Past Perfect, Future Misleading

Rand Simberg wrote:
I have some more commentary on the Gehman report, and why we should
not build "the" next generation launch system.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95930,00.html


Also near the end of this essay is this:


"Let's start a new space age based on the American values of competition
and individualism, rather than European (or even Soviet) ones of
monopoly and bureaucracy."

It seems to me there's free market capitalism flourishing in the
European Economic Union, as well as along the Pacific Rim. I think there
may be other entities besides the U.S. that could benefit from private
space industry.

There are some multi-national corporations that strengthen the economy
of several nations. For example CFM International is both U.S. and
French. Would they be able to compete for both U.S. incentives and
European prizes?

Hop
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

Hop David wrote:


Rand Simberg wrote:

I have some more commentary on the Gehman report, and why we should
not build "the" next generation launch system.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95930,00.html


At the end of this essay Rand writes:

"We want, and need, a space transport industry, and it will never occur
as long as NASA remains in charge of developing manned launch systems.


I've seen vague speculation on a space tourism industry. But is this the
killer app that will capture public imagination? It's hard to image Joe
Taxpayer writing his congressmen to give incentives to Carmack, Boeing
or whoever to establish LEO resorts.



Find a solid gold asteroid...then you'll have the killer app. Space
transportation would leap a century into the future.

But, unless China makes plans to plant a flag on Mars, there's not much
out there other than the public imagination to give manned spaceflight a
purpose. And that's mainly driven by romantic musings of the Apollo
program.

In article , stmx3 wrote:

Find a solid gold asteroid...then you'll have the killer app. Space
transportation would leap a century into the future.

Or not. The problem with relying on "valuable minerals" is that the
market can glut; the world produces some 2500 tonnes of gold a year. A
10m diameter gold asteroid would have about four years worth of that
production; it scales up from there. IANAEconomist (I mean, I can do
sums g), but you get the idea... that'd do really weird things to the
market.

The oceans contain some $1.5 *quadrillion* worth of gold (or so my
slighlty hyperbolic-looking source says; this number seems inherently
WAG); about ten million tonnes, or four thousand years of production.
I'm not drawing an explict analogy, just making a point; "valuable"
resources are really only valuable should it be possible to make a
profit on them. No-one's made a profit evaporating seawater to get it...

If there's an economic reason, it won't (I suspect) be precious metal in
the Belt, or the discovery of diamonds on Enceladus, or the like...

--
-Andrew Gray

stmx3 wrote:
Hop David wrote:



Rand Simberg wrote:

I have some more commentary on the Gehman report, and why we should
not build "the" next generation launch system.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95930,00.html


At the end of this essay Rand writes:

"We want, and need, a space transport industry, and it will never
occur as long as NASA remains in charge of developing manned launch
systems.



I've seen vague speculation on a space tourism industry. But is this
the killer app that will capture public imagination? It's hard to
image Joe Taxpayer writing his congressmen to give incentives to
Carmack, Boeing or whoever to establish LEO resorts.



Find a solid gold asteroid...then you'll have the killer app. Space
transportation would leap a century into the future.

I understand there are asteroids rich in metals, metals not bound up in
oxygen, sulfur etc. like the ores we can get at at the top of earth's crust.

Wouldn't delta V expense make even a solid gold asteroid unprofitable?


Hop
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

"Hop David" wrote in message
...
Wouldn't delta V expense make even a solid gold asteroid unprofitable?

Delta V does not cost money. It costs energy. Which in turn cost close to
nothing in dollars.
The issue lies designing a space vehicle with maximum deltaV per buck.
Nobody has tried that yet. All sorts of rockets have been optimized for
maximum ISP, minimum GLOW and what not. Nobody has tried to optimize for
deltaV per dollar.

-kert

Manned spaceflight should
be an national industry not a government program.

Craig Fink

Where's the revenue stream that would interest industry?

The technology for establishing, say, a Moon base, has existed for
-decades- and is well within the technological capacity of industry.
That it hasn't been done is entirely because no one can think of a way
to make a buck at it.

If your best idea is to send people on joyrides, you're not going to
motivate industry.

John Ordover wrote:
Manned spaceflight should

be an national industry not a government program.

Craig Fink


Where's the revenue stream that would interest industry?

The technology for establishing, say, a Moon base, has existed for
-decades- and is well within the technological capacity of industry.
That it hasn't been done is entirely because no one can think of a way
to make a buck at it.

If your best idea is to send people on joyrides, you're not going to
motivate industry.

There have been a multitude of reports on the huge store of energy
in the deep sea methane hydrate deposits, with returns as large as the
biggest oil fields, but it's too hard to get to and nobody with any
money will bother to exploit it.
What makes space any different?
IMHO: I'm afraid that space is useless as a source of product or
services.
Jim Davis

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 19:50:07 +0000, stmx3 wrote:

Hop David wrote:

Find a solid gold asteroid...then you'll have the killer app. Space
transportation would leap a century into the future.

By the time you get to it you'll haveve spent a good portion of it.

By the time you haul back a few thousand tons to Earth and safely
land it you'll have spent most of the rest of it.

By the time you get paid for the gold you brought back word of the
gold's arrival will have flattened the gold market... and you'll be
broke.

Industrial materials in space will stay in space to be used in
space by folks who work in space.

And that's what a gold asteroid would become... gold foil, gold
conductors etc.

The only exception would be materials that are _only_ produced or
procured offworld... that are wanted on Earth.

--
Chuck Stewart
"Anime-style catgirls: Threat? Menace? Or just studying algebra?"

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
I have some more commentary on the Gehman report, and why we should
not build "the" next generation launch system.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95930,00.html


While I agree in theory with much of what you are saying IMO the market is
not yet developed to that point especially considering the poor orbit the
station is in.

Better to concentrate on replacing the shuttles lift capacity in an open
market.
For each of the three people the shuttles leave at the station it is also
leaving about 4 tons of thrust, equipment and supplies.
That according to some estimates is 50 tons a year add to that launching
NASA's space plane and you have a market for 10-70 flights a year on
commercial launchers depending on size.

We do not need any new technology just what we have used more efficiently
and often.

On 28 Aug 2003 22:15:01 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Dholmes"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
.. .
I have some more commentary on the Gehman report, and why we should
not build "the" next generation launch system.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95930,00.html


While I agree in theory with much of what you are saying IMO the market is
not yet developed to that point especially considering the poor orbit the
station is in.

I'm not sure what relevance the space station's orbit has.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers: