Doug Messier continues to add new posts (again, not a permalink, just keep scrolling). I missed the lunch talk by Elon Musk, but Doug reports that he says he can close much of the gap.
Jeff Foust says that he talked to Rep. Kosmas yesterday as well, on non-ITAR subjects.
And Jeff continues to twitter the main session.
[Update a few minutes later]
Between Jeff’s twittering and spacevidcasts, Clark Lindsey is doing a damned good job of coverage, considering that he’s a thousand miles away.
I have found a rare confluence at this conference — simultaneous power and connectivity. I hadn’t realized until today just how much my laptop battery sucks (HP Pavilion dv5, less than a year old, if anyone’s wondering). I started using it this morning, and checked the battery after about fifteen minutes, and it told me I had about fifty minutes left…
I don’t know if it’s the design, or if there’s a memory problem because I don’t use it off the grid much, and rarely deplete it, or what. But I might have to start carrying a spare, or get one of those things that plugs in externally as a backup.
And of course, I don’t have the ultimate, unachievable combination — power, connectivity, at a comfortable table, with something interesting to listen to. I’m sitting in a chair in the hotel lobby. Fortunately, there’s nothing I’m really hot to hear going on right now.
“Bob-1” asked in comments whether I talked to Congresswoman Kosmas yesterday about ITAR. In fact I did. She seemed aware of the issue, or at least the word. I pointed out (in light of her praise of entrepreneurship) that it was actually a much bigger problem for the smaller companies and startups, because the big ones have staff dedicated to deal with it, and can factor it into their costs for government reimbursement, but for those small companies without such in-house expertise and not on the government cost-plus dole, it represents a formidable barrier to entry, and one that the big players don’t necessarily mind. I don’t think that she had heard this argument before, and seemed interested. She told me to talk to her staffer (who was with her) next time I was in DC. Of course, I don’t know when that will be, but if anyone else out there wants to talk to the staffer, the Congresswoman seemed supportive.
There’s no wireless in the meeting rooms, so I can’t do anything real time. I’m typing this from the patio, eating a ten-dollar pastrami sandwich (didn’t pay for the luncheon where Elon Musk is speaking, and getting a von Braun award).
What was interesting about the morning plenary session was the emphasis. In past meetings, they might have led with the wonderful things that NASA has in store for us. This year, the lead speaker was George Nield, head of the FAA-AST office, followed by Jeff Greason, CEO of XCOR Aerospace, and then Will Whitehorn, head of Virgin Galactic, so clearly, the conference programming committee considered suborbital tourism to be the headliner at this event. NASA’s plans (soon to likely be dramatically altered) will be presented tomorrow morning.
Both the Greason and Whitehorn talks were good. Jeff made his usual points, but he started to show a little gam on orbital, saying that he has started thinking about it, and dropping a couple hints. They have seriously depleted their bin of technology problems in suborbital, and are moving forward with the Lynx, but orbital promises to replenish it, so they’re thinking about how to get someone to pay them to solve the new issues, as they did with suborbital. He is clearly aiming toward a two-stage reusable system, with a flyback first stage, horizontal takeoff and land. This implies a very large first stage, or a very expensive first stage, or some combination, and he didn’t want to show us any pictures, because he wasn’t sure what direction it would go. Also no discussion of whether or not it would be an airbreather or rocket.
He also made some comments about flight test, and not to panic when something goes wrong, which is why it’s called flight test. In the days of blogs and texting, it’s easy to gin up a lot of speculation and doomsday warnings that are unwarranted, compared to the old days when no one paid any attention to what was going on at Edwards until the results were released. This was undoubtedly in reference to the recent kerfuffle over White Knight Two tail dragging. He said a lot more good stuff, but I suspect that others will have posts up. Jeff Foust has probably been twittering.
Will Whitehorn, refreshingly, didn’t bash Lynx (perhaps because he was grateful to Jeff for his flight test comments? Or perhaps he’s just realized that it’s not good marketing). He actually praised parts of Jeff’s speech. He says that there will be a flyover of Spaceport America with WK2 at the dedication this June, and captive carry of SS2 by the end of the year, perhaps with a drop and glide test. Engine integration will occur next year. He also showed video of hybrid engine tests at Capistrano. More later.
OK, I said I was signing off, but in a surprise, the local congresswoman is giving a brief talk.
Excited to be the newly elected congressperson from Florida 20th (the Cape), lives in New Smyrna Beach, and has watched Shuttles for years. Wants to bring other congress members down to share the enthusiasm. On the science committee not because she knows about science but because of her passion for space. Entrepreneurship demonstrated here is an important component to keeping America the premiere nation for space, and there is great synergism with the Florida entertainment industry. As a long-time business owner, thinks thatus her two-year-old son will be a customer. Bought an astronaut suit at the Dulles museum, and he fell in love with it, and now says “My shuttle, my shuttle,” since seeing the launch live. Sees partnership with private enterprise and entrepreneurship as being key. Says that commercial space is important to Senator Nelson as well, and wants to be partners with the people at this summit at the federal level, helping with regulatory issues, and looks forward to working with us.
It was a quick speech, and it looked like it was without notes and she made no news, but it was encouraging. We’re about to go to a reception with her and everyone else, where I may ask her a question or two. I’m curious to know if she’s aware of the ITAR problem.
Later.
Sorry for the light summit blogging after a fast start. A combination of networking and having trouble with my setup. But Doug Messier has been taking good notes to pick up my slacking off (not a permalink, but if you’re reading this in the next day or so, just keep scrolling). Probably off line until tomorrow morning, when the ISDC starts.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Oh, one more thing. Jon Goff has some interesting thoughts on lunar COTS.
Tami Griffith of the Army Simulation Tech and Training Center is describing the use of current technology for training. Shows a video of interfacing a Wii and balance board with Second Life. Apparently a lot of people are hacking the Wii for things like this. She says that whole-body training is much more effective and memorable than joysticks or cockpit simulators.
Cool.
First panel is to discuss the synergy between financing for space and entertainment. “Space is not a destination.” “Space is an enabler for a variety of business verticals.” “Space accelerates and expands business verticals by providing new, disruptive ways of doing business.” Using Internmet analogy with book sales. Space-related viability may exist in areas we haven’t heard of.
Four categories: launch infrastructure, R&D and manufacturing, system operations, end-user applications. latter includes entertainment. They build on each other. “Infrastructure” is categories of large-scale hardware systems, similar to railroad lines back in 1800s. Necessary for applications: healthcare, materials, science, media/entertainment, communications, governance, energy and mining, defense, transport operations. “Governance” is things like disaster relief and planetary monitoring.
Entertainment needs infrastructure beyond mere launch — more like real estate, with facilities in space. Near-term opportunities include media and entertainment, comm and governance. Other apps are longer term. Defining media and entertainment as space tourism, ground-based training and simulations, and documentaries and GPS-related games, live video feeds from orbit, real-time earth imagery, etc.
See suborbital space tourism as important near-term app which fits cleanly within hospitality/entertainment business that requires precursor infrastructure. Virgin Galactic embodies transition — selling one-week experience with suit and simulations, not just a flight. Shouldn’t forget orbital space tourism, which is further down the road, but Bob Bigelow’s modules are an early stage of the hospitality industry in orbit.
Providing an overview of structure of hotel investment business. Major hotel chains are no longer significant investors in real estate — they manage the properties for investor groups. So don’t look to them for financing of space hotels. Look for private equity funds, insurance companies, private investment trusts, investment banks both domestic and international, which are the current industry financiers. Current markets are impacted by the financial crisis, but expects people to come back in the water in the future, because it’s a good traditional model. Hotels will be interested in participating via franchise names (e.g., Hilton) but no as investors.
What drives terrestrial hotels? Business traveler, groups and meetings, leisure. What services are required for space travel? Have to consider similarities and differences with: cruise ships, all-inclusive hotels, suborbital/orbital travel. Consider advance deposits for space hotels. Consider scuba industry as a model. Preparation somewhat similar to suborbital training in length/time, understanding of technical issues/risks. Has been very successful, and training could become significant industry in itself, even for people who don’t fly, at destination resorts.
[Late morning update]
I got pulled off into some discussions, but Jeff Foust is twittering the panels (not a permalink).
[Afternoon update]
Doug Messier blogged this panel as well.
I’m parked in the back of the room — there’re no designated tables for blogging, but I have a chair against the wall, and power, and the hotel wireless seems to work here, so I’m on the air.
Here is a post comparing the voyages of Zheng He to the modern US space program. Arthur Kantrowitz is the first that I’m aware of to make this comparison, back in the seventies.
I think that it’s an interesting analogy, but not in the way they intend, and I wrote about it a few years ago at Fox News:
…some have argued that in essentially turning our backs on the cosmos after the rapid success of Apollo, in favor of welfare programs and pork, our own politicians have given us a similar failure of vision.
But that draws the wrong conclusion. The fact was that Zheng He’s journeys were a failure. They sent out vast amounts of the nation’s treasure with which to impress the heathens and gain tribute and the appropriate respect (just as is the goal for the current Chinese space activities). But when trade occurred at all, the ships often came back with items that were perceived to be of less value than what had been sent out to the ports. The trade was not profitable — it was draining vital resources. The bureaucrats were right.
The Chinese suffered a failure of expansionary will 600 years ago because they were doing it for the wrong reasons. And I suspect that the current leadership is similar to Zheng He in their outlook. His missions were for national prestige — not the generation of wealth — as, apparently, are the current Chinese space plans.
As was America’s Apollo program.
Space will not be settled by governments, whether Chinese, Russian, or American. It will be settled by the people who want to go, and seek their own opportunities, and dreams. Governments can help, and if the Chinese government can navigate the difficulties I describe above, and actually eventually get to the Moon, that might be one way of helping, not just the Chinese, but as the article states, all who want to go. But I suspect that there will be private activities that beat them to it, and we cannot, and should not, count on Beijing.
We will know that things are moving forward seriously in space when, in addition to remote-sensing and communications satellites, there are activities going on in space, involving humans in space, that bring more value back than is put into them. Unfortunately, communist governments (which China’s remains, despite propaganda to the contrary) are not notable for their value-added activities, and I don’t think that the present Beijing regime is that far removed from its predecessors, either in the Ming Dynasty, or the Mao Dynasty.
But I hope they’ll prove me wrong.
I continue to so hope.