The business case for space tourism

[fhapgood]

The business case for space tourism -- at least in the near to mid term -- seems weak to me. When you're in orbit you're going to be looking at a display surface of some kind. It might be a window; more likely it will be a pixellated display. In any event the experience will be pretty easy to replicate down on Earth's surface. True, there is the weightlessness and the risk, which for some people might be a bit of a draw, but it is hard for me to see that those two features are going to be worth the tremendous sums the space tourism industry has in mind. Why spend a hundred grand to look at the same display you could see for free in your EZBoy back home?

 

[spacester]

AFAIK, every single person who has had the opportunity to look down on the Earth from orbit has described it in terms that vary from life-transforming to merely once-in-a-lifetime awesome. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />It is not an experience or a view that can be replicated. You can project the experience using all the technology you can dream of, but that will always be a pale shadow of the real thing.<br /><br />There will be those among us who lack the capacity to experience the wonderment, but once accounted for they are irrelevant in a space tourism market analysis. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[mlorrey]

WHo says their view is pixellated? Last I checked, all the space tourism vehicle proposals had viewports.<br /><br />Beyond the view, the zero g feeling, and the ride up and down (which are great for any roller coaster aficionado), there is also the cachet of earning the status of 'astronaut'. People with $200-300k of disposable cash to burn on a suborbital joyride are just the sort of people who are attracted to status symbols, like Coach(tm), DKNY(tm), Black Amex, etc.. They used to be able to get that elite status riding the Concorde, joining the mile-high club, etc. Those who have one too many Mercedes, Lamborghinis, Ferraris, etc. will be hankering for a new status symbol. Wearing astronauts wings is such a symbol. There are fewer astronauts today than there are NFL team members.<br /><br />Is such a status symbol worth $250k? I distinctly believe so, for at least several thousand people out there, perhaps a few tens of thousands.<br /><br />As they pay their fares, they capitalize the infrastructure to lower ticket prices further and to produce vehicles capable of greater speed and altitude.

 

[larrison]

If you can convince investors that it is possible to make a return on their investment in five years it is feasible.

 

[fhapgood]

> It is not an experience or a view that can be <br /> /> replicated. <br /><br />Of course the view can be replicated. It can be replicated perfectly, right down the precise amount of light falling on every last rod and cone. Everything about the experience can be replicated as well, and to the same degree of precision, at least in theory, except weightlessness. That seems to me an awful weak hook to hang an industry on.

 

[fhapgood]

> Beyond the view, the zero g feeling, and the ride up > and down (which are great for any roller coaster <br /> /> aficionado), there is also the cachet of earning the <br /> /> status of 'astronaut'. <br /><br />It's true, but status is by definition highly transient. As soon as X number of people have made the trip the status will be gone and then what will you be selling? So far as I can see, an amusement park ride and a visual experience that is indistinguishable from and possibly inferior to (because it will be less flexible) the feed you can get on the 60 inch high definition display you have at home. Right now the trip to orbit is exciting because we don't have a high definition feed from orbit. But soon we will and when we do, who will want to pay $100K, let alone $250,000, for what is essentially a movie ticket? I mean think of the downside. If freefall makes you nauseous you're trapped there for five days or whatever.

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">"Of course the view can be replicated. It can be replicated perfectly, right down the precise amount of light falling on every last rod and cone. Everything about the experience can be replicated as well, and to the same degree of precision..."</font><br /><br />With all due respect, this is absurd.<br /><br />An image, even a moving, computer-generated 3D VR image, is <b><i>not</i></b> the real experience and no existing or proposed system for generating such images can replicate the degree of visual detail or the kinesthetics of riding in a vehicle through launch, weightlessness, re-entry and landing. It simply can't be done. <br /><br />You are too quickly discounting the human emotional aspects of actually "being there." Viewing images of "there" is only satisfactory to those who have no sense of adventure and an unwillingness to take risks in pursuit of that adventure. There are obviously many who believe it's worth the cost of riding a rocketship and feeling the experience for real. While you and other armchair astronauts watch your images in the comfort of home, others will be feeling it. I'm sorry that you do not understand the difference. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[mlorrey]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>It's true, but status is by definition highly transient. As soon as X number of people have made the trip the status will be gone and then what will you be selling? <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />That is the beauty of it: by the time enough people have ridden that it is not cachet for the megarich, it will be affortable for the simply rich, and by the time its old hat for them, its affordable by the not quite rich,, etc etc etc down the line. The rich always capitalize new technologies at least as much through their exclusive early use as by their investment. Take, for example, cell phones. At one time, there were only 50 cell phone owners in the world, and they all lived around New York City. They paid $10/minute for the privilege in the 1960's. The infrastructure was paid off, new technology developed, and so on, and now people throw away cell phones like junk mail, and switch services like brands of toilet paper.<br />Today we are in the 2nd generation of space transportation, and rides not used by government employees are bought by the rich looking for new experiences and status symbols. We'll reach the 4th generation by 2040, about the same amount of time as has passed since the cell phone entered service to now. <br /><br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>So far as I can see, an amusement park ride and a visual experience that is indistinguishable from and possibly inferior to (because it will be less flexible) the feed you can get on the 60 inch high definition display you have at home. Right now the trip to orbit is exciting because we don't have a high definition feed from orbit. But soon we will and when we do, who will want to pay $100K, let alone $250,000, for what is essentially a movie ticket? I mean think of the downside. If freefall makes you nauseous you're trapped there for five days or whatever. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Digital feed doesn't get you the astronauts

 

[summoner]

This isn't even an argument as far as I'm concerned. As mentioned above, it's not the same as being there. You can look at pictures of Mexico or Europe or any destination and say you've seen it. But no one would claim to have experienced anything until they've been there. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> <br /><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:271px;background-color:#FFF;border:1pxsolid#999"><tr><td colspan="2"><div style="height:35px"><img src="http://banners.wunderground.com/weathersticker/htmlSticker1/language/www/US/MT/Three_Forks.gif" alt="" height="35" width="271" style="border:0px" /></div>

 

[spacefire]

20 years in the future, it is possible the experience-including zero G- can be replicated on the ground.<br />Hopefully, within 20 years, space tourism will have evolved into space-based industry and space based hotels with down-to Earth prices which would make the space experience worthwhile and affordable for many.<br />From there on,it's space colonization where the objective is not tourism anymore but settling new places. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[fhapgood]

> An image, even a moving, computer-generated 3D VR > image, is not the real experience ...<br /><br /><br />Arguments about Everest and Mexico and so on miss the point. Baking in the sun on a Mexican beach with the waters of the Gulf playing with your toes is a deeply sensory experience that is immensely pleasurable on every level. The only piece of orbital tourism that matches this intensity is the video, which admittedly is terrific, but which has the disadvantage of being easily replicated on the surface. It is certainly possible, and possible right now, to build a display that delivers a controlled level of brightness to every rod and cone in the retina. Once you have that it gets very unclear what you are paying for. If you can't tell the difference between being there and not without first checking to see whether or not you are weightless you have a pretty poor basis for a tourist industry. <br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">" It is certainly possible, and possible right now, to build a display that delivers a controlled level of brightness to every rod and cone in the retina."</font><br /><br />Sorry, fhapgood, but you are missing (and evading) an important point about the feelings of actually being there. You are also exaggerating the capabilities of display technology.<br /><br />If you are so easily fooled by a simulation then perhaps you are immune to the lure of the actual experience and should stay at home in the safety of your armchair. Others are not similarly handicapped and are looking forward to buying a ticket. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[mlorrey]

Well, at least we know that fhapgood must be a NASA bureaucrat, with that stunted an imagination.<br /><br />If I climbed everest inside a metal robot, in which every sensory experience was digitally produced because I were quadrapelegic, blind, deaf, and tongueless, I would still find actually being physically in the robot that did the climbing to be a superior experience than doing it from a hospital bed in Boca Raton. If you can't understand the difference, then fhapgood, you are neither the sort of person that space tourism would be marketed too, or who should be responsible in any way for space tourism marketing.<br /><br />Is "Being John Malkovich" as good as actually being John Malkovich? No, if only because the real John Malkovich is free to hunt down the peepers and beat them silly.

 

[jatslo]

Is there a Scholarly Research Article on this subject that I can review?

 

[mlorrey]

There is this great invention called Google....