Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets

The FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation has released a
pretty interesting report on "Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and
Emerging Markets":

http://ast.faa.gov/files/pdf/Suborbital_Report.pdf

I found the detailed overview of potential markets for suborbital
vehicles particularly interesting. Here are the different possibilities
they listed (with many more details in the actual report):

Emerging markets:
* Tourism and adventure travel
* Science and high-speed research
* Microsatellite orbital insertion
* Microgravity research
* Media, advertising, and sponsorship
* Hardware qualification
* Military surveillance
* Space diving

Long-term markets:
* Fast package delivery
* High-speed aerospace transportation

Which of these markets do you folks think will be the most important in
the short-term and long-term? Are there any other potential markets
which were overlooked by the report?

"Neil Halelamien" wrote in message
oups.com...
The FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation has released a
pretty interesting report on "Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and
Emerging Markets":

http://ast.faa.gov/files/pdf/Suborbital_Report.pdf

I found the detailed overview of potential markets for suborbital
vehicles particularly interesting. Here are the different possibilities
they listed (with many more details in the actual report):

Emerging markets:
* Tourism and adventure travel
* Science and high-speed research
* Microsatellite orbital insertion
* Microgravity research
* Media, advertising, and sponsorship
* Hardware qualification
* Military surveillance
* Space diving

Long-term markets:
* Fast package delivery
* High-speed aerospace transportation

Which of these markets do you folks think will be the most important in
the short-term and long-term? Are there any other potential markets
which were overlooked by the report?


The two most important to the Pentagon are ASAT weaponry and space to ground
attack modalities.

MK

"The Mighty Krell" wrote:

:"Neil Halelamien" wrote in message
roups.com...
:
: Which of these markets do you folks think will be the most important in
: the short-term and long-term? Are there any other potential markets
: which were overlooked by the report?
:
:The two most important to the Pentagon are ASAT weaponry and space to ground
:attack modalities.

Neither of which is currently having any money spent on it that I'm
aware of. Your intellect and this 'market' would appear to be of
approximately the same size - i.e., vanishingly small.

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson

I'm not sure if I would consider those "commercial markets," as such.

Fred J. McCall said:

The Mighty Krell said:

:The two most important to the Pentagon are ASAT weaponry
:and space to ground attack modalities

Neither of which is currently having any money spent on it that I'm
aware of. Your intellect and this 'market' would appear to be of
approximately the same size - i.e., vanishingly small.

We know for sure that money was benig spent on this by the United
States Government in the 1980's, when the technology was _less_
advanced. If we are spending money on it now, it is very likely part
of the "black" (i.e. secret) budget. Why do you regard TMK as stupid
for bringing this issue up? It seems to me that he is more aware of
the history of ASAT and Space-to-Ground weapons systems than you, so it
is very inappropriate for you to label him as being foolish for
demonstrating knowledge which you obviously have failed to gain.

Sincerely Yours,
Jordan

"Jordan" wrote:

:Fred J. McCall said:
:
:The Mighty Krell said:
:
::The two most important to the Pentagon are ASAT weaponry
::and space to ground attack modalities
:
: Neither of which is currently having any money spent on it that I'm
: aware of. Your intellect and this 'market' would appear to be of
: approximately the same size - i.e., vanishingly small.
:
:We know for sure that money was benig spent on this by the United
:States Government in the 1980's, when the technology was _less_
:advanced.

Yes, we do. We put together and successfully tested the ASM-135A
against a satellite that was past end of mission. The program was
terminated in 1988.

:If we are spending money on it now, it is very likely part
f the "black" (i.e. secret) budget. Why do you regard TMK as stupid
:for bringing this issue up?

Because if those were the two big areas of interest to the Pentagon
there would be enough money being spent so that it would show up. The
Pentagon's big interests in space are imaging and surveillance systems
and communications network-centric control systems. Follow the money.

Because special purpose ASAT weaponry is pretty much redundant in a
world with NMD systems like LEAP and EKV, which can have significant
capability against things in LEO. Satellites are easier than inbound
warheads.

Because cleaning out satellites can be as simple as lofting a load of
ball bearings into a retrograde orbit, so anyone with a nice big space
booster can do it.

Because I note that even you are unable to point to ANY 'strike weapon
from orbit' systems, even going back to old public systems in the
1980s (which is apparently your excuse for thinking there is somehow
now some huge 'black' program to develop ASAT weapons). What would be
the point of such a weapon that would not be easily met by other,
cheaper systems?

Your (and his) thinking is PRECISELY that required for any good
conspiracy theory. The absence of any indication of activity is proof
that it is going on.

:It seems to me that he is more aware of
:the history of ASAT and Space-to-Ground weapons systems than you,

I think you'll find that reality isn't particularly amenable to
necessarily conforming to how things seem to you.

:so it
:is very inappropriate for you to label him as being foolish for
:demonstrating knowledge which you obviously have failed to gain.

See what I mean about reality not necessarily conforming just because
you think something?

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn