
Nasa to Open International Space Station to Tourists - bem94
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48560874
======
consumer451
If I may, I am personally very excited for more people, especially wealthy
people, to go into space so that many of them experience the overview
effect.[0]

> The overview effect is a cognitive shift in awareness reported by some
> astronauts during spaceflight, often while viewing the Earth from outer
> space.

> It is the experience of seeing firsthand the reality of the Earth in space,
> which is immediately understood to be a tiny, fragile ball of life, "hanging
> in the void", shielded and nourished by a paper-thin atmosphere. From space,
> national boundaries vanish, the conflicts that divide people become less
> important, and the need to create a planetary society with the united will
> to protect this "pale blue dot" becomes both obvious and imperative.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_effect)

~~~
ketozhang
I wonder if VR would provide the same effect with today's technology or of the
upcoming future.

~~~
lanewinfield
I thought the same as soon as I read the original comment—I've had minor but
similar feeling in VR. Try "Irrational Exuberance."

~~~
meruru
Never tried VR, but my initial reaction went like this: how is viewing Earth
from space different than just looking at a video? -> the viewport is larger
-> just use VR.

~~~
ngokevin
You'll get the sense of scale in VR, but I don't think you can get the
realization that below you would be billions of people walking and bustling
around you cannot even sense. The feeling of being so zoomed out and
everything feeling so small.

In VR, a pixel would be only a pixel rendered from a fixed texture map and
nothing more. Might not have the same effect.

~~~
amacbride
Plus, of course, you’d be in microgravity. I’m sure that adds quite a kick to
the visuals (which wouldn’t be present in VR.)

------
Klathmon
[1] is a link to the NASA press release.

At a glance, it looks less about space tourism and more about enabling private
companies to begin manufacturing and development in LEO or conduct experiments
that NASA themselves don't need to be directly involved in.

In fact it seems to specifically call out that private astronauts are only
allowed if they enable the allowed "activities".

Also, it looks like they are looking to have a dedicated "commercial" section
of the ISS, and long term they want to have multiple commercial destinations
in LEO!

[1] [https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-opens-
international-...](https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-opens-
international-space-station-to-new-commercial-opportunities-private)

~~~
hanniabu
It'd be great if they mandated that any research performed must be made public
with free use of that research.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
Absolutely! The private company will have some high costs associated with a
single trip, but it’s the taxpayers that footed most of the $100B station to
make it all possible.

~~~
Robotbeat
You won't get any takers for offsetting some of that $100B in costs if there's
zero incentive for a private company to fund such research.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I'm really thirsty, oh look a well built by the public, hey there's a bucket
stall in the nearby town, I could get a bucket and then everyone can have a
drink ... oh hang on though, other people might use my bucket.

Oh, best just stay thirsty then.

Hang on, perhaps I can force the people to pay for security guards that stop
them from using my bucket ...

~~~
Robotbeat
We are, of course, talking about research to develop intellectual property.
Probably most people on HN are employed in producing protected intellectual
property in some way.

~~~
jMyles
> Probably most people on HN are employed in producing protected intellectual
> property in some way.

I don't think most people on HN even believe in intellectual property
conceptually, much less view their activities through that lens.

I develop software, and that software has a license (mostly AGPLv3 at this
point) because I live in the real world. But it's nobody's property; it's just
math.

~~~
Robotbeat
Okay, and the companies that might utilize the space station also have to
exist in the real world.

~~~
jMyles
Maybe I'm just missing your line of reasoning here. I thought you were saying
that you expected people on HN to rush to the defense of intellectual property
as a viable abstraction for understanding (for example) software or research.
Do I have it wrong?

Yes, companies exist in the real world. The real world is full of open source.
And full of companies that produce open source material and don't regard it as
"intellectual property" except insofar as to license it to protect themselves
and their users/readers/customers.

------
sandworm101
>> $35,000 (£27,500) per night.

That is cheaper than the multi-room suites on board the A380. It's cheaper
than renting many boats.

Or maybe this is a trick. How long is a "night" on space station? Only an hour
or so iirc. Maybe they get back to earth and get a surprise Expedia bill on
their cc.

~~~
dontbenebby
I've heard that the laws of your home apply in space, so some Californian
should get a 30 day lease then force them to evict them :D

~~~
Waterluvian
A great way to become the first human to be Spaced.

~~~
stcredzero
Getting someone evicted in California might take 2 years in court. For it to
be that hard, they have to be in residence for over 2 years. There are all
kinds of shenanigans lawyers can pull to draw out such processes.

~~~
wahern
Evictions usually happen much faster than that, like on the orders of days or
weeks. See [https://www.attorneydavid.com/blog/how-long-does-it-take-
to-...](https://www.attorneydavid.com/blog/how-long-does-it-take-to-evict-a-
tenant-in-california/)

~~~
stcredzero
I've spoken to Bay Area attorneys about this. Non-disputed evictions take 4-6
weeks. That's non-disputed. That's on the long side! Other jurisdictions take
a few days to 2 weeks for non-disputed. An additional month for disputed
evictions is an average, so that's up to 10 weeks or so. It can drag out for
much longer. It depends on how good the case is for each side.

~~~
Waterluvian
In the parts of Canada I've lived the rules very much bias in favour of the
resident, based on the logic that the cost to the landlord is financial but
the cost to the residents is safety, health, etc.

If I recall, in some places you can't even evict in the winter. Same applies
to utilities: it's illegal to disconnect heat (whether gas or electricity) in
the winter even if for non payment.

Personally I prefer protecting residents at the cost of some people who
exploit the system.

~~~
stcredzero
This is the logic behind California's laws.

------
aerophilic
I love that they are doing this, but I am worried it may not be enough to keep
the ISS up past 2024, but it is a good first step.

Some context for those that haven’t been following closely: It costs NASA over
4 billion a year to maintain the ISS. [0]

While the vast majority of that cost is transportation to/from the ISS (around
2.4 billion), there is a sizeable chuck that if they could “offload” to the
private sector, may allow NASA to keep the ISS in orbit longer than currently
planned.

The problem is, at least until they grow a true market, that market isn’t big
enough to support that maintenance.

So, I _believe_ the strategy (which makes sense) is try and get a true
market/interest in the ISS going. If they can do that successfully, it should
lower the cost for everyone, potentially allowing for even more things to
happen in LEO.

So we will see, but I will note one of the biggest risks for SpaceX/Blue
Origin/others doing commercial resupply is that once ISS disappears, there is
no ready customer/market for their commercial offerings for crew. No way
faster to kill the infant commercial crew space industry than to starve it of
revenue.

[0]
[https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fy_2018...](https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fy_2018_budget_presentation_media_telecon.pdf)

------
kawfey
They've done this before. Charles Simonyi [0] went up to the ISS in 2007 and
2009. I got to talk to him via ham radio.

Space Adventures [1] has been doing it since 2001, but it seem they haven't
had any recent trips.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Simonyi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Simonyi)
[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Adventures](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Adventures)

~~~
makomk
The previous space tourism was operated by the Russian space agency out of the
Russian section of the ISS. NASA didn't particularly like this at the time but
weren't in a position to do much about it.

------
cmancini
Most people talk about 1) tourism and 2) research which makes sense, but I can
see a lot of benefit for marketing and branding. Imagine promo videos of
someone using your gadget in space. A private company could fly up a few
models/actors, a few of the latest brands goods, and get shots looking back at
earth or floating around.

Luxury goods like watches and pens have already capitalized on this (Fisher
Space Pen, Omega Moonwatch). I could see other high margin luxury brands
snagging a seat:

\- Sneakers (Air Jordans -> Space Jordans?)

\- Jewelry (Diamond industry could play up a diamonds/stars theme)

\- Fashion (play up the weightless/effortless aspect)

Any brand could get in on it if someone figured out the economics of a testing
service. Small brands and Kickstarter projects could pool resources and fly up
a few hundred toys and say they were 'tested in space'.

~~~
jackfoxy
> fly up a few models/actors

More like 1, even for the biggest brands. This is going to be way expensive. I
think you are onto a good idea, except I get the impression NASA will
prioritize missions that contribute to commercial or science R&D and/or
production.

~~~
jackfoxy
From the press release:

To qualify, commercial and marketing activities must either: require the
unique microgravity environment to enable manufacturing, production or
development of a commercial application; have a connection to NASA’s mission;
or support the development of a sustainable low-Earth orbit economy.

~~~
cmancini
That's a good point. There will be prioritization, and the costs could be so
high as to rule out brand plays even if they could get the rules interpreted
as loosely as possible. My idea might need to bake a bit longer. :)

------
jorge-d
Given that ISS belongs to multiple countries (US / Russia / Japan / Canada /
UE), is NASA allowed to sell tickets to travel there and get keep the benefits
of the sell for itself ?

~~~
rory096
Each module is owned by its respective country.

~~~
pkaye
So Canadians get strapped on for a ride on the Canadarm2? /s

------
PunksATawnyFill
It's NASA. Why don't the Brits understand acronyms?

~~~
mratzloff
It's Americans who are inconsistent with acronyms. Do you write LASER or
RADAR? If it's pronounceable as a word, it's written as such. If it's
pronounceable as letters, it's written how you would expect.

~~~
gsnedders
To be fair, the BBC style guide[1] isn't totally consistent either, though in
general, initialisms are upper-case and acronyms are title-case (as we see
here).

[1]:
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art201307021121335...](https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art20130702112133530)

------
captn3m0
I remembered the EoL date for ISS being 2024, but it looks like a bill was
passed this September extending it to 2030.

[https://spacenews.com/house-joins-senate-in-push-to-
extend-i...](https://spacenews.com/house-joins-senate-in-push-to-extend-iss/)

------
jakebaker
Why not consider running an auction in the early years to maximize private
funding for operations?

------
ggregoire
From the official tweet:

> @Space_Station is open for commercial business! Watch @Astro_Christina talk
> about the steps we're taking to make our orbiting laboratory accessible to
> all Americans.

Why is it limited only to Americans?

~~~
obmelvin
They are only allowing a very small number of people to go aboard, so I don't
think it's that bizarre that a US agency is only picking Americans for the
initial program.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I think it's more the "for access to the international space station" part
that the questioner is interested in?

If the ISS is actually international then shouldn't access be open to all.

Nor that one expects USA decision makers not to extend their imperialism to
space though.

~~~
wongarsu
"international" as in "multiple nations", not as in "everyone". It's a
cooperation between multiple nations. If the US won't take you up you can
still ask Russia, the EU, Canada and Japan if one of them will host you on the
ISS.

------
droithomme
The food and room service better be top notch for what I'm paying here!
Commander Kononenko, when the heck is my laundry gonna be done?! Hop hop!

------
callumprentice
Whole new market for NoAirB&B rentals..

------
eutropia
> Nasa's announcement on Friday is part of a move towards full privatisation
> of the ISS. US President Donald Trump published a budget last year which
> called for the station to be defunded by the government by 2025.

I had no idea that the ISS was going to be de-funded. Does that even make
sense?

~~~
Robotbeat
The ISS has a limited life due to thermal cycling and such. (One hot/cold
cycle every 90 minutes). Think airliner cycles. The first part was launched in
1998.

ISS was actually supposed to be deorbited in the 2015 timeframe under Bush II
(to make funds available for the Constellation program), later extended to
2020 and then 2025.

I think most expect ISS to stay in orbit until 2028 or maybe a little later,
so some extension is likely to happen regardless of what Trump's policy is
(same as how Obama extended ISS). 30 years is a _really_ long time for safety-
critical space hardware, and ISS absorbs an astronomical amount of funding.
It's not hyperbole to say that the Trump Moon shot would have plenty of
funding if ISS wasn't around. We're talking about an additional $4-5 billion
per year.

~~~
chungleong
I remember being angry when Congress cancelled fundings for Superconducting
Super Collider but kept those for Space Station Freedom. From a scientific
discovery standpoint, the decision was utterly unjustifiable. I'm willing to
accept the contention that space exploration is more than science--it's the
fulfillment of Man's aspiration. But if the existence of the space station
becomes an impediment to space exploration itself then what exactly is the
point?

~~~
Robotbeat
I'm not sure I agree. Building ever-bigger colliders has pretty hardcore
diminishing returns. ISS (what Space Station Freedom became) is also a
platform with a whole bunch of scientific and now commercial applications,
many of which were not even foreseen at the time. Additionally, CERN ended up
building CERN, which basically accomplished the goals of SSC. I doubt anyone
else would have taken up the mantle of ISS other than a few small modules.

But I agree it's potentially problematic that ISS has become a budget drain on
NASA. That's why it's good to look for alternative customers/uses of ISS other
than being entirely paid for by NASA.

------
riffic
Hey Bbc, it's NASA not Nasa.

~~~
ceejayoz
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalization_in_English](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalization_in_English)

> In British English, only the initial letter of an acronym is capitalized if
> the acronym is read as a word, e.g., "Unesco."

You say "Bee Bee Cee", so they're the BBC. You do not say "Enn Aay Ess Aay",
so it's "Nasa". "Nato" and "the UN". etc. Americans do it differently, but
telling the folks who invented the language they're doing it wrong is a bit
silly.

~~~
Gustomaximus
Great information but adding the "but telling the folks who invented the
language they're doing it wrong is a bit silly." seemed unnessesary, not least
I'm sure BBC do make mistakes from time to time. Nothing wrong with polite
questioning no matter how expert someone is.

------
johnchristopher
Really off-topic and nit-picking: if you are going to editorialize the title
to capital letters for every words (tourists -> Tourists) then do it at least
for `NASA`.

While I Am At It, I Do Dislike random Capitalization :) and those rules
[https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/capitalization/rules-
for-...](https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/capitalization/rules-for-
capitalization-in-titles.html)

~~~
Kye
Acronyms that become words sometimes lose their capitalization. Nasa is headed
there.

See also: laser, scuba, radar, modem.

~~~
johnchristopher
I don't think so. Which apparatus is a nasa supposed to be ?

edit: a laser, a scuba, a modem I can picture but what's a nasa ?

~~~
hombre_fatal
It's about pronunciation, not whether it's some tangible apparatus. That's you
backsplaining the phenomenon.

You don't pronounce it "En Ay Es Ay". You say "Nasa". Someone in another
comment thread links to a wiki article for more info.

~~~
johnchristopher
Oh, I see now ! Thanks. That makes much more sense if it's about pronunciation
and not some tangible apparatus (I wrongly deduced that).

