3 ms·

I think that indoor skydiving is closer to the Zero-G flight than the Zero-G flight is to the Virgin Galactic's space trip on a rocket launching from a plane, g

I think that indoor skydiving is closer to the Zero-G flight than the Zero-G flight is to the Virgin Galactic's space trip on a rocket launching from a plane, getting to Mach 2.9, getting an out-of-this-world view, and gliding to the landing. Do you disagree? Your comment about the 80% of the value came out as dismissive of Virgin Galactic's achievement. This is a company that is trying to come back after a deadly crash that could've stopped further work and to initiate space tourism. I get the usual HN contrarian skepticism, as I've participated in it also, but to see this comparison as one of the top comments here is disappointing.

lisper 8y ago
That may well be. Having not gone into space I can't speak authoritatively on that. However, I can say this: seeing the view from space is a visual experience. Visual experiences can be simulated, e.g. with VR, or high-def video. A simulated visual experience is very similar to the real thing. Free fall is different. Yes, you can get brief periods of free fall on, say, a roller coaster, or by jumping off a high dive. I have done all of these things, so I can tell you authoritatively that being in free fall for 30 seconds, not strapped in, and with no wind rushing past you, is completely different than being in free fall for a third of a second (high dive) or even three seconds (roller coaster). YMMV, of course, but for me that feeling of floating is a big draw of going into space. I'm sure the view is very nice too, but I've seen it.