightless suborbital flight is so 1961. I would just make a stretched version of Dragon that seats 20 people (no cargo) and send them into orbit for $50k each.
Re: (Score:2)
Your weight estimates could be correct but there is no way you're gonna fit a 140-seat glider in the Falcon 9 fairings.
Of course it won't and I explicitly said to replace the entire second stage as well. I would have hoped it to be obvious that I was talking about reengineering large parts of the system.
Anyways 5 minute weightless suborbital flight is so 1961. I would just make a stretched version of Dragon that seats 20 people (no cargo) and send them into orbit for $50k each.
Or to Mars for perhaps $500k, I agree. I was just thinking out loud about the possibilities here, just to show that Virgin Galactic's system is an overpriced toy that could be done much cheaper by the likes of SpaceX.
Re: (Score:2)
(Hint: Boeing 737 doesn't even seat 140 people)
http://www.seatguru.com/airlin... [seatguru.com] 212 > 140
Re: (Score:3)
Real zero-g (not Vomit Comet or theme park rides) would be pretty damn cool
How is vomit comet not 'real zero-g?' Or is your measure based on length of time?
Because whether you're falling on the ISS or fallling on the Vomit Comet, you're still falling...
Covered in dead tree format before (Score:2)
Funny. Slashdot now follows the lead of Private Eye as well...
Virgin Galactic (Score:1)
"Virgin Galactic". lol. The dude's company is only proposing to launch peeps not even into orbit... up there pretty far, but not even into an orbit... and this guy calls his company "Galactic". The only thing "Galactic" about it is his ego. What a douche.
Re: (Score:1)
Not necessarily. Early customers had to pay "only" $200k, whereas it now costs $250k for a ticket, so there was *some* advantage to getting in early.
Space is anything not expressible as 'altitude' (Score:2)
Like "200km" (125mi for all you metrically challenged).
Imagine the laff ex-PanAm execs are having... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My thoughts (Score:3)
What they likely don't realize is that they paid for something that, essentially, didn't exist yet. Would you rather they rush and blow you up? Or wait a bit and have a relatively safe ride? (Yes, I say relatively...it is inherently risky after all) They jumped at the chance to be first so they could rub it in their friends' noses.
Me? I'll never be able to afford it, unfortunately. But if I could, I'd wait until it had gone a few times. Let the bugs get worked out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Branson's comments (Score:1)