Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

The Dunedan · Jun 9, 2004, 11:56 am

With Burt Rutan and Scaled Composites poised to capture the 10-million-dollar X PRIZE later this year, I thought a little discussion on the difficulties of getting private spaceflight working was in order.
A few years ago, Carl Bussjaeger published a novel entitled Net Assets. The book was heavily researched, and dealt with the beginning of private, non-govornmental space access, using advanced ( but already extant ) technology, such as linear-acceleration launchers, aero-SPIKE engines, and partial-pressure spacesuits. The book also dealt with the difficulties such an enterprise would inevitably have to deal with, many of them eminating from within our own govornment. Bussjaeger posited that this was because, in the interests of it's own safety ( and pocketbooks ) world govornments have maintained a monopoly on space-launches since the 60s, and have deliberately continued using the most inefficiant system available ( liquid-fueled vertical launch ) in order to keep costs high.

A year or so after the publication of Net Assets, L. Neil Smith posited that the reason for this Govornment Monopoly, which is enforced by treaty and UN Mandate, is because of two works; once of fact and another of fiction, and the effect they had.
The first was Geologist Louis Alvarez' white-paper dealing with the likelihood of the Extinction Level Event which wiped out the dinosaurs being caused by the impact of a large metiorite of some type. His evidence was a band of ash and dust, present all over the earth, which occurred at the same time and at consistant depth throughout the geologic strata. In other words, Alvarez showed us what a big rock can do if it falls on the Earth.
The second was Rober Heinlein's most political novel, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. In it, Heinlein deals with a group of exploited Lunar colonists who rebel against the Earth-based govornment which holds them economically and physically hostage. Without missles, spaceships, or any other type of weapon larher than a laser pistol, the "loonies" use a magnetic-accelerator catapult, usually used to transport barges of grain and water-ice, to hurl rocks at specifically designated targets Earthside. Among other things, they manage to level Cheyenne Mountain. While never hitting or damaging cities, they make it quite clear that if they wanted to, they could win their independance Hiroshima-style.

In other words, Alvarez showed us what happens when big rocks fall. Heinlein showed us how ( and why? ) someone might make them fall.

Smith, among others, suggests that it wasn't too long before someone in Govornment caught on to this. A few years after Moon was published, the UN passed a resolution prohibiting the private use of space for commercial purposes other than communications. This was widely interpreted at the time as being an end-run ban on private space access. And indeed, it has functioned as such. So far, only the Russians, who never signed the UN agreement, have used space for anything other than chasing droplets of Tang around and endlessly repeated experiments. They have, twice, sold 'tourist' slots on their Soyuz spacecraft. ( Hint for Americans: this is called Capitalism ) In the US and Europe, private use of space, and private access, has been severely curtailed.

However, with Rutan preparing to make the worlds first privately funded, constructed, launched, and recovered spaceflight in just a few weeks, this question is deserving of serious consideration: if the science is there to allow it ( Net Assetts demonstrated that it is ) and the money is there to fund it ( calling Jimmy Buffet! ) once Rutan proves that it can be done, what's to stop us from just packing up and leaving? Dangerous, sure. Expensive, in the beginning at least. Profitable, you'd better believe it. Perhaps this belongs in the Science and Tech section, but with the implications for Liberty if such access became available, I figured I'd better put it here.

http://www.lneilsmith.com/lns-spac.html
http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/libe147-20011112-02.html

Kiljoy001 · Jun 9, 2004, 05:44 pm

The fact is this, it IS going to happen, sooner or later. In fact I am counting on it. There are so many wonderful products that can be used by space exploitation rather than mere space exploration. The exploitation of space is to big just to ignore.

Kiljoy001 · Jun 9, 2004, 06:08 pm

And on a further note, people on a whole do not think that space will do anything for them. I have been quite convinced that on a whole people at the the end of the day only worry about there narrow problems, and not towards future global problems. That is to say, space has not done anything significant for people yet, but it will...

Jun 11, 2004, 01:42 pm

Yeah, that UN treaty is probably one of the biggest piles of puke we've ever been associated with.

We need to dump it and reclaim our six landing sites on the Moon, and that's just for starters.

Leopard · Jun 12, 2004, 04:16 pm

I too believe that space will be our playfield once the economics become right - there are alot of benefits and resources in space but the cost of maintaining life in such a cruel environment have not yet been economically manageable... perhaps in a hundred years, perhaps 20... it will take some major changes earthside (political upheaval, major catastrophies, etc) tomake space profitable sooner...

michael

Jun 9, 2004, 05:44 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Kiljoy001 Sedimentary Rock Posts: 13	The fact is this, it IS going to happen, sooner or later. In fact I am counting on it. There are so many wonderful products that can be used by space exploitation rather than mere space exploration. The exploitation of space is to big just to ignore. If you cannot think for yourself, one of these days someone will do it for you, and then you'll be screwed.

Jun 9, 2004, 06:08 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
Kiljoy001 Sedimentary Rock Posts: 13	And on a further note, people on a whole do not think that space will do anything for them. I have been quite convinced that on a whole people at the the end of the day only worry about there narrow problems, and not towards future global problems. That is to say, space has not done anything significant for people yet, but it will... If you cannot think for yourself, one of these days someone will do it for you, and then you'll be screwed.

Jun 12, 2004, 04:16 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
Leopard Propertarian Posts: 568	I too believe that space will be our playfield once the economics become right - there are alot of benefits and resources in space but the cost of maintaining life in such a cruel environment have not yet been economically manageable... perhaps in a hundred years, perhaps 20... it will take some major changes earthside (political upheaval, major catastrophies, etc) tomake space profitable sooner... michael Take on the responsibility to be free

Jun 9, 2004, 11:56 am	#1 (permalink) (top)
The Dunedan Hot Lava Posts: 905	With Burt Rutan and Scaled Composites poised to capture the 10-million-dollar X PRIZE later this year, I thought a little discussion on the difficulties of getting private spaceflight working was in order. A few years ago, Carl Bussjaeger published a novel entitled Net Assets. The book was heavily researched, and dealt with the beginning of private, non-govornmental space access, using advanced ( but already extant ) technology, such as linear-acceleration launchers, aero-SPIKE engines, and partial-pressure spacesuits. The book also dealt with the difficulties such an enterprise would inevitably have to deal with, many of them eminating from within our own govornment. Bussjaeger posited that this was because, in the interests of it's own safety ( and pocketbooks ) world govornments have maintained a monopoly on space-launches since the 60s, and have deliberately continued using the most inefficiant system available ( liquid-fueled vertical launch ) in order to keep costs high. A year or so after the publication of Net Assets, L. Neil Smith posited that the reason for this Govornment Monopoly, which is enforced by treaty and UN Mandate, is because of two works; once of fact and another of fiction, and the effect they had. The first was Geologist Louis Alvarez' white-paper dealing with the likelihood of the Extinction Level Event which wiped out the dinosaurs being caused by the impact of a large metiorite of some type. His evidence was a band of ash and dust, present all over the earth, which occurred at the same time and at consistant depth throughout the geologic strata. In other words, Alvarez showed us what a big rock can do if it falls on the Earth. The second was Rober Heinlein's most political novel, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. In it, Heinlein deals with a group of exploited Lunar colonists who rebel against the Earth-based govornment which holds them economically and physically hostage. Without missles, spaceships, or any other type of weapon larher than a laser pistol, the "loonies" use a magnetic-accelerator catapult, usually used to transport barges of grain and water-ice, to hurl rocks at specifically designated targets Earthside. Among other things, they manage to level Cheyenne Mountain. While never hitting or damaging cities, they make it quite clear that if they wanted to, they could win their independance Hiroshima-style. In other words, Alvarez showed us what happens when big rocks fall. Heinlein showed us how ( and why? ) someone might make them fall. Smith, among others, suggests that it wasn't too long before someone in Govornment caught on to this. A few years after Moon was published, the UN passed a resolution prohibiting the private use of space for commercial purposes other than communications. This was widely interpreted at the time as being an end-run ban on private space access. And indeed, it has functioned as such. So far, only the Russians, who never signed the UN agreement, have used space for anything other than chasing droplets of Tang around and endlessly repeated experiments. They have, twice, sold 'tourist' slots on their Soyuz spacecraft. ( Hint for Americans: this is called Capitalism ) In the US and Europe, private use of space, and private access, has been severely curtailed. However, with Rutan preparing to make the worlds first privately funded, constructed, launched, and recovered spaceflight in just a few weeks, this question is deserving of serious consideration: if the science is there to allow it ( Net Assetts demonstrated that it is ) and the money is there to fund it ( calling Jimmy Buffet! ) once Rutan proves that it can be done, what's to stop us from just packing up and leaving? Dangerous, sure. Expensive, in the beginning at least. Profitable, you'd better believe it. Perhaps this belongs in the Science and Tech section, but with the implications for Liberty if such access became available, I figured I'd better put it here. http://www.lneilsmith.com/lns-spac.html http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/libe147-20011112-02.html

Jun 11, 2004, 01:42 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
KSoDBartman Guest Posts: n/a	Yeah, that UN treaty is probably one of the biggest piles of puke we've ever been associated with. We need to dump it and reclaim our six landing sites on the Moon, and that's just for starters.