Re: Historical comparisons


Chance wrote:
Obviously historical comparisons have their weaknesses, but with that
caveat, what does the commercial passenger space industry look like to
you? More like the begining of the airline industry, or more like the
development of the supersonic aircraft by the US,Europe and Russia in
the 60's and 70's? Obviously one industry turned out fairly sucessful
while the other died a slow lingering death. Or perhaps you think a
totally differant historical scenario is appropriate, or none at all.
Thoughts?

Asked "What do you think about the American Revolution", Vietnamese
general Giap said "It's too soon to tell.".

The aerospace movement is one seamless continuum. Nature doesn't see
the distinctions you portray. There was no moment that dinosaurs became
birds -- they became ever more birdlike and ever less dinolike until
what you see is birds but no dinosaurs.

People observing birds flew kites, then made man-carrying kites, then
engine powered kites. There was no moment when man transcended kites to
airplanes. Kites became more planelike and less kitelike, although
there are plenty of flying powered kites still today, and unpowered
manlifting kites as well still seen in the skies.

Catapults threw rocks, then flaming objects, then bombs. Flaming
objects became self-propelled and catapulted themselves. Fireworks and
pyrotechnics used gunpowder to push themselves, then push objects like
bullets and cannonballs. The fireworks and pyrotechnics didn't turn
into guns and cannons, they still exist every 4th of July.

Jets and rockets came into existence due to expansion, not displacement
of their predecessors. Jets and rockets are only really different in
that one is air-breathing and the other carries it's oxidizer. Jets,
cruise missles and ballistic rockets were all developed at once, while
cloth-covered wooden planes still flew, and cloth-covered wooden planes
still fly.

The expansion of diversity does not require extinction of the earlier.
Crocadillians and sharks watched the dinosaurs come and then watched
them go.

There is no commercial passenger space industry but every person who
ever got their astronaut/cosmonaut wings has been a space tourist.
Space is a harsh, demanding, unforgiving environment. There never has
been a time when non-working travellers were welcome there and there
isn't any prospects that they will be welcomed soon, if ever. There may
never be a time when human deadweight is welcome in space. If you have
nothing to contribute while in orbital space then there aren't any good
reasons to lift you there.

Sub-orbital joyrides of 15 minutes is another diversification, not a
displacement of anything. It is not appropriate to even call it
"commercial passenger space industry".

It is doubtful that sub-orbital jaunts will become more orbital-like
and less amusment-park ride-like.

SSTO requires a rethinking that is more fundamental than any of the
plans posted in public to date. None of these can morph into the kind
of orbital docking and re-entry vehicles that will provide the ladder
to the planets and stars. If anything they are money sponges sucking
dry the funding sources and a distraction from what will work.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Historical comparisons
    ... caveat, what does the commercial passenger space industry look like to ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Historical comparisons
    ... what does the commercial passenger space industry look like to ... More like the begining of the airline industry, ...
    (sci.space.policy)