Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space The Almighty Buck

Space Tourism? 214

Posted by Cliff from the visit-the-final-frontier dept.
Cave_Monster wonders: "With the successful return to earth by Gregory Olson, the US businessman who allegedly paid around £11m for his trip, what are people's thoughts on continuing with this trend? It is definately favourable towards generating extra funds for space programs, and with Mr. Olson preferring to be labeled as a 'flight participant' rather than a tourist, it definately begs the question as to how much input can these paying people have in space research? Experiments that he participated in included further investigation into how the human body deals with weightlessness and the possible causes to lower back pain and nausea, yet are these activities simply carried out so as to 'entertain' or is there real scientific purpose behind them? With the next 'tourist' expected to be Japanese businessman Daisuke Enomoto, should paying people have a real scientific background or is money simply enough?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Space Tourism? More

Space Tourism?

Comments Filter:

  • In a capitalist society... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dethl ( 626353 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:28PM (#13787869)
    It doesn't matter whether or not your intentions for space flight are for science or not. All you need is enough cash and noone will care.
    • Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. More money for space programs is usually a Good Thing(TM).
      • There aren't enough rich morons to make this work as a business model, and the cost-benefit ratio is being total distorted by this kind of foolishness. The value of scientific research is NOT directly related to the cost. Try considering it in comparison to the "tourist balloon" business. It barely exists, even though it's much cheaper than space flight--but actual scientific balloons are much more important.

        The closest you can come to making a scientific justification is that random Guinea Pigs are neede

        • "Not enough rich morons" is an understatement. One other example I think is relevant is how Apollo 13 was tanking in the TV ratings - apparently after people had visited the moon only twice the public got jaded and moon missions were considered routine.

          This in a world with only three TV stations and way fewer alternative modes of entertainment.

          No freaking way space tourism can payback. Now if we're talking fractional-orbital flights to get you from New York to Tokyo in 15 minutes than space tourism be

        • There aren't enough rich morons to make this work as a business model, and the cost-benefit ratio is being total distorted by this kind of foolishness.

          I never said that it was a good business model, but consider this: these "rich morons" are in a position to help space programs. They have money to invest in aerospace firms, education, and advertising.

          If the only motivation they need to spend that money is a few days of freefall, then send 'em up by the dozen. Of course, the trick would be figuring out which
          • Even if you suck them dry, the rich morons can't raise any significant amount of money compared to the potential of a lottery. However, even a very good lottery can't raise any signficant amount of money compared to what it REALLY costs to develop these technologies. They would need to recoup BILLIONS of dollars to make this into a business.

            Sadly, the real motivation for the original investment was a combination of chest thumping to beat the commies and crazy paranoia about what the commies could learn or

        • There aren't enough rich morons to make this work as a business model, and the cost-benefit ratio is being total distorted by this kind of foolishness. The value of scientific research is NOT directly related to the cost. Try considering it in comparison to the "tourist balloon" business. It barely exists, even though it's much cheaper than space flight--but actual scientific balloons are much more important.

          Well, I'd say that it's pretty clear that the price needs to drop well below $20 million per fli

    • Who the hell cares if the tourist has a scientific background. He can still be the guinnea pig in an experiment done by the real scientists that are up there with him.

      Or he could get in the way of the real scientists while they do experiments that don't involve him, but they'll put up with him being in the way. Why? Because he paid for most of the trip, making the experiment cost that much less. Or they're allocating the money for the experiment from the research budget and taking the tourist to earn some c
      • Experiments that he participated in included further investigation into how the human body deals with weightlessness and the possible causes to lower back pain and nausea, yet are these activities simply carried out so as to 'entertain' or is there real scientific purpose behind them?

        I dunno, the submitter seems to think that you might be in for some pretty sadistic in-flight entertainment. Probably smarter to be able to pull your own weight.
    • Say what you will about Paul Allen (and given that he helped create Microsoft, there's probably not a lot of love lost for him here on slashdot), but rather than blow $20M on a narcissistic joyride, he funded Spaceship One and the first private venture to make it to space. That's cool. Damn cool.
      • Here is an interesting story. Last night I attended a discussion at the Science Fiction Museum (well, it was actually in the Experience Music Project, but they are the same building) with people involved in creating new lift technologies to get to space. One guy was a businessman from LiftPort, who is working on a space elevator. There was also a scientist there who had the idea of using ground based lasers to heat liquid hydrogen in a vehicle, which would be used as propellent.

        The big problems right now fo
    • Wait until there's a injury that is inflicted on a rich buisnessman. Do you seriously think this can continue?
    • NASA is actually a communist organisation paid for by a capitalist society.

      I mean, they're doing it obstensibly for the good of the people, or humanity or whatever, they don't seek profit and they do it from tax dollars.

      And they do a lot of good research too, I'm not knocking NASA exactly. But when it comes to manned space it's all a bit pointless; there's little research going on. That badly *needs* to be privatised. It's just pork-barrel politics at it's worst. None of their manned projects have really

    • Yeah, and Ludovico Sforza had enough money to pay Leonardo to draw pictures for him, and nobody cared. So what? We still get to look at the pictures.

      rj

  • Fly me to the Moon... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:30PM (#13787880) Homepage Journal
    If the space program can accomodate it and want the extra money, the extra passengers need contribute nothing more than money to the mission. If they meet the requirements of any other tasks in the mission, perhaps they should get a discount, or extra charges for the "extra fun". Whichever the mission planners can accomodate and negotiate. The exciting news is that we've reached a stage of space industry development where we have enough "discretionary resources" and minimized risks that we have the flexibility to engage in substantial nonessential mission components. Which means frivilous Moon trips are now in sight.
    • The exciting news is that we've reached a stage of space industry development where we have enough "discretionary resources" and minimized risks that we have the flexibility to engage in substantial nonessential mission components.
      Not even remotely. The spare seats are available because the US is late in delivering our full commitments to the ISS and the Russians are desperately strapped for cash and good PR.
      • The spare seats are available because the mission has extra capacity that represents only extra funding when they're filled. And the nation that's kept the ISS behind for practically all its existence is Russia, underfunding, underachieving, undercaring about the project. While they launch their own solar sails and other projects, like commercial launches (which often crash), using the American ISS subsidy money, instead of fulfilling their ISS committments.

        If you're going to claim contrary to the steady re

        • And the nation that's kept the ISS behind for practically all its existence is Russia, underfunding, underachieving, undercaring about the project.

          Which is why all the Russian critical path equipment is on orbit - and has been for years.

          While they launch their own solar sails and other projects, like commercial launches (which often crash), using the American ISS subsidy money, instead of fulfilling their ISS committments.

          Which is why the equipment is on orbit, and Progress and Soyuz flights have occure

  • Funding (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ozTravman ( 898206 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:30PM (#13787882)
    Space travel is expensive. No space agency has all the money they need to accomplish their goals. We no longer have the public support we had in the 60's so private enterprise is required to help send us further. If the revenue from these tourists helps fund further space missions then it is justified.

    • Re:Funding (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Myopic ( 18616 ) on Friday October 14, 2005 @12:02AM (#13788030)
      Not just that, but space tourism is a fantastic idea. One way to look at it is simple economics: there is a demand for space flight, and there is an incredibly limited supply, which of course increases the price to astronomical heights, if you'll pardon the pun; but so long as the exchange is 'profitable' to the 'supplier', which in this case it is, it will naturally lead to an increase in supply. Maybe in a few years it will only cost a million dollars. That will be in the price range of a lot of people. Not you and me, but a lot of people.
    • Reminds me of the days before modern science when curious wealthy persons funded scientific research out of their own pocket. Where would we be without The Lavoisiore's [wikipedia.org] proving conservation of mass basically all by themselves working out of their house? Of course, they were the local tax collector for Paris and used money scraped from the peasantry to live the lavish life while the peasants starved all around them.

      Things have changed, right?

    • and anyways, when they can choose just those people who are suitable for performing the tasks the astro/kosmo/taikonaut would need to perform it doesn't really matter to the mission if it's someone who paid good money to get there - as long as he does everything scheduled for him.

  • Is money enough? What? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LeonGeeste ( 917243 ) * on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:36PM (#13787906) Journal
    Do we make sure anyone who wants to bankroll the first commercial car knows enough about cars' scientific purposes before we deign to allow him to use one?

    Of course you should "let" rich people buy access that later funds democratization of the new technology.

  • Tickets to space (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Nerdposeur ( 910128 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:36PM (#13787907) Journal
    Should paying people have a real scientific background or is money simply enough?

    That should be up to whoever is behind the trip. Maybe if the tourists are completely useless, they'll have to pay more to make up for their dead weight. But we're not talking about buying your way into heaven or something. Sure, traveling to the moon was a big step for mankind, and it takes on mythic, almost religious significance for us for someone to go into space. But bottom line, it's just a new place we can go.

    If you've got a rocket and I've got a sack of cash, why shouldn't we be able to make an arrangement? You can't do your science without funding anyway. There's no need to be elitist.
    • Gordon Cooper: You know what makes this bird go up? FUNDING makes this bird go up. Gus Grissom: He's right. No bucks, no Buck Rogers.
    • There is nothing to prevent someone without a scientific background from conducting good science. The tourist in question is not designing the experiment. He is conducting the experiment, and acting as an assistant to the scientists who did design the experiments. In some cases space tourists will be able to offer useful suggestions. In other cases they will just be the eyes and arms of people on the ground.

  • kinda like climing mt everest (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hansoloaf ( 668609 ) <hansoloaf@[ ]oo.com ['yah' in gap]> on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:37PM (#13787910)
    i mean what's the point if you are not a climber or a geologist. But they got the money to burn and want the "label" of having been there. More power to them - and same for these "flight participants" regardless if they just float around or do some little "fun" experiments. Perhaps in the future we would have these floating hotels in space and we would get up there via Charlie's Glass elevator.

  • Why money is enough (Score:5, Interesting)

    by G4from128k ( 686170 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:42PM (#13787939)
    Anything that gets more people excited by space and space travel is good. Space needs better marketing -- yet another scientific experiment in space doesn't capture the imagination. But marketing is expensive unless you can get free publicity -- I can't see Congress giving NASA the OK to put on a $100 million ad campaign.

    If letting a space tourist go up can attract media attention, then that's great. Its even nice that the customer pays the organization to create good marketing for the organization.

    Besides, I'd bet the economics of space flight are such that the cost of filling an empty seat aren't that high. The average cost of putting a pound into orbit may be extremely high, but the cost of adding another pound of person and supplies is probably not bad. It's like the airlines -- if you're going to fly anyway, why not fill every seat.

    Creating the idea that space is accessible to an increasing number of people -- not just a few astronauts that spent their life in the program -- is the key to the future of space funding.

    • "If letting a space tourist go up can attract media attention, then that's great. Its even nice that the customer pays the organization to create good marketing for the organization."

      I guess; it works for brand-name jeans ans slogan t-shirts.

      I'm not sure this is going to be a viable income source in the long term, though. That is, we can't depend on conspicuous consumption to keep our space agencies solvent. As for participating in experiments, when a university does a psychological study, they pay the pa
    • Space needs better marketing
      Marketing? I think it needs better applications.

      (Space travel, that is. Space in itself is quite handy.)

  • Definitely time to invest in a spell checker (Score:3, Informative)

    by Tetravus ( 79831 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:42PM (#13787940) Homepage
    I use SpellBound [sourceforge.net] for Firefox. As for space tourists/flight participants, if they can positively contribute to experiments in a safe fashion they should be encouraged to help further defray the costs of their trip by working.
  • The simple experiment of under trained (out of shape?) personal is valuable for anyone who hopes to see orbital hotels in the next ?? years.

    NASA, and for that matter the DOD, seem hopelessly technologically disfunctional to this untrained observer, but if some private companies (go Virgin) or national economies devolving into private companies (Russians) can bring the cost of humans to low orbit down slightly we inch towards an economy of scale while the rising powers of the 21st century play catch up. I
  • $11,000,000 / 700,000 km. per day x (howevermany days he was up) = probably less than you would pay per km. in a taxi.

    (I couldn't find the pound thingy on my keyboard so I typed $)

  • science is a fringe activity (Score:3, Informative)

    by lawpoop ( 604919 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:46PM (#13787957) Homepage Journal
    Face it, most of what people want to do is socialize. Science or other knowledge-acquiring endeavours are fringe activities for the small geek subpopulation. That being said, when technology becomes mass produced and sold to people in order to socialize, that lowers the cost and makes the science much cheaper to pursue.

    I say make space travel mostly a entertainment/travel industry for now. As the general public finances it, there will be investment and competition by private industry. The cost of space travel will become so cheap that it will be feasible to manufacture in space, and also to throw a few experiments up there.

    Forget about the science-and-engineering oriented utopia promised us by science fiction. As a general rule, people want bread and circus. It would be much more effecient to throw a few experiments on the bread-and-circus rockets than the way it's currently being financed.
    • Face it, most of what people want to do is eat. And breathe. Socializing or other carnal-knowledge-acquiring endeavours are fringe activities for the large non-geek population. That being said, when technology becomes mass produced and sold to people in order to eat, that lowers the cost and makes the socializing much cheaper to pursue.

      I say make eating mostly a entertainment/reality-show-stunt industry for now. As the general public finances it, there will be investment and competition by private industry.

  • Space Cowboys (Score:2, Funny)

    by caller9 ( 764851 )
    Are you kidding? If I had several million to blow on a trip to space I sure as hell would do it.

    I'd want to do stupid stuff too. Like put a tether on and fly around with a fire extinguisher rocket. I'd also probably be an idiot and shoot at the moon some. Then all us astronauts would run out and place space ball. I'm sure that'd be a sweet EVA.

    I'd make most of my money back plugging Coke and Virgin Galactic. Then I'd make my own cereal called Space-O's which would really be fruit loops with different packag

  • An interesting answer to a previous story (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ShatteredDream ( 636520 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:50PM (#13787976) Homepage
    The amount of scientific research necessary to make regular space travel useful is tremendous. It actually gives companies an incentive to invest research money into pure research because there is soooo much we have to figure out before it can really become part of normal life.

    Let's cut the idealistic bullshit on something too. There is something about the government-centric approach to space that needs to be brought up. Who do you really trust to spend money wisely, an eccentric businessman who is getting involved directly like this or Congressmen and government bean counters? The government chose to lock us out of space travel on a private basis for a while and then did nothing to advance it.

    This is just more evidence to me of why socialism cannot be trusted to provide for new and edgy research or art. This businessman doesn't have to think about the greater good, he only cares about his ability to fly into space and maybe advancing this for general society. I remember asking a socialist friend why a government owned media outlet would publish counter-culture works and small-time art/literature since there was no proven audience and it was all based on tax funds to produce it (thus an obligation to not be wasteful in publishing art). She couldn't give an honest answer. I think here we see the clear superiority of the free market. There is a lot of money to be made in space so there is a lot of reason for people to support research in this area.

  • Start my own Space Tourism agency (Score:3, Funny)

    by milatchi ( 694575 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:54PM (#13787990)
    I'll just start my own Space Tourism agency with hookers and Blackjack!

    In fact, forget the Space Tourism.

  • Scientific Purpose? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:57PM (#13788005)
    yet are these activities simply carried out so as to 'entertain' or is there real scientific purpose behind them?

    Given that the space station itself doesn't have a real scientific purpose, using it to host tourists is perfectly appropriate.

  • Same as archaeology (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Archaeologists need more money than they can come up with from governments and colleges for their digs, so they solicit contributions from people who get their Jones from wanting to be archaeologists. These contributors get to go along, camp with the real scientists, get briefings from the head guys, and such. They do not, however, under any circumstance, get to actually dig, which embitters some of them.

    Selling rides to rich people is not a new thing, it seems.
  • What does this stuff always need some justification or "higher purpose". Some people say that space tourism is good because it helps fund the space program science... well, that is a good reason too. But, what is wrong with people going to space just for fun? Even if, in the long run, it did absolutly nothing for science or humanity?

    I mean, I understand it is kind of lame that only multimillioniares can go into space for fun... it would be much better if everyone could afford space travel... I can understan
    • Yah. More please. Virgin Galactic? Get up there already. Elon Musk, Steve Bozzos? We're routin' for ya guys, get those payload boosters up to human safety levels and strap on a space ship. John Carmack? Dude, you show so much promise, good luck, and I hope you make it.

      Oh, and before anyone replies to this post saying that SpaceShipOne isn't scalable.. who the hell says you have to have a powered ascent to orbit? There are alternatives to rockets [tethers.com].
  • I've seen this coming for a while, it will get more common and cheaper and accessible to the common man..

    1) Space Tourism, trip to The Moon Disneyland with the kids..
    2) Profit!
  • In Space Daily a few days back, there was an article titled "Japanese Whiz Aims For Space - In Cartoon Uniform" [spacedaily.com]. Here's a snippet:

    A Japanese Internet whiz is tipped to become the world's fourth space tourist - and he wants to orbit the earth dressed as an ace pilot from a hit Japanese animation series. ... If he gets Russian approval, Enomoto [wikipedia.org] said he wanted to dress up on the trip as "Char Aznable [wikipedia.org]", a character in the popular "Gundam" hero robot series of animation whose name is inspired by French singer Ch

  • Hey Ma Look... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Sebilrazen ( 870600 )
    ..I'm an astroNOT. Don't get me wrong, I get jazzed talking about the possibilites for the future of space travel, space tourism among them. But no one should kid themselves into thinking that anyone that goes up in the shuttle is accomplishing alot of science - including the astronauts. Look at it this way, fly to NYC. Once there get into one of their lovely cabs. Instruct the cab driver to drive you by all the important landmarks; WTC site, Empire State Building, Central Park, etc. Have him stop on
    • You could have said much the same thing about John Cabot, adventurer, who while seeking the rich reward of a sea route to China discovered North America in 1496. Indeed, more than a century was to pass after Columbus and Cabot before anyone even thought about getting serious about living in the New World and planted a colony here, and it took a further century after that before a viable colonist civilization emerged.

      Early exploration is always touch-and-go, just getting in and out for a quick look (and, ya

  • Ummm? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Omnifarious ( 11933 ) *

    I don't understand why anybody would ever think these people shouldn't be allowed up. It seems to me that this smacks of elitism, and I don't think that attitude has much of a place anywhere.

    Also, if someone thinks participating in scientific experiments is fun (and I would likely think that about some experiments) then more power to them. I don't understand the question here either. Does the fact that someone paid money to go on a trip somehow invalidate the data?

  • Space tourism is great. The more people who go the faster prices will come down and the sooner I can make a trip. However, the first people to pay to go are real risk takers. Those space trips are not safe, yet. Anyone who has the bucks can go. Who cares? Its their money, and the people giving the ride must need the cash or they wouldn't provide the service.

    Its all good fun and games until someone gets hurt. The first time one of these billionaires gets blown up that will hurt the in

  • Behind schedule (Score:3, Interesting)

    by kylemonger ( 686302 ) on Friday October 14, 2005 @12:29AM (#13788136)
    We (the human race) have been sending people into orbit for 44 years. 44 years after the Wright brothers first flight, we were on the verge of commercial jet air travel. The ill-fated de Havilland Comet was introduced in 1949. Commercial air travel for the rich (and foolhardy) on prop planes had been available since 1928.

    So I think we're behind schedule--- we should have been sending rich people up there to die twenty years ago. If things had gone according to schedule Challenger's cargo bay would have been refitted for passengers by then and 30 people could have died that day in 1986.

    • So I think we're behind schedule--- we should have been sending rich people up there to die twenty years ago. If things had gone according to schedule Challenger's cargo bay would have been refitted for passengers by then and 30 people could have died that day in 1986.

      NASA never has been in the space tourism industry. Nor is it clear to me why they should enter and compete with private commerce in this area.

  • space tourists begin displacing scientists as astronauts.

    Right now it doesn't seem to be a problem, but what happens when scientists can't get a ride on a rocket because all the places are taken by tourists? Space then stops being a scientific endeavour and becomes a joyride.

    When this happens, space travel may cease to advance due to lack of research. Perhaps progress towards interplanetary travel will cease because all the time in space has been bought by tourists? We will have hit a 'local minima'

    • You mean like the way we can't get anyone to perform test flights to research airplane design changes anymore, because too many regular passengers take up all the seats on commercial aircraft?

      Your fears are completely unfounded. If tourists buy up all the "time in space", larger spacecraft will be developed to accomodate the need to take extra passengers, or more craft will be built to run more flights at a time. NASA isn't going to just stop doing research because they've got too many civilians who will

  • Benefits (Score:3, Interesting)

    by PresidentEnder ( 849024 ) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (rednenrevyw)> on Friday October 14, 2005 @12:49AM (#13788213) Journal
    I can think of no downside to space tourism. For one, the space program in question gets more money; money that would not be used for anything else terribly useful, anyway. This means that this particular space program now has to request less government or entrupreneurial funding, and they can get more done. Tourists "displacing" "scientists" isn't really a problem, either. Those scientists can't go up if their spaceship doesn't fly because of lack of funding, and there's very little research up in space that requires an actual "scientist" to be present. The effects of weightlessness can be tested just as readily on a layman as on a PhD, any data collected in space can be analyzed earthside, and we get to see how space affects people who aren't elite air force test pilots who bench 350, have perfect hair, and date supermodels.

    Besides, where's the bad in sending a rich old dude off-planet?

  • Ask me next year (Score:3, Funny)

    by elronxenu ( 117773 ) on Friday October 14, 2005 @01:14AM (#13788301) Homepage
    I'm just waiting for the price to come down. When it becomes affordable, I'll be there!
  • The fact is, space tourism is a reality and it is a joke in its current incarnation. Basically, these people are rich bastards who dreamed of being an astronaught (nothing wrong w/ that). Whenever I watch video of these guys up in space, they always look like some little kid yelling 'whopee!' as they go for a ride. Do these guys really think they are astronauts? More like preschool children to me...

    Since space tourism is here, and probably here to stay, a more valid question is, is t
  • an overlooked area of usefulness is the possibility of using these space tourists in the ongoing research into muscle loss, bone density loss, and other physiological changes that take place after spaceflight. Even with their relatively short spacetime, they could provide useful data to biomechanics folks. Perhaps including a stipulation that by agreeing to go to space, they agree to some post-flight study in the mountain of paperwork they presumeably have to wade through before blastoff?

    they might be us

  • It's all about the cash (Score:3, Insightful)

    by J05H ( 5625 ) on Friday October 14, 2005 @01:55AM (#13788419)
    "space" has to pay for it to become the new frontier. There simply must be viable economic paths to orbit and beyond. Rand Simberg has said for years that it isn't the technology or even politics, but lack of good business plans that have kept commercial development away from space. Telecomm is the obvious exception, because it has a good biz plan, and tourism seems to be finally taking off. Good news for the future. I get a kick out of otaku in Gundam clothes.

    Also, what better measure for getting into space than paying a set price? The price is high, but anyone can work hard with that goal in mind. That it is an open, priced product puts it on the level playing field for all. Being a government Chosen Hero of the State is in no way egalitarian, but an act of status. It allows NASA to fly senators and Saudi princes, but stick their nose up when asked about paying customers. John Denver BEGGED them to let him fly on Shuttle, as a paying customer, they said "screw".

    Josh

  • Carbon Credits (Score:2, Interesting)

    by PBPanther ( 47660 )
    Just wondering how many years worth of carbon credits Mr Olson used in his little jaunt. Pity this isn't factored into the price. I would guess it is a few centuries of personal allowances.

  • Cash is king (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Zebra_X ( 13249 ) on Friday October 14, 2005 @02:11AM (#13788468)
    Science will come - but science isn't going to give us a colony on mars that we can go and visit. Industry will and capitalism.

    I say bring it on.

    It is time for the scientific strangle hold on manned space flight to end, and for our childhood dreams to come true.
    • I always said - just like in the old times, the convicts and dissidents should lead the colonization. Maybe *IAAs can send all those illegal downloaders in lieu of prison term ;-)

  • 'flight participant' (Score:3, Interesting)

    by R3d M3rcury ( 871886 ) on Friday October 14, 2005 @02:54AM (#13788583) Journal
    I prefer NASA's terminology: Payload Specialist. [chron.com]
    • > I prefer NASA's terminology: Payload Specialist.

      And I call myself "a non-participant in the pizza acquisition venture" rather than "a deadbeat", but it doesn't have much effect on peoples' perceptions.
  • I mean, what's the point of going in to space if your just another space tourist, carted round in rockets, surrounded by sweaty, mindless oafs from Kettering and Coventry in their cloth-caps and their space suits, with their IPods and their Sunday Mirrors, complaining about the tea, "oh they don't make it properly here, do they? Not like on earth. And stopping at russian space centers, selling fish'n'chips and Watneys Red Barrel and calamaris. And being herded into endless Hotel Cosmoses, and Earth Views',
  • In the end, do you not WANT space travel do be something many people can do as a frivolous venture? I do, I see nothign wrong and everything right with getting as many people into space as possible to really get the Big Picture, as it were.

    To that end I say the earlier we start thinking of space as a place you can pay to go if you like with no other requiremnet, the sooner we drive down costs so that more people can go.

    As a side note I don't think sub-orbital space tourism will big a big hit, I can't see p
  • After all, scientists need monkeys to do their experiments on. The fact that these particular monkeys can pay for the mission is just a bonus!
  • I read about how most people that travel in space get a flu-like sickness, it is pretty miserable experience for the first few days.

    I am not sure how much people are going to enjoy space travel unless significant advances are made in providing for people's comfort.
  • We need as much space experience as we can get. Is it OK up there? So far it looks like that. Does it have some interesting side-effects that haven't yet shown in the small sample of people who've been up there? (Green skin, telepathy, discovering God, or just a better sense of perspective...) That's one bonus of people having money that the organizers judge as adequate compensation.

    If the people can actually be actively helpful, that's another bonus, nothing more.

  • Should the person who pays the piper be required to take dance lessons? Or is it enough that we get to enjoy the music (and laugh at the occassional MS exec)?
  • Time and again slashdotters trot out their superstitious penchant towards supporting manned space flight. The parent showcases one aspect of this simpleminded belief with:

    It is definately favourable towards generating extra funds for space programs,...

    A guy pays $20M and suddenly this sounds like extra money. Forget that taxpayers paid several billion dollars to put the ISS up there and billions more to keep it working. For what, to have an unbelievably elitist amusement park ride? What fraction of the i

  • But the reason why everyone can't figure out the benefits of space tourism is old men keep being the ones to go up in space. That's pretty uninteresting, what are they doing?

    But if we could interest Paris Hilton in taking a trip (come on, like she can't pay the $20 million) we could get the first real Zero-G porn action happening. A huge video market -- NASA could do Zero-G PPV.

    Although, this would imply that Paris could actually concentrate long enough to go through her flight training. But in case of s
  • There are certain things in life that should have a 1000% "too much freakin' money for your own good tax". Included in this category are 10,000 dollar mobile phones and space tourism like this. Anyone with enough money to drop 11 mil on this should be forced to build a school or a hospital wing first. Oh, and it should be a departure tax (rather than a return tax) so that if the blow up along the way they still have to pay.

    Can I buy duty free? Do I have to take it with me when I go or can I buy it on my ret
  • It does not beg the question.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Close