In the sweepstakes it says the Approximate Retail Value ("ARV") is $2.21 Million. That is one expensive ticket!
Should be closer to $50million I'm thinking
That's what NASA pays per seat to ferry astronauts to the ISS.
The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
71–80 of 95 posts
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is perfect timing. I've just been told to communicate a significant project delay to a customer. 'Next quarter' sounds a lot better than 'months, not weeks'. Thanks heaps.
"slippage" possibly sounds better than "delay" also.
Due to unforeseen events impacting developer velocity, we experienced some slippage while burning down feature development on the critical path. Needless to say this will be reflected in our Sprint planning going forward and we’ve already added an Epic to track the remaining work needed to unblock the remaining tasks.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#73Hate to be that guy but what's the environmental impact of flying folks to orbit "just for kicks" if this were to become a business
Can someone help me understand why I was down voted. Is there anything wrong about thinking of the impact of something like this becoming a commonplace luxury.
Most likely because we're not anywhere remotely close to this becoming a commonplace luxury, and the impact of this happening twice a year is essentially zero.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#74Not very 'inspirational' to exclude 95% of the World's population from entering.
I can't see that it's based on ITAR requirements.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
> crazy enough It's probably less risky than the first flight of the 1903 Wright Flyer. (The Flyer was highly unstable and could barely be controlled.) Modern notions of risk have changed quite a bit in the last century.
Honestly some straps inside the already pressurized capsule + some CO2 filtering and Crew Dragon 1 is probably much less risky than most of the early human space flights. We forget how many astronauts and cosmonauts died in the early days (especially if you include pilots of high altitude test flights which tested many concepts later used in the space programs). There were many additional close calls on either side,…
For sure. Cargo dragon on falcon 9 is a solid combo compared to the space shuttle. I wouldn't say that C1 was low risk (for a human to joyride in), though. Probably less risky than the first shuttle launch, but that's a pretty low bar based on how the shuttle was developed. C1 was designed, validated and launched for the purpose of flying a few orbits with a wheel of cheese in it. It was an early test flight long before cargo dragon was complete.
Likewise, crew dragon's first manned flight was likely way lower risk than probably any shuttle mission. It largely benefited from all the learnings from cargo dragon and a lot of practical testing though.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#76Back when I worked on cargo dragon, there were definitely some coworkers crazy enough to ride C1 up for a few orbits if it were allowed. They would have been fine with just a couple seatbelt straps too...
> crazy enough It's probably less risky than the first flight of the 1903 Wright Flyer. (The Flyer was highly unstable and could barely be controlled.) Modern notions of risk have changed quite a bit in the last century.
The difference would be public fallout in case of a death. That would be really crazy, not the risk for the person involved.
In 1903, there was no radio, no TV, people would not learn about someone killed in his own contraption or boarding a risky prototype. Maximally as a short notice on sixth page of a newspaper. There was also no competing industry.
In 2021, the outrage of seeing somebody killed on video because a new ship failed would be enough to stop the program for years. Musk detractors who hate his entire style and persona would feel instantly vindicated - "see, this abominable billionare finally killed somebody, as we prophecied since 2002!". THe competition (ULA) would do its utmost to bury SpaceX under tons of papers and years of investigation, because their cheap flights are eating into Boeing et al. sacred territory.
And I think that would happen even if that person on board was not just volunteer, but an illegal stowaway.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#77From https://www.prizeo.com/campaigns/inspiration4/inspiration4/o... : TO ENTER WITHOUT DONATING: To enter the Sweepstakes for free without donating to the Sponsor's campaign, visit the Sweepstakes Website and follow the on-screen instructions to complete the simple online entry form ("Form"). All fields must be completed. Incomplete entries are void. Each valid submission of the Form earns 100 entries. You may compl…
I don’t feel publicizing this part is beneficial. Especially on this site, where many people have both disposable income and scripting abilities.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#78Not very 'inspirational' to exclude 95% of the World's population from entering. I can't see that it's based on ITAR requirements.
Maybe just eases the paperwork.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#79Hate to be that guy but what's the environmental impact of flying folks to orbit "just for kicks" if this were to become a business
Can someone help me understand why I was down voted. Is there anything wrong about thinking of the impact of something like this becoming a commonplace luxury.
Also on an tangent, advances in launch industry = moving industries to space. This could reduce pollution drastically on Earth. So the net carbon footprint of the launch industry could even become negative.
Re: The first commercial astronaut mission to orbit Earth aboard Dragon
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
> crazy enough It's probably less risky than the first flight of the 1903 Wright Flyer. (The Flyer was highly unstable and could barely be controlled.) Modern notions of risk have changed quite a bit in the last century.
The difference would be public fallout in case of a death. That would be really crazy, not the risk for the person involved. In 1903, there was no radio, no TV, people would not learn about someone killed in his own contraption or boarding a risky prototype. Maximally as a short notice on sixth page of a newspaper. There was also no competing industry. In 2021, the outrage of seeing somebody killed on video because a…
> see, this abominable billionare finally killed somebody, as we prophecied since 2002!"
Technically, Tesla's irresponsible so-called "autopilot" has already killed a handful of people, but generally the public has not been upset about it.
[Accounting here (not all were killed by autopilot): https://www.tesladeaths.com/]