Past Perfect, Future Misleading

The sonic boom issue was questionable all along, yes. But it was not
clear just how much people would put up with. Now we think we know.

However, if you're required to forsee fuel price increases, or new
engine noise rules, when your design was about as loud as its operating
contemporaries, then all new businesses and projects must hire a
psychic, yes?

Knowing in advance what the specific new restrictions would be would
require a psychic - but knowing that there =would be= new restrictions
of some kind is predictable, because there usually are. You need to
design a system flexible enough to deal with that kind of possibility,
and have the need for redevelopment costs to deal with them on your
balance sheet.

"John Ordover" wrote in message
m...
Even I am more optimistic than that - I think there probably is a way
to exploit space to make a bundle that no one has thought of yet.

And that way will only be found by people looking for and working
on answers, not someone that simply collects negatives.

Assuming they are actually working on it, rather than deluding
themselves with dreams of asteroid mining, joyrides, and other such
dead ends.

Clearly you have not researched these areas. You have a problem with
'Killer App syndrome' in which any revenue stream must stand alone
and support the entire development and exploitation effort. Either of
the items you mentioned will not do the whole job, no one item will.

What is required is to integrate as many revenue streams as possible
into a coherent business plan. Joyrides and asteroid mining do not fit
into the same plan. We once identified 9 possible revenue streams
for one vehicle. Each inadequate alone, sufficient with margin as a group.

Also you do not go from zero to unlimited access in one jump. Any
coherent plan includes as large a number of profitable intermediate
steps as possible. Fortunes and progress are made in the margins.
Identifying these margins is a job in itself for the careful investigator.
Unlimited pessimism or optimism is a hindrance.

These are hard lessons I learned building one company, and the
lessons I am applying to a second. I won't be first or even second,
but I will make money.

(John Ordover) wrote in message . com...
the big challenge for any investors or company in developing a
non-government funded vehicle is: where are you going to get the money
to design, build, and support a new type of space vehicle?

It's not hard to get the money if you can show a bird-in-the-hand
revenue stream - the problem is that no one has thought of one.

And a standard part of business plan analysis is "what are the tax and
regulatory regimes the business would operate under."

Right now for any novel space application, the answer is mostly a big
question mark. That right there will kill any chance of getting
serious money.

I believe (yes, it's a belief) that if we get the regulatory
uncertainty taken care of, and liability normalized (can we leave the
OST, pretty please?), then there is at least the CHANCE of a space
transport industry arising.

But right now the ground isn't fertile for such a market to grow.

From what I can gather, that is Rand's main recurring point, and in my
mind a very valid one.

A market will not develope unless given a chance.

In article ,
says...
Even I am more optimistic than that - I think there probably is a way
to exploit space to make a bundle that no one has thought of yet.

And that way will only be found by people looking for and working
on answers, not someone that simply collects negatives.

Assuming they are actually working on it, rather than deluding
themselves with dreams of asteroid mining, joyrides, and other such
dead ends.

Dead ends? The last of the Earth's easily accessible soft iron deposits
were depleted during World War II. We're now mining taconite and
recycling steel in order to keep up with the demand for iron. Eventually
(granted, in a future that's far enough removed that none of us here will
ever see it), we will *need* to go off-planet for iron. Assuming we
insist on using iron to make new buildings, machines, etc.

Do you propose that we wait until the last mines are drying up and we
can't junk the old stuff fast enough to keep up with demand for new stuff
to start *thinking* about going off-planet for more iron? If so, I'd say
your thinking is reminiscent of most of the short-sighted politicians and
corporate officers in the world today. So, if that's the conceptual
company you want to keep...

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for | Doug Van Dorn
thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup |

In article , says...


Tom Merkle wrote:

No, there has to be somewhere to GO in space before people (and
Congress, too) will really want to go there in any great number. Right
now that consists of a small scientific station in zero-g. It's like
an oil rig without any oil as a product. It's an economic dead end
until we decide to go to a place with resources that can be used to
defray the cost of getting there and maintaining it--like the moon or
mars.


Actually IIRC the Martian moons are the single point in the solar system
where it's easiest to get to any other point from.... so if you are
going to start mining things and building a spaceport, Phobos and Deimos
with their tiny gravity wells might be the place to start. Particularly
if you have a base on Mars itself that can act as a refuge in case of
major crew injury or vehicle malfunction...certainly close than either
the Moon or asteroids in a time needed/energy used sense.

Just a minor nit -- on either/both of Mars' moons, you're not only inside
the given moon's gravity well, you're also inside (though not at the
bottom of) Mars' gravity well. But yes, you're far enough towards its
edge that your delta-V requirements for getting other places are less
than in Earth orbit, or even in lunar orbit.

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for | Doug Van Dorn
thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup |

Doug... wrote:

Dead ends? The last of the Earth's easily accessible soft iron deposits
were depleted during World War II. We're now mining taconite and
recycling steel in order to keep up with the demand for iron. Eventually
(granted, in a future that's far enough removed that none of us here will
ever see it), we will *need* to go off-planet for iron. Assuming we
insist on using iron to make new buildings, machines, etc.

What you do you see.... is go down to some remote area where the Earth's
crust is really thin- Tanganyika for instance. Then you drill a bore
hole down to the molten nickel-iron of the Earth's outer core...if any
hard substance- say one that can even dull diamond drills- is found to
be covering this mass of molten metal, then it can probably be pierced
by the judicious use of a nuclear device propelled down the bore hole by
a rocket... I think this idea is logical, economical, and completely safe.

Dr. Stephen Sorenson

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Doug... wrote:

Dead ends? The last of the Earth's easily accessible soft iron deposits
were depleted during World War II. We're now mining taconite and
recycling steel in order to keep up with the demand for iron. Eventually
(granted, in a future that's far enough removed that none of us here will
ever see it), we will *need* to go off-planet for iron. Assuming we
insist on using iron to make new buildings, machines, etc.

What you do you see.... is go down to some remote area where the Earth's
crust is really thin- Tanganyika for instance. Then you drill a bore
hole down to the molten nickel-iron of the Earth's outer core...if any
hard substance- say one that can even dull diamond drills- is found to
be covering this mass of molten metal, then it can probably be pierced
by the judicious use of a nuclear device propelled down the bore hole by
a rocket... I think this idea is logical, economical, and completely safe.


Actually I've got this idea for building an atomic powered digger and taking
it to the South Pole.

I think my idea would Swiftly solve the problem.


Dr. Stephen Sorenson

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

Actually I've got this idea for building an atomic powered digger and taking
it to the South Pole.

I think my idea would Swiftly solve the problem.




No need to drill if you're going there...a Zeppelin can be sent into the
Polar opening, and mining can commence with the aid of the handy
prehistoric animals and indigenous peoples that live down there.
We could show them how to mine, and after some initial monkeying around,
I'm sure they would ape our behavior.

Lord Flanstoke

"Jan C. Vorbrüggen" wrote in message ...
There is no demand or need for suborbital mail service. The major
limiting factor on mail delivery is getting it from the airport to the
recipient, not the flight time.

Oh really? Like the spare part that needs to go to Australia from Europe,
and which is costing $200k per hour in down time unitl it arrives? Not a
large demand, but definitely greater than 0.

And how often does that happen, exactly? Spare parts like that are
usually stockpiled or bought from local suppliers in the first place.

Paperwork (contracts et al.) are also applicable.


Nope - because overnight is fine on contracts - you can fax a signed
copy, and wait a day for the physical paperwork.
Jan

"Sander Vesik" wrote in message
...
In sci.space.policy John Ordover wrote:
It was limited by matters outside of market forces:

The unacceptability of sonic booms over inhabited areas.


And that could not have been forseen? Seems like a no-brainer.

Have you ever actually heard one? If a plane goes supersonic at
a realtively low altitude, yes, the noise is loud, will rattle
the windows, etc. At the heights Conorde flies, it would be
at most slightly annoying. So no, it is not something they could
have foreseen.


--
Sander
Thunder at some distance is a fair analogy.
Ralph Nesbitt