"A Private Space Venture IS NOT POSSIBLE" Only Government can do it!

Originally posted by heyitsphil

Originally posted by MarkScheppy

Originally posted by boymonkey74
Is this just an anti space thread which I have noticed a few recently....

We have to go beyond our own planet and destroy all the others we come into contact with......Mahaha...Mahahhahahahhahaaaaa!

edit on 3-1-2012 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

At the risk of sounding "anti-space" can a private entrepeneur (like Branson or Musk) make a spaceship destined for Mars or Proxima Centauri? Perhaps in a hundred or two hundred years, wheras government could do it in a fraction of the cost and time. The proof is in the pudding at NASA (a government agency) and that is facts not anti space or anti science. We need a high energy flux density to propel us to other planets and stars and I don't see Richard Branson or Elon Musk investing in such technologies. Unless you have some contradicting evidence and these 430 rich cornish people, are going to change the face of human culture.

edit on 3-1-2012 by MarkScheppy because: add

I assume you have a crystal ball too sir..
Rich corny people. can and HAVE changed the face of human culture.

All evidence (in my crystal ball) points to government being the consolidating and efficiently organizing force. Government got us to space (not SpaceShipone) and government has the ability to make starship type of space vessels to go to star systems. This is not propaganda (have not heard of NASA). NASA was a government organization meant for the public using engineers, intelligence and bravado from a defeated government.

Creating profit does not produce greatness such as the greatness needed to go to Mars or building Panana Canal or the parthenon. Or go to the moon have astronauts throw a football around on it (like it is nothing but a playground). People should be doing that now, not thinking about the next War on the telegraph. Corporations are an unbridgeable conflict of the interests of free-thinking culture (to explore) and that of the Cabal politics with ego aka vulture capitalists (to make money).

Originally posted by MarkScheppy

Originally posted by heyitsphil

Originally posted by MarkScheppy

Originally posted by boymonkey74
Is this just an anti space thread which I have noticed a few recently....

We have to go beyond our own planet and destroy all the others we come into contact with......Mahaha...Mahahhahahahhahaaaaa!

edit on 3-1-2012 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

At the risk of sounding "anti-space" can a private entrepeneur (like Branson or Musk) make a spaceship destined for Mars or Proxima Centauri? Perhaps in a hundred or two hundred years, wheras government could do it in a fraction of the cost and time. The proof is in the pudding at NASA (a government agency) and that is facts not anti space or anti science. We need a high energy flux density to propel us to other planets and stars and I don't see Richard Branson or Elon Musk investing in such technologies. Unless you have some contradicting evidence and these 430 rich cornish people, are going to change the face of human culture.

edit on 3-1-2012 by MarkScheppy because: add

I assume you have a crystal ball too sir..
Rich corny people. can and HAVE changed the face of human culture.

All evidence (in my crystal ball) points to government being the consolidating and efficiently organizing force. Government got us to space (not SpaceShipone) and government has the ability to make starship type of space vessels to go to star systems. This is not propaganda (have not heard of NASA). NASA was a government organization meant for the public using engineers, intelligence and bravado from a defeated government.

People get ideas of Castro's cuba (when government is mentioned). But when driven by vision such as Kennedy's or Werner von braun to go do great things, then you see it is about something larger than making money. Profit does not produce greatness such as the greatness needed to go to Mars and have astronauts throw a football around on it (like it is nothing but a playground). People should be doing that now and planning their next nuclear powered mission.

edit on 3-1-2012 by MarkScheppy because: add

What?

The only reason government GOT the human race to space is because the commercial and private industry simply was not ready for it yet, technology had not advanced far enough, and private industries weren't confident in putting men in to at that time an untested environement, and they especially weren't keen on butting in on the U.S Russia Space race. I understand your point that often profit does not bring the great visions of Armstrong jumping off the lunar lander and stuff, but you are not realizing that PRIVATE and GOVERNMENT space agencies are seperate. You cannot tell me it would NOT be beneficial to society to let the two work hand in hand, it would benefit fiscally as well as exploratory, not to mention the technology that would be introduced in to society.

Show me NASA or ESA's starship vessel? Seriously?

(technical difficulties loading a picture)
Well anyone with knowledge on how to load a picture (is useful). A plasma engine to go to Mars (I must not know what I am talking about) and it hasn't been done yet. NASA sent a ship to the moon with less processing speed than your average laptop computer (but they did do it.) Going to Mars is not shocking fantasy technology. We have the ability now we should do a technological "re-equipping" of our engineering sector and develop an economy and infrastructure with the right machine tools technology to go to Mars.

That would take clear determination and committment and leadership (and focus). Not Obama or Tony Blair (or any UN committee). Government built the Hoover dam and private enterprise is capable of destroying a well-built government project, but I doubt highly that they could envision anything that lasts more than a couple of decades. Perhaps write a Declaration of Independance from the powers that be, that keeping earthlings down (with monetary policies.)

reply to post by MarkScheppy


Will be interesting to see how long SS2 lasts.

Thought I would mention Space X as well. They have quite the schedule booked, although it is definately heavy on government clients

www.spacex.com...

OP: you ARE aware, that PRIVATE companies built all our spacecraft, past & present, there is no govt 'spaceship factory; out there churning out these things.
Without the PRIVATE companies, the GOVT would have NEVER made it INTO space

Originally posted by HomerinNC
OP: you ARE aware, that PRIVATE companies built all our spacecraft, past & present, there is no govt 'spaceship factory; out there churning out these things.
Without the PRIVATE companies, the GOVT would have NEVER made it INTO space

The Russians that sent the first probes to space and Sputnik. And the American government (branch of the miltary) helped pave the way to Space (Werner Von Braun's Saturn V because he wasn't paid by IBM.) Companies don't have drive or willpower. They want others to do the work and they reap off the hard labor. The doctrine of ignorant people will say otherwise (but there is no proof to show greatness of a company product).

reply to post by MarkScheppy

All evidence (in my crystal ball) points to government being the consolidating and efficiently organizing force. Government got us to space (not SpaceShipone) and government has the ability to make starship type of space vessels to go to star systems. This is not propaganda (have not heard of NASA). NASA was a government organization meant for the public using engineers, intelligence and bravado from a defeated government.

More accurately, it was a communist regime of a government that - under your logic - got us into space:

Conflict between military branches had hindered the progression in creating a satellite before Sputnik's launch. Also, it was not until the U.S.S.R. got Sputnik launched that the U.S. saw their own space program as something more than a leisurely hobby. Satellites were predicted to have no military value to the U.S., and so sufficient funds were not put into the Vanguard project. A lack of qualified personnel contributed to the slow progression of the U.S.'s satellite projects as well. After Sputnik's launch, however, money was pumped into education and satellite projects.

www2.needham.k12.ma.us...

You are being more than just disingenuous about this issue. A political battle between two bigger than their own britches governments used a space race to become even bigger for those britches. There was no benign and humanitarian reason for the space race, it was just politics. You are necessarily ignoring all of this very real history in order to make it appear as if only government can accomplish space exploration.

Even more importantly is the fact that you are either ignoring or just plain ignorant of, that NASA is turning space travel over to private industry. As reported July 7th of 2011:

With the space shuttle's retirement Thursday, no longer will flying people and cargo up to the International Space Station be a government program where costs balloon. NASA is turning to private industry with fixed prices, contracts and profit margins. The space agency will be the customer, not the boss.

You've offered your opinion on private industry and space exploration with an obvious anti-capitalistic bias. Here is an opinion from an obvious pro free market advocate:

Doug Casey:

Perhaps I wasn’t clear – I should have fully separated the concepts of space exploration, which I wholeheartedly endorse, and government space programs, which I oppose on principle and in practice. Government in space is bad economics. It’s unethical to force those not interested in space to pay for its exploration through taxes. And though few people like to think about it, most of what the state now does in space has military intent, and that is very grave, very destructive, on multiple fronts.

The United States federal government cannot even effectively protect its own borders and yet somehow you expect anyone smarter than a box of rocks to believe that somehow that government, and other bumbling governments, are the only hope for space exploration?

i'll just chime in to toss these guys into the fray.

Our mission is very simple. We are working towards launching a human being into space.

This is a non-profit suborbital space endeavor founded and lead by Kristian von Bengtson and Peter Madsen, based entirely on sponsors, private donaters and part time specialists.

Since May 2008 we have been working full time to reach our goal of launching ourselves into space and to show the world that human space flight is possible without major government budgets and administration.

Copenhagen Suborbitals

and this is what can happen when we stop talking and start going out and doing it.

There is no such thing as Careers anymore in America for citizens to afford a home....

If American citizens can't even afford a home.....ain't no way possible for a private venture to Space.


America only prospered when Americans owned homes and were allowed to produce fruit for their labor (figure of speech-get something for their work). The old Land Grants Act and other Federal programs that handed free land to Americans to live and make something of themselves....

That's the only time we prospered. If they did such a program tomorrow.....we'd definitely have a Private Space program since citizens would have funds to invest in it.

OP is right in one thing. Private-only spaceflight (with the exception of highly profitable commercial satelites market) is completely unrealistic and will remain so for a long time. The return on investment is simply not there. Spaceflight is very costly, and no tourism or mining is going to pay for it in foreseeable time.

Virgin galactic SpaceShipOne is just a glorified suborbital plane, far from actual orbital spaceship.

All this news about private spaceflight in recent time refer to privately executed, but mostly PUBLICLY funded spaceflight. And that is not gonna change.

All evidence (in my crystal ball) points to government being the consolidating and efficiently organizing force.

But I have to disagree strongly with this. NASA is a mess, and was going downhill ever since the end of Apollo. Private space companies are our best hope for high efficiency. Bureaucratic and political nonsense that is endemic in NASA and seeps even into some contractors is the surest way to kill off any hope for inspiring space program.

reply to post by Maslo


I disagree, the Apollo Saturn V launched a spacecraft to LEO that was approximately 262,000 pounds. A fully loaded Space Shuttle is about 240,000 pounds.

Gross liftoff mass of the Apollo Saturn V was just under 7 million pounds. 5 Huge F-1 engines, and 2 more J-2 engines, all expendable.

Gross liftoff mass of the Space Shuttle was about 4.4 million pounds. 2 SRBs and 3 main engines, all reusable.

The Space Shuttle maximum landing weight was 230,000 pounds, and reusable. What free fell back for a parachute landing of the Apollos was around 10,000 pounds, expendable.

To me, maybe just me, that says progress, efficiency, and something no private corporation would fund. You are aware NASA also has lots of heavy lift unmanned rockets to launch pure payloads, none I know of that are manned operational heavier lifters. But nobody else lifts beyond earth orbit, so we can have another discussion about that with some numbers.

One that fascinates me is the New Horizon's launch in 2006, from the pad the Atlas V sent the New Horizons craft past lunar orbit within 9 hours, past Mars in 2 and a half months, and past Jupiter in 13 months, its now over 2/3rds of the way to Pluto.
Where is New Horizons now?

Another interesting thing, the expelled third stage of the spacecraft actually beat the New Horizons spacecraft to Jupiter, but without guidance, it wasn't able to guide itself to a slingshot in the proper trajectory from Jupiter so it will miss Pluto by over 2 million miles, while New Horizons will come within 2,000 miles of Pluto, and then be sent off to look for a Kuiper Belt body to fly by. Contact with New Horizons could last another 30 years.

Originally posted by Maslo

All evidence (in my crystal ball) points to government being the consolidating and efficiently organizing force.

But I have to disagree strongly with this. NASA is a mess, and was going downhill ever since the end of Apollo. Private space companies are our best hope for high efficiency. Bureaucratic and political nonsense that is endemic in NASA and seeps even into some contractors is the surest way to kill off any hope for inspiring space program.

Mars is my goal and should be the goal of the combined efforts of the world. Reagan was probably the last decent guy who gave the United States a chance to be leaders in Outer space but we were still battling with Communism. Necessity is the mother of invention. SpaceShipOne (or two) is going to be a Dr. Moreau for suborbital rich folk but it is not necessity for fueling invention. Russia and China would join in to save the world and go to Mars, their policy priorities are on the right scope for scientific infrastructure. Proverbs comes to mind, "Where this is no vision, the people perish."

"Pay for itself" and should medical isotope production—or that NASA or a government science agency be stopped because it doesn't "pay for itself" immediately. The cost-benefit economic model will get the nation and the world nowhere fast (especially in privatization of space). SpaceShipOne is exemplary of this folly. Neat yeah, that rich fatsos can go up in Space and say Wow, been there now. It isn't paving the way for any infrastructure, a nation or going to space cannot be built with a "cost-benefit" yardstick. You can't win any kind of war with that kind of yard-stick.

Well first off, traveling through space isn't the difficult part because there isn't much gravity to speak of, getting off the planet would create more drag due to gravity so this is the only hurtle, small spacecraft as what was depicted on StarWars isn't out of the question, and secretly i'm sure the government has numerous developments just like them, anyone in the private sector with enough money could in fact develop such a spacecraft that could be piggy backed into the stratosphere and propel itself into space from a larger flying platform, as far as for profit? that's something that will eventually be added into the equation, for now its not the most important issue.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

You are being more than just disingenuous about this issue. A political battle between two bigger than their own britches governments used a space race to become even bigger for those britches. There was no benign and humanitarian reason for the space race, it was just politics. You are necessarily ignoring all of this very real history in order to make it appear as if only government can accomplish space exploration.

Even more importantly is the fact that you are either ignoring or just plain ignorant of, that NASA is turning space travel over to private industry. As reported July 7th of 2011:

With the space shuttle's retirement Thursday, no longer will flying people and cargo up to the International Space Station be a government program where costs balloon. NASA is turning to private industry with fixed prices, contracts and profit margins. The space agency will be the customer, not the boss.

You've offered your opinion on private industry and space exploration with an obvious anti-capitalistic bias. Here is an opinion from an obvious pro free market advocate:

Doug Casey:

Perhaps I wasn’t clear – I should have fully separated the concepts of space exploration, which I wholeheartedly endorse, and government space programs, which I oppose on principle and in practice. Government in space is bad economics. It’s unethical to force those not interested in space to pay for its exploration through taxes. And though few people like to think about it, most of what the state now does in space has military intent, and that is very grave, very destructive, on multiple fronts.

You don't like the United States government or Russian because they have made accomplishments that are long lasting based on a coming together of great minds in their politics? Government aren't perfect angelics, I am not going to give you an Angelican Calvinist sympathy of your problems and critical analysis of government (perhaps they should be better at being perfect?) You don't like the shape of the Mars Rovers maybe they should more closely resemble a bag of doritos?

My opinion will be watching SpaceShipOne (or the Simpsons) look like a joke of industry and then space travel.t returning back to the dust of the ground where the Dodo was (and where doritos ought to be..) It is obvious to more of us that Government can do things that only Government can do and Private Enterprise can sit in their chair and scorn them for it like a badly played Simpson's character.

You don't have to go into deep space to make it profitable. One of the experiments performed on the old Skylab was to use zero gravity to form ball bearings. They found out that a precise amount of molten metal placed into zero gravity and allowed to cool will form a perfect sphere of a predictable size due to surface tension. Ball bearings formed in this manner will reduce friction by an order of magnitude. If you place a space factory at one of the Lagrangian points, you could use the energy of the Sun to melt your materials. Skylab also showed that it might be possible to create alloys that cannot be formed on Earth. The formation of the alloy's crystaline structures would be different due to the lack of gravity.

The main problem with doing any of this in space was that Governments were the sole providers of Space access. With all of these companies working on ways to get into orbit, it is just a matter of time until someone orbits a small space station to experiment with this. If those alloys and bearings work out like the current information shows that they might, you will have the same type of drive to get into space that California had in 1849. Remember one thing, the Government didn't build the railroads, it just got out of the way. One of the railroads first customers was the Government in the form of the US Mail, come to think of it, that is how the airlines got started too.

reply to post by MarkScheppy

You don't like the United States government or Russian because they have made accomplishments that are long lasting based on a coming together of great minds in their politics?

This is precisely the disingenuousness I have accused you of. Why are you deflecting. You're the one who made the absurd claim that only government could accomplish space exploration, and then failed to support this argument with anything substantive. You've ignored the fact that private industry has advanced technology far more than any government has. You've ignored the fact that it was private individuals through private enterprise that made the long lasting accomplishments of automobiles and flight itself. You ignore this because you have no reasonable rebuttal to it.

You are entitled to your opinion just the same as any bag of rocks is. Sycophantic praise of government is all you've accomplished in this thread.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
You don't have to go into deep space to make it profitable. One of the experiments performed on the old Skylab was to use zero gravity to form ball bearings. They found out that a precise amount of molten metal placed into zero gravity and allowed to cool will form a perfect sphere of a predictable size due to surface tension. Ball bearings formed in this manner will reduce friction by an order of magnitude. If you place a space factory at one of the Lagrangian points, you could use the energy of the Sun to melt your materials. Skylab also showed that it might be possible to create alloys that cannot be formed on Earth. The formation of the alloy's crystaline structures would be different due to the lack of gravity.

The main problem with doing any of this in space was that Governments were the sole providers of Space access. With all of these companies working on ways to get into orbit, it is just a matter of time until someone orbits a small space station to experiment with this. If those alloys and bearings work out like the current information shows that they might, you will have the same type of drive to get into space that California had in 1849. Remember one thing, the Government didn't build the railroads, it just got out of the way. One of the railroads first customers was the Government in the form of the US Mail, come to think of it, that is how the airlines got started too.

I want private enterprise to benefit from what the government has done and to go as far as they can go, experimenting with Lagrangian points you say. But they cannot do more than these over-glorified suborbital space planes. And sending astronauts up to do repairs on it like NASA did with hubble (a pebble chore for government) private corporation could never do it. Nuclear Laboratories do the same thing you mention with Skylab that they experiment, Mutatis mutandis like make isotopes that can be used to treat cancer patients. Private Enterprise excels at using materials that government already created (but they won't make a new astronomy.)

There is a Zen quality to seeing Mir or Skylab operate in outer space free of the constrains of human politics on earth. Doing things experimenting with alloys and back in the 1970's wasn't the pessimism that exists today with Government. It is going to take a miraculous return to physical geometry science and some technological breakthroughs (perhaps getting closer to our creator) but if we can build spaceships that are nuclear powered to Mars, then Starships would be within mankinds potential. Go-Slow Moon-Mars missions would be of the past like medieval days. Skylab is my favourite adventure that ball bearings example says a classic why reason I like Space. Wasn't Skylab inspiration for The Millenium Falcon, thought I heard that?

Neither private enterprise or government space programs will allow for a fulfilling exploration of space.

In our current system, the government space programs are much better. Private enterprise in this regard would be difficult to make money on and virtually nothing at all would ever be discovered this way. Pretty pointless joy ride for the mega-rich, if it ever gets going.

But for all you space lovers, here's the zeitgeist/venus project pitch:

The plot of Star Trek was only able to begin once the human race abandoned money entirely world-wide.

You want us to explore space properly? Well we are gonna have to withdraw all our money and give it back to the central banks first.

reply to post by GoatwolfeWolfgoate

In our current system, the government space programs are much better. Private enterprise in this regard would be difficult to make money on and virtually nothing at all would ever be discovered this way. Pretty pointless joy ride for the mega-rich, if it ever gets going.

It is no surprise at all that those who advocate complete government control of space exploration and ventures want to reduce private industries participation in this venture as being nothing more than tourism, necessarily ignoring what has all ready been pointed out: asteroid mining.

Asteroid Mining: Key to Space Economy

Professor John Lewis has pointed out (in Mining the Sky) that the resources of the solar system (the most accessible of which being those in the NEAs) can permanently support in first-world comfort some quadrillion people. In other words, the resources of the solar system are essentially infinite... And they are there for us to use, to invest consciousness into the universe, no less. It's time for humankind to come out of its shell, and begin to grow!!

So both for species protection and for the expansion of humanity into the solar system, we need to characterize these objects and learn how to mine and manage them.