Science

All Aboard! Boeing Plans to Fly Tourists to Space…With Gov’t Help

All Aboard! Boeing Plans to Fly Tourists to Space...With Govt Help

Images such as this could be availabe first-hand to space tourists as early as 2015. (Photo: AP)

“Fly me to the moon, let me sing among the stars,” crooned Frank Sinatra. Soon, Old Blue Eyes’s dream could be possible.

Boeing announced yesterday that it was entering the fledgling space tourism market, creating plans for a new age of space exploration. The company’s seven passenger space buses could be ready as early as 2015, reports the New York Times, and Boeing has already won an $18 million government contract to start developing the program.

“We’re ready now to start talking to prospective customers,” Eric C. Anderson, co-founder and chairman of Space Adventures, the space tourism company based in Virginia that would market the seats for Boeing, told the Times. And while ticket prices have not been decided, the benchmark may already have been set by the Russians, who have been charging $40 million for tourist trips on their Soyuz flights.

But don’t get too excited. According to Boeing, the “commercial crew” project needs a lot of government help in order to get off the ground. “At Wednesday’s news conference, Boeing officials said that the federal government would have to pay much of the development costs in order for the effort to succeed,” the Times reports, and then quotes John Elbon, program manager for Boeing’s commercial crew effort: “This is an uncertain market. If we had to do this with Boeing investment only and the risk factors were in there, we wouldn’t be able to close the business case.”

In other words, this is a risky project, and Boeing doesn’t want to take the risk. Instead, it wants the government, and taxpayers, to bear that burden.

That may be easier to stomach if Boeing’s recent track record was much more palatable — but it isn’t. Just last month Boeing announced that it’s jumbo jet of the future, the 787 “Dreamliner,” wouldn’t be delivered on time — yet another delay that has set the project back at least two years.

Customers and taxpayers, then, could be left waiting and waiting, which brings a variation on another Sinatra tune to mind: “I’ve got the world on a string, but I’m sitting here in limbo.”

Comments (18)

  • flyguync
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 9:53pm

    I will support this as long as all members of the current administration are on the initial flight with a one-way ticket.

    Report Post »  
  • Geezrman
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 4:39pm

    Wow what a way to shoot the liberals to the moon and beyond. I like the beyond better then there is no chance they can come back. What a blessing

    Report Post »  
  • wilmo
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 4:23pm

    When Geithner called China’s finance minister about this, his response was “You want to borrow another billion or so to do what?”

    Report Post »  
  • MarkH
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 1:08pm

    If the Government deems that it can use much/most of the work on such a project for its own needs such as supplying Space Station, on-orbit satellite repair, etc. Then a more appropriate approach would be for congress to establish a prize that would be 1.5 times the estimated development costs for the first place winner and 1/2 the amount for the 2nd place winner of a US led development effort. As long as the rules for winning the prize were established prior to its offering, this would be fair. The companies would have the incentive to get the job done as soon as possible (1st vs 2nd place) and the government wouldn’t have to spend money for its procurement process (it would be purchasing services not hardware) and would know the maximum cost for the development (the prize money). If companies didn’t get the job done, the government would pay nothing. The companies would want to make the service as inexpensive as possible as this would maximize their long-term profits in the commercial world. The government would also have to provide a mechanism to limit liability if the an accident occurs as this is a major issue with rocket launches.

    NASA should be excluded from the development process and only involved to the extent that the companies could buy expertise from its centers to answer questions, perform analysis, or provide launch facilities if the competing companies so desired. NASA could also be involved in setting up the goals (and metrics measuring if they are met) used to winning the prizes. These goals should be easily measurable (not subject to interpretation) and should easily understandable to the lay person (Congress and the American public), This approach would allow NASA to focus on space exploration not the creation of launch and transport hardware. It would also keep the Government from changing requirements in mid-stream — thereby adding to both the development time and costs. It would also make establishing a business case to build the capability much easier. Having multiple companies offering a service will tend to keep the cost of the service low as there would be built in competition.

    Although this approach would need a bit more work, it is conceptually easy, understandable, and limits the exposure of the American people while improving our technical and scientific infrastructure. It would also fire the imagination of our public and lead to improvements in science and mathematics in our schools because it would suddenly be acceptable to be a science/math “geek”.

    Report Post »  
    • jcatlanta
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 9:52pm

      In my book it is already acceptable to be a math/science geek. I have worked on aircraft design for the last 30 years and this approach would definitely work. There are plenty of us that are able to do the design work. It could actually be done with a rather small group of engineers. It would just take very specialized design experience. I’d be interested in joining such a team myself. Good concept.

      Report Post » jcatlanta  
  • Danglingdingleberry
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 9:57am

    Hi I am Danglingbags big brother. I guess by now all of you have figured out that he was repeatedly dropped on his head when he was small. I want to apologize that he has escaped from the attic. Mama just had too much to drink that day. We didnt realize that he ever learned how to use a computer. He spent most of his time playing with his own feces. We had no idea he would live long enough to become a problem. But I have to say, even mentally challenged pos like him needs entertainment too. He has no idea what hes doing or saying so please just overlook him and whatever you do, dont respond to him. It just makes matters worse. As time goes by I will finish filling you in on him. Sorry for his ignorance but mom was on drugs pretty heavy while she was pregnant with him.
    By the way mama wants to know if we can get Danglingbags on a one way flight.

     
  • Nauvasheena
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 8:44am

    It’s true that putting taxpayer money into a project like this might seem bogus, but I‘ll be the first to say I’ve seen them spend it on worse. Unfortunately, Boeing is not the first to want to pioneer commercial space flight. Simply Google Burt Rutan, and Virgin Galactic and you’ll find that this idea has been in the works for years already. The idea is that it gives ordinary people (I guess we’ll see how ordinary when we see ticket prices) the opportunity to experience what astronauts experience and gain profit for the purpose of extending our reach in further exploration. The question is, will it happen that way? If Boeing and Virgin Galactic are in competition, I suppose the sky is the limit. The difference being, Virgin Galactic has not spent a single taxpayer cent on its venture.

    And for those at a loss as to how Burt Rutan Gained his name, he built the first privately owned space craft that exited the atmosphere and returned safely to earth. Before you scoff at the achievement, he built at least parts of it in his Garage with civilian attainable materials.

    Report Post » Nauvasheena  
    • kralspaces
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 8:53am

      This project is using NM State tax dollars. The pre-sale ticket price is $200,000. They have already sold a lot of tickets. First flights are schedlued for 2011.

      Report Post » kralspaces  
    • Nauvasheena
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 9:02am

      Wow, before I swallow my foot all the way to the knee, I‘ll say I’m extremely disappointed to hear that they’ve sold out. I wonder what that ticket price will look like after it actually launches and accounts for inflation.

      Report Post » Nauvasheena  
    • kralspaces
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 9:41am

      You can still buy tickets for $200K. The money is being used to privately subsidize the project. Of course, we here in NM are subsidizing the other half with our state tax dollars. This is a Gov. Richardson dream. I can only hope that their is enough money to finish.

      Report Post » kralspaces  
  • kralspaces
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 8:35am

    2015? Are you kidding me. The 787 is still sitting on the runway in Roswell NM for brake testing. This plane is already 3 years late.If they ever make it to space we have the SpacePort for them already under construction (on tax payers backs of course).

    Report Post » kralspaces  
    • kralspaces
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 8:48am

      For those interested in seeing the progress..

      http://www.spaceportamerica.com/construction/construction-status.html

      Report Post » kralspaces  
    • missmarie
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 12:03pm

      Thanks for the website – pretty neat. The problem I’m having is with the government funding the project. As it said in the article: “In other words, this is a risky project, and Boeing doesn’t want to take the risk. Instead, it wants the government, and taxpayers, to bear that burden.” If I’m bearing the burden, I should at least get a discounted flight and a bag of peanuts.

      Report Post » missmarie  
    • Docrow
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 3:25pm

      Peanuts? How about a steak!?

      Report Post » Docrow  
    • jcatlanta
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 9:44pm

      I worked for Boeing on the 787 and 747-8 design up until last year. The designs are getting more and more complicated and there are layer upon layer of management and a very bloated union. The answer is totally privitized developement. In fact, it is going on right now with several private companies.

      Report Post » jcatlanta  
  • thegr8restoration
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 8:21am

    I think its sounds like a great idea except for the part the American tax payers should burden the start up cost and the risk of failure. Boeng, hears a novel idea why not find privat investors to partner with you, instead of asking people who will never be able to afford a ticket to take the risk.

    Report Post »  
  • RubinGaidin
    Posted on September 16, 2010 at 8:14am

    WAIT A SECOND!!!!!!
    NASA gets told no more space fleights, and gets instucted to make muslum country’s feel better about their contribution to the history of science. Then a year later Boeing is expecting the government to “assist” with footing the bill for “space tourism”
    And the part that will make it all a brilliant irony will be when Obama calls it a brilliant idea and lobbies the house to pay for it…

    Report Post »  
    • tobywil2
      Posted on September 16, 2010 at 8:55am

      The purpose of investments is a major difference between tyranny and Capitalism. Under Capitalism, investments are made for the purpose of creating wealth that earns a profit for the investor. Investments made under Tyranny (Socialism, Communism, Fascism or the Tribal Chief-Witch Doctor) are made for the purpose of political expediency. Any wealth created is simply accidental as it was not a consideration in the selection of the investment.

      If this proposal could really create wealth, would Boeing be willing to accept a partner interested in political expediency than profit?

      http://commonsense21c.com/

      Report Post » tobywil2  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love