A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tourist flights



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #9  
Old December 4th 17, 04:06 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Tourist flights

"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote:

"Alain Fournier" wrote in message news

Le Dec/3/2017 à 6:34 AM, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote:

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

Jeff Findley wrote:

In article ,
says...

I wanted to follow up with this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CST-100_Starliner I was reading this
earlier
tonight and came across

"As of 2014, the CST-100 was to include one space tourist seat, and
the
Boeing contract with NASA allows Boeing to price and sell passage to
low-Earth orbit on that seat."

and

"Part of the agreement with NASA allows Boeing to sell seats for
space
tourists. Boeing proposed including one seat per flight for a space
flight
participant at a price that would be competitive with what Roscosmos
charges
tourists.[32]"

This leads to:
https://www.reuters.com/article/boei...0RI2XY20140917


Makes sense, and I'm all for it. If NASA doesn't need the seat, why
not
let the commercial crew provider sell the seat to someone else?


Does SpaceX also get this deal or just Boeing? Since Dragon V2 can be
configured to carry up to seven people, just what would allowing
'spare' seats to be sold to tourists mean?

You'd think the deal would (eventually) apply to both suppliers. I
don't see how NASA could allow Boeing to do this yet deny SpaceX the
same deal if they requested it.


I haven't seen anything about SpaceX other than they may fly with fewer
than
7 simply for more upmass payload.


What I recall reading was that NASA was going to impose a four seat
maximum on any flights for NASA, regardless of what the vehicle COULD
do.


But it does open the question and changes my mind. It does appear NASA
has
accepted the concept of tourists visiting ISS again.


But only one and only if one of their pet contractors (Boeing)
delivers them.


(which means time to add another Bigelow module ;-)


What they have now isn't a real Bigelow module; it's a closet being
used for testing. Time to add a REAL Bigelow module.


I'm not quite sure about that. It's only the word "add" that I'm not
sure about. Wouldn't it be better to have a Bigelow module independent
from ISS? You know, a space-hotel. So long as it's a module attached
to ISS, you will have space agencies from multiple countries arguing
about what is permissible to do in the module.


I fully expect that within 6-8 years.

BUT, this discussion was in the context of what to do with the tourists that
apparently will be flying to the ISS.

NASA would ideally like to keep them out of the way. So a full size Bigelow
module a few windows a little privacy, and they're all set.


This would actually be a great way to manage it. A single B330 would
allow almost doubling the crew of ISS from 6+1 to 12+1 and increase
pressurized volume of the station by around 35%. The module contains
all the support required for a crew of 6, so the only additional drain
on station resources would be for the additional supplies required. A
commercial provider could simply build that cost into the price of the
tourist 'ticket' and bring up the extra supplies on its own money.

All that being said, Bigelow may have gone to the Dark Side, having
made a partnership agreement with ULA.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
EADS going for sub orbital tourist flights Alex Terrell Policy 19 June 28th 07 03:11 AM
Another ISS tourist Pat Flannery History 13 September 23rd 06 12:32 PM
Outlaw Space Tourist!? [email protected] Policy 12 September 22nd 06 02:57 AM
Alternate tourist selected - MT Revision Space Station 0 August 23rd 06 01:48 AM
RocketPlane claiming to start tourist flights in 2007 Joe Strout Policy 2 October 7th 04 03:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.