4 ms·

We've only been sending people to space for fifty years, there's still nothing "routine" about low earth orbit... That is the damaging legacy of STS. It's est

by tsotha 15y ago

We've only been sending people to space for fifty years, there's still nothing "routine" about low earth orbit... That is the damaging legacy of STS. It's established the expectation that going to orbit can never be done at a reasonable price, that there will never be anything people can do in space worth the staggering cost of getting them there. Getting to orbit could be routine, but we been marinating in expensive failure for so long the engineering that needs to be done to make it happen will never get public support in the US.

jerf 15y ago
Well, that's arguably one of the defining features of capitalism; the engineering doesn't need public support in the US. It just needs some investors with vision and eventual profitability. The way other socioeconomic systems tend to destroy that feature in passing (on their way to some other goal) is one of the major reasons they have been such overwhelming failures in practice. The last flight of the shuttle is a huge step in the right direction, historically so, not a regression. I respect it for what it did, but the best thing it could do now is retire with honor and dignity.
- tsotha 15y ago
  ...the engineering doesn't need public support in the US. It just needs some investors with vision and eventual profitability. Where is that profit going to come from? Space tourism? I will be very surprised if there will be a big ongoing demand for spending a few days vomiting in an orbiting can.
  - astine 15y ago
    "few days vomiting in an orbiting can." You clearly underestimate the desire of the average American to make himself severely uncomfortable for the sake of a thrill. At the current level of expense, space tourism will never be more than a status symbol for the super rich, but get the cost bellow a few thousand dollars and add a few amenities to the experience and people will go hog wild for it.
    - tsotha 15y ago
      You may be right, but I suspect interest will start to fade when the early customers get back and describe the experience. Inevitably one of the launches will go bad and kill the passengers. There will be calls for the government to make it safe, and that will be the end of space tourism.
  - jerf 15y ago
    "Where is that profit going to come from?" From providing services that are already being paid for, only for lower costs? Which generally has the effect of growing the economy in question? You are aware that there already is a space industry, right? Private companies paying real money to put real satellites up for various reasons? It doesn't take much Microeconomics 101 to think that dropping the cost to launch by a factor of four will tend to grow the already-existing economy. Skepticism about whether a viable space economy can exist at all is too late, that ship has sailed. Cheaper space access will enable more economic activity in existing domains, will enable new types of activities that aren't currently viable, and historically speaking, it's pretty safe to say that trying to guess in advance what will ultimately be the "killer app" is actually pretty hard, but given the existence of an already-viable economy it's more a matter of waiting and seeing than hoping.
    - tsotha 15y ago
      Oh, there's definitely money in launching satellites. But that market is already served by commercial companies. What we're talking about here is manned flights to orbit.

by tsotha 15y ago

jerf 15y ago

Well, that's arguably one of the defining features of capitalism; the engineering doesn't need public support in the US. It just needs some investors with vision and eventual profitability. The way other socioeconomic systems tend to destroy that feature in passing (on their way to some other goal) is one of the major reasons they have been such overwhelming failures in practice. The last flight of the shuttle is a huge step in the right direction, historically so, not a regression. I respect it for what it did, but the best thing it could do now is retire with honor and dignity.

tsotha 15y ago
...the engineering doesn't need public support in the US. It just needs some investors with vision and eventual profitability. Where is that profit going to come from? Space tourism? I will be very surprised if there will be a big ongoing demand for spending a few days vomiting in an orbiting can.
- astine 15y ago
  "few days vomiting in an orbiting can." You clearly underestimate the desire of the average American to make himself severely uncomfortable for the sake of a thrill. At the current level of expense, space tourism will never be more than a status symbol for the super rich, but get the cost bellow a few thousand dollars and add a few amenities to the experience and people will go hog wild for it.
  - tsotha 15y ago
    You may be right, but I suspect interest will start to fade when the early customers get back and describe the experience. Inevitably one of the launches will go bad and kill the passengers. There will be calls for the government to make it safe, and that will be the end of space tourism.
- jerf 15y ago
  "Where is that profit going to come from?" From providing services that are already being paid for, only for lower costs? Which generally has the effect of growing the economy in question? You are aware that there already is a space industry, right? Private companies paying real money to put real satellites up for various reasons? It doesn't take much Microeconomics 101 to think that dropping the cost to launch by a factor of four will tend to grow the already-existing economy. Skepticism about whether a viable space economy can exist at all is too late, that ship has sailed. Cheaper space access will enable more economic activity in existing domains, will enable new types of activities that aren't currently viable, and historically speaking, it's pretty safe to say that trying to guess in advance what will ultimately be the "killer app" is actually pretty hard, but given the existence of an already-viable economy it's more a matter of waiting and seeing than hoping.
  - tsotha 15y ago
    Oh, there's definitely money in launching satellites. But that market is already served by commercial companies. What we're talking about here is manned flights to orbit.