

SpaceX to Launch Private Astronauts in 2015 - jk4930
http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/2013/01/11/spacex-launch-astronauts-2016/

======
jholman
Check out this trolling: the final sentence of the article says "AXE
astronauts may even beat their SpaceX counterparts to microgravity" (in an
XCOR Lynx rocketplane). As in Axe body spray. Uh huh.

This is trolling because

a) that's a _suborbital_ spaceplane (which the mention, but don't emphasize),
which is obviously a much lower bar

b) the Lynx Mk I hasn't even started flight tests yet, as far as I can tell
from their press releases

c) really, if they want to talk about suborbital space tourism (which is what
the Lynx is), isn't Virgin Galactic the market leader here? probably?

d) you really think that if SpaceX wants to do crewed orbits by 2015, they
won't be booking time on a Vomit Comet long before then (and thus logging
microgravity time)? seriously?

~~~
lutorm
Hehe, yeah. By that standard astronaut Mike Melvill already beat those SpaceX
astronauts by more than 10 years...

------
jlgreco
I'm still stuck thinking that 2015 is 10-15 years away.

But 2 to 3 years from now? Damn that is ambitious.

~~~
JshWright
2-3 years seems to be SpaceX's preferred timeline (and they've hit most of
them so far)

~~~
jlgreco
Yeah, that seems to be the case. Manned flight is a _massive_ step forward
though. It's not just a matter of making sure everything they have today works
well enough if people are on board, they still have critical systems that they
still have to develop first! They still need to finish, _then_ test and
certify those second generation draco thrusters that would be used as the
launch-abort system for instance.

The craziest part is that I think they can actually do it.

~~~
lutorm
superdracos have been in testing for a while:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUUnYgo1-lI>

~~~
jlgreco
Not actually in a Dragon capsule to my knowledge, though I admit I don't know
how different that would be.

------
bane
I think it goes to show the incredible depth of engineering in the U.S. to go
from start in 2002 to humans in 2015, 13 years, with all new tools, designs,
engineering and manufacture with so few people and such little monetary
investment. It's astonishing...

~~~
neolefty
They're creating plenty, no doubt, but Musk talks admiringly of Apollo and how
valuable the experimentation and open designs of that era have been for
SpaceX. It allowed them to focus on a much smaller design space.

Unfortunately, I can't find a good source for it (I remember reading an
interview with Musk where he talked about it). I think everyone recognizes
that they are standing on the shoulders of giants and says so frequently.

Interestingly, the Soyuz and Apollo programs, although their missions were
similar, differed significantly in engineering culture. I heard a story about
the Soyuz-NASA collaboration that lead up to the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo%E2%80%93Soyuz_Test_Proje...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo%E2%80%93Soyuz_Test_Project)):
NASA engineers met with Soyuz engineers and asked for engineering
specifications, but the Soyuz engineers couldn't give them (or maybe they just
weren't very detailed) because most things were in people's heads rather than
documented. The Russians were iterative and practical, and had very robust
systems, but they were not nearly as formal as the NASA blokes.

In the end, I wonder if that lack of careful documentation on Soyuz' part
diminished its long-term helpfulness? Or did they later record their designs
more carefully? I would be curious to know. Apollo documents are apparently
available for aspiring rocket builders. Hurray for openness in publicly funded
research.

~~~
gdy
Or maybe they just needed an excuse for not giving those specs.

------
dirkk0
Being a big fan of SpaceX/Elon Musk and having the deepest respect to Buzz
Aldrin, the video still reminds me of 'Tom Corbett, Space Cadet':
[http://archive.org/details/tomCorbettSpaceCadet-
RunawayRocke...](http://archive.org/details/tomCorbettSpaceCadet-
RunawayRocket1954)

All the best to LSA, though.

------
linhat
> The idea is for NASA’s commercial partners to demonstrate the safety and
> operability of the new craft on their own employees before the agency risks
> its astronauts.

The keywords here seem to be 'risks ITS astronauts'. With all the money they
(rightly) have spend on human safety in an outer space environment they now
assume somebody else will do it for them? This confuses me to no end.

So it's like getting test drivers for space vehicles now. Oh my, times sure
have changed...

------
yakiv
What is the target market? Would most of the customers likely be governments?

~~~
rst
Their current work is under contract to NASA; they're one of three private
companies developing spacecraft for possible future use in ferrying astronauts
to the International Space Station. (The other two are Boeing and the Sierra
Nevada corporation, a defense contractor.)

Other possible markets would include space tourism and research trips to
private space stations, along the lines of what Bigelow Aerospace is trying to
develop.

As to governments other than the US, SpaceX could probably sell launch
services, but it would be a lot harder for them to sell the rockets (or,
probably, spacecraft) to foreign governments. A lot of that technology comes
under fairly tight arms trading regulations (for good reason; any launch
vehicle can be transformed into an ICBM by reprogramming the guidance system).

------
orik
I assume SpaceX is hiring Austronauts that are former NASA employees.

How many years down the road will it be before we need to start privately
training Astronauts for SpaceX?

------
krie
Yeah, no. Elon Musk should instead focus on fixing the Peaks that will make
the Almighty Industrial Revolution look like a blip on the easel of the
history of history. Space travel, cars and the Internet has no future beyond
the next 10~ years. Possibly shorter if the financial paradigm falls sooner.

* Peak oil, gas, coal, phosphorous, rare earth metals, uranium, copper, iron und su weiter.

Sorry Elon!

~~~
freehunter
You do realize that most of the things on your list can be found in much more
abundance in space, right? So getting us there is the first step.

~~~
krie
No, because even if we got more of those (and fossil fuels, the most crucial
component of our "prosperous" Western societies aren't available from the
skies) we wouldn't solve the most conspicuous problem: growth. Billions will
die in this century, world pop will plummet to ~ 0.5 billion and the Internet,
cars and all such trivialities will vanish.

The first step? Stopping the senseless notion we will ever get off this rock
and implement a "reduce, reuse, recycle and do without" paradigm akin to world
war 2 rationing, will be the first step.

~~~
freehunter
>fossil fuels

Elon Musk is working on that. He also owns Solar City and Tesla Motors.

>growth

Colonizing space can solve that. Plenty more room and resources.

>senseless notion we will ever get off this rock

It's looking less and less senseless every day, in part due to Musk and his
team.

~~~
krie
Batteries can't be an alternative because: 1) They need fossil fuels and
finite minerals/metals to be manufactured and transported 2) The EROEI is way
less

The earth had plenty of room and resources before we "decided" (we didn't,
we're humans, like yeast we try to consume everything in our path until the
overshoot is apparent and we collapse) that 7-9 billion people and American
1000 gallon a year per capita lifestyles were viable. Haha, what folly.

