TGD(ver 1.0) Waste of Time

Hi Al,

The price of launch has risen because US politicians wanted it to do so.
They wanted it because it kept their voters in this State or that in
jobs - and to hell with the rest of the world - or at least that is how
it has seemed over here.

Other people in other lands had plans for cheaper launchers that they
were not permitted to develop due to US pressure on their governments
that this should not be permitted to happen. I know of one particular
vehicle using what was off-the-shelf tech then that could have been
developed 15 years ago but was not, just for that reason. If David
Ashford's 'Spacebus' had been given proper backing (2 billion - about
the same as Concorde {which he helped design}) when he designed it and
asked for support back in 1986, in 10 years we would have had a fleet of
72 of these. By 1996 we would have had space hotels already up there.
Had it been developed in the way planned, it would presently cost
$10,000 per head to put a man in space for a week and space tourism
would already be up there and running.

However, in 1986 the cold war was still happening, even if getting less
intense. The UK still needed US Trident missiles. I reckon we had to do
what we were told and I'm sure our politicians thought likewise.

NASA claims it supports space tourism, but has failed to publish its own
report on the subject. Indeed, had it not been for economics Professor
Patrick Collins - who works for NASDA in Japan, we wouldn't even know
about that report. It said space tourism could start any day and would
become an enormous space business. Here is a quote from NASA's own 1998
report (though not yet published by NASA) "Fortunately, critical
advances have been made during the past decade in many of the
technologies that can enable non-astronaut human space travel to become
both technically and economically feasible, and more are foreseen. As a
result, the potential exists for the creation, in the next very few
decades, of a $10-20 billion... per year "general public space travel
and tourism" business."

Best wishes, Andy Nimmo.

Al Globus wrote:

> Ian Woollard wrote:
>
> > Al Globus wrote:
> >
> > > Ed Minchau wrote:
> >
> > My theory is that the price will halve every 5 years for the
> > foreseeable future; on average; but it may drop more quickly in
> > the short run due to competition between the Russian block and
> > the Americans.
>
> Considering that the price of launch has actually risen over the last
> 30 years,
> that's a theory in need of some data. Measured in person-hours per
> ton to
> low-Earth-orbit, a Saturn V launch was cheaper than any current
> alternative, with
> the possible exception of some Russian launchers Source: Reducing
> Space Mission
> Cost, James Wertz and Wiley Larson, page 116. In addition, launch
> costs have never
> halved over any 5 year period. Why would they suddenly start now?
>
> As to competition between the old USSR and the U.S., most of the new
> and recent
> launchers developed or in development in the US use major pieces of
> ex-Soviet
> hardware (engines, whole vehicles, etc.).
>
> > Tourism is ~15 years away, if I am right.
> >
> I wish you were right, but I don't see a shred of evidence for a
> tourism business
> outside of people with literally millions to spend on a trip to
> space.. The only
> hope I see for middle-class tourism is NASA's official goal of a few
> hundred
> dollars/lb to LEO by 2020 or so with one failure in 10,000 flights.
> If this goal
> were reached, tourism should work. However, I don't see a development
> path that
> will get us there. Hopefully am wrong.
>

The price of launch has risen because US politicians wanted it to doso. They wanted it because it kept their voters in this State or that injobs - and to hell with the rest of the world - or at least that is howit has seemed over here.
Other people in other lands had plans for cheaper launchers that theywere not permitted to develop due to US pressure on their governments thatthis should not be permitted to happen. I know of one particular vehicleusing what was off-the-shelf tech then that could have been developed 15years ago but was not, just for that reason. If David Ashford's 'Spacebus'had been given proper backing (£2 billion - about the same as Concorde{which he helped design}) when he designed it and asked for support backin 1986, in 10 years we would have had a fleet of 72 of these. By 1996we would have had space hotels already up there. Had it been developedin the way planned, it would presently cost $10,000 per head to put a manin space for a week and space tourism would already be up there and running.
However, in 1986 the cold war was still happening, even if getting lessintense. The UK still needed US Trident missiles. I reckon we had to dowhat we were told and I'm sure our politicians thought likewise.
NASA claims it supports space tourism, but has failed to publish itsown report on the subject. Indeed, had it not been for economics ProfessorPatrick Collins - who works for NASDA in Japan, we wouldn't even know aboutthat report. It said space tourism could start any day and would becomean enormous space business. Here is a quote from NASA's own 1998 report(though not yet published by NASA) "Fortunately, critical advances havebeen made during the past decade in many of the technologies that can enablenon-astronaut human space travel to become both technically and economicallyfeasible, and more are foreseen. As a result, the potential exists forthe creation, in the next very few decades, of a $10-20 billion... peryear "general public space travel and tourism" business."
Best wishes, Andy Nimmo.
Al Globus wrote:
Ian Woollard wrote:
> Al Globus wrote:
>
> > Ed Minchau wrote:
>
> My theory is that the price will halve every 5 years for the
> foreseeable future; on average; but it may drop more quicklyin
> the short run due to competition between the Russian block and
> the Americans.
Considering that the price of launch has actually risen over thelast 30 years,
that's a theory in need of some data. Measured in person-hoursper ton to
low-Earth-orbit, a Saturn V launch was cheaper than any currentalternative, with
the possible exception of some Russian launchers Source:Reducing Space Mission
Cost, James Wertz and Wiley Larson, page 116. In addition,launch costs have never
halved over any 5 year period. Why would they suddenly startnow?
As to competition between the old USSR and the U.S., most of thenew and recent
launchers developed or in development in the US use major piecesof ex-Soviet
hardware (engines, whole vehicles, etc.).
>
> Tourism is ~15 years away, if I am right.
>
I wish you were right, but I don't see a shred of evidence for atourism business
outside of people with literally millions to spend on a trip tospace.. The only
hope I see for middle-class tourism is NASA's official goal ofa few hundred
dollars/lb to LEO by 2020 or so with one failure in 10,000 flights. If this goal
were reached, tourism should work. However, I don't see adevelopment path that
will get us there. Hopefully am wrong.