|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
You seem to be assuming facts not in evidence - the existence of a
space-based infrastructure that needs supplying from space. If you're talking about selling to Earth-based customers, everything on this list is cheaper to manufacture or acquire on Earth, or isn't something of much use. Cheap desalinization would provide a lot more water than getting water from space. There will be occassional hobbyish forays into space, but if you're talking about -real- space economics, you have to provide a service or product -for people on Earth- because -that's where all the customers are-. In those areas where that is possible, such as information flow and transfer, space investment was there. If space can provide something else cheaper and better than you can get it on Earth, that will attract investment too. What it might be I can't imagine, but where you need to focus energy on is imagining it. Water. Lunar Lander. Space Station Parts. Space Station Supplies. Mars Lander. Space Station Astronauts. Food. Fuel. Lunar Explorers. The government currently has a budget for these items. Why not these thing to start with? -- Craig Fink Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @ |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
(...US Airmail and Aviation)
The list was what NASA currently (or in the near future) wants to have in orbit. The list is probably much larger. These things are equivalent to the Airmail. The Aviation, is private enterprise. I would think the list for private people is currently shorter. Satellites. Tourists. Experiments. But, would grow exponentially as price to orbit comes down. The lack of gravity and nice vacuum would be useful to manufacturing. On Mon, 15 May 2006 12:56:27 -0700, Ordover wrote: You seem to be assuming facts not in evidence - the existence of a space-based infrastructure that needs supplying from space. If you're talking about selling to Earth-based customers, everything on this list is cheaper to manufacture or acquire on Earth, or isn't something of much use. Cheap desalinization would provide a lot more water than getting water from space. There will be occassional hobbyish forays into space, but if you're talking about -real- space economics, you have to provide a service or product -for people on Earth- because -that's where all the customers are-. In those areas where that is possible, such as information flow and transfer, space investment was there. If space can provide something else cheaper and better than you can get it on Earth, that will attract investment too. What it might be I can't imagine, but where you need to focus energy on is imagining it. Water. Lunar Lander. Space Station Parts. Space Station Supplies. Mars Lander. Space Station Astronauts. Food. Fuel. Lunar Explorers. The government currently has a budget for these items. Why not these thing to start with? -- Craig Fink Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @ |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
"jonathan" wrote:
Fission is also massively expensive and a typical reactor can take 15 or 20 years to be built. The *paperwork* for a typical reactor takes 15-20 years to process. The actual reactor (and building) takes far less time. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
Rand Simberg wrote:
wrote: v A market! A cargo! The US Airmail. So....what is the market/cargo for space? That is, of course, the heart of the problem. Where there is a market - comsats of various kinds - there is substantial investment and interest; where there isn't one, or where at the very least no one has thought of one, there's no investment and no interest (in the financial world). And there has been about a billion dollars of investment in private space vehicles recently. So? There was a massive amount of capital invested in railroads too back in day. (Much of it lost.) There was also massive amounts of capital invested in the dot-bombs, (and much of it too was lost). Furthermore, much of the investment in private space is represented by a few individuals - not the broader financial world. (But then, such facts and complications don't fit neatly into a typical Randian one-liner sound bite.) D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
"jonathan" wrote in message . .. A market make in heaven. ' "Earth" is not a *market*. You don't have a clue. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
"jonathan" wrote in message . .. Besides, I'm not talking about the foreseeable future. Obviously. If it's as easy as you say, why aren't *you* doing it? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
Eric Chomko wrote:
: That is, of course, the heart of the problem. Where there is a market : - comsats of various kinds - there is substantial investment and : interest; where there isn't one, or where at the very least no one has : thought of one, there's no investment and no interest (in the financial : world). : And there has been about a billion dollars of investment in private : space vehicles recently. With a $50K ROI? No. When's the break-even point, Rand? I doubt if you even know what that phrase means. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
David Ball wrote:
id they ever do any studies of what beaming all that power through :the atmosphere would do to things like the ozone layer and weather atterns, or is it so small compared to what we get from the SUN that :it wouldn't make a difference. Not enough to matter. :Actually, I've wondered if we could do some weather and energy usage :control with shades or reflectors in space. Could you diminish the ower of a hurricane by cutting off much of the sunlight to it since :it seems like warmth that makes hurricanes grow. Hurricanes draw their power primarily from the water. If shade would do it they'd all stop at night. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation
Derek Lyons wrote:
So....what is the market/cargo for space? That is, of course, the heart of the problem. Where there is a market - comsats of various kinds - there is substantial investment and interest; where there isn't one, or where at the very least no one has thought of one, there's no investment and no interest (in the financial world). And there has been about a billion dollars of investment in private space vehicles recently. So? So, significant money disagrees with Mr. Oldover (not surprising, since most sensible people do). Furthermore, much of the investment in private space is represented by a few individuals - not the broader financial world. Much of that money is state government money. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|