Page 1 of 14 |
[ 200 posts ] |
Why the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS
Author | Message |
---|---|
Space Station Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 363 Location: Italy ![]() |
.
as explained in this article I think that the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS since, all suborbital spacecrafts, seems very fragile and the space-tourists (actors, managers, singers, etc.) never can be trained like professional astronauts . _________________ . Why the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS . ghostNASA.com . gaetanomarano.it . |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
Moon Mission Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 1050 Location: Columbus, GA USA ![]() |
This risks and dangers are part of the appeal of space tourism. Everyone involved is well aware of the hazards and have signed liability releases six ways to Sunday.
The rest of that rant deserves no comment. There's always someone who would even criticize Mother Teresa... ![]() |
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 363 Location: Italy ![]() |
JamesG wrote: This risks and dangers are part of the appeal of space tourism. depends if the risk is 1% or 30% or 80% Quote: Everyone involved is well aware of the hazards and have signed liability releases six ways to Sunday. probably the space tourism businessmen... but how many (potential) "tourists" know the truth??? Quote: There's always someone who would even criticize Mother Teresa true, many have thought that she hasn't adopted true medical techniques to the patients anyhow, all vehicles can be designed to be safe or dangerous . _________________ . Why the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS . ghostNASA.com . gaetanomarano.it . |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
Space Station Commander ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:22 pm
Posts: 844 Location: New York, NY ![]() |
JamesG wrote: There's always someone who would even criticize Mother Teresa... ![]() trolls will be trolls, but i think i've seen enough compelling arguments to agree that mother teresa was a queen amongst trolls - she was a huge funding source for the catholic church, yet managed to make few if any meaningful improvements to the lives of the people she served. she was crazy, and believed that suffering was the way to salvation - not exactly useful to people whose daily existence was defined by suffering. _________________ Cornell 2010- Applied and Engineering Physics Software Developer Also, check out my fractals |
Back to top |
![]() |
Moon Mission Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 1050 Location: Columbus, GA USA ![]() |
That really wasn't my point. Or maybe you proved it...
|
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 363 Location: Italy ![]() |
JamesG wrote: That really wasn't my point. Or maybe you proved it... there are many risky activities... policemen... Formula 1 driver... parachuters... firemen... etc. but ALL them are done at the BEST possible safety standards can you imagine a policeman without a gun? or an F1 driver without the helmet? or a paratrooper without a backup parachute? or a fireman without a fireproof suit? well, the space tourism lacks the MINIMUM safety standards that, also much less risky activities and jobs, always match the space tourists not even will have a parachute, an ejectable seat a decent spacesuit... it's much close to a suicide, than a travel to Space . _________________ . Why the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS . ghostNASA.com . gaetanomarano.it . |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
Space Walker ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:25 pm
Posts: 160 Location: Ireland ![]() |
gaetanomarano wrote: can you imagine a policeman without a gun? Yes I can. Many police forces around the world do their jobs without needing to threaten the civilians with the risk of being shot. In my opinion an armed police force is a symptom of a sick society. johno |
Back to top |
![]() |
Moon Mission Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 1050 Location: Columbus, GA USA ![]() |
gaetanomarano wrote: the space tourists not even will have a parachute, an ejectable seat a decent spacesuit... it's much close to a suicide, than a travel to Space. One thing I don't think you are considering when you compare NASA or Russian manned space programs with these nascent space tourism ventures is the fact that they are sub-orbital. Sub orbital is just 100 miles up and and order of magnitude "safer" than orbital because of the velocities and energies involved. Its really apples and oranges from a safety perspective. Building a sufficiently robust pressure vessel for a quick jaunt up to high altitude isn't very difficult, does not need elaborate structures, and does not require the safety measures of something going to LEO. I doubt anyone who gets the money and has the experience to fly real hardware is going to risk killing customers. Space tourism is the "low hanging fruit" that is going to nurse commercial space access. This is the only way to take it out of the few hands of government agencies and allow space access to "the common man". "Nervous nellies" like you are not helping. Unless you have better ideas or a few billion dollars to make sure that everything that flies is as safe as your bed, there is an American expression that is useful here: STFU. |
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Commander ![]() ![]()
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 521 Location: Science Park, Cambridge, UK ![]() |
gaetanomarano wrote: JamesG wrote: That really wasn't my point. Or maybe you proved it... there are many risky activities... policemen... Formula 1 driver... parachuters... firemen... etc. but ALL them are done at the BEST possible safety standards can you imagine a policeman without a gun? or an F1 driver without the helmet? or a paratrooper without a backup parachute? or a fireman without a fireproof suit? well, the space tourism lacks the MINIMUM safety standards that, also much less risky activities and jobs, always match the space tourists not even will have a parachute, an ejectable seat a decent spacesuit... it's much close to a suicide, than a travel to Space . F1 is not raced to the highest possible safety standards. UK police do not carry guns. Even firemen do not wear the best POSSIBLE fireproof clothing. At the moment there is NO space tourism business (ignoring $20mill flights to ISS), so at this stage no minimum safety requirements have been set. The craft are not yet built or tested (well, SS2 is close), so no-one has any idea of what safety systems are planned for these things. They will have safety systems, but there is always some risk to spaceflight, or any of the professions you mentioned earlier. It will be higher for spaceflight, but that is why you sign on the dotted line. |
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 363 Location: Italy ![]() |
.
they are sub-orbital... but no pressure, no oxygen and -100 °C like around the ISS an order of magnitude "safer" than orbital... yes, if reached with a safe vehicle and spacesuits not require the safety measures of something going to LEO... the safety measures must be based on the external environment, not on the altitude Space tourism is the "low hanging fruit" that is going to nurse commercial space access... a "nurse" that could kill the baby in the cradle better ideas... make better vehicles . _________________ . Why the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS . ghostNASA.com . gaetanomarano.it . |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
Space Station Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 363 Location: Italy ![]() |
.
F1 is not raced to the highest possible safety standards... but many drivers have survived to serious accidents UK police do not carry guns... after some of them have been killed, they will soon have guns firemen do not wear the best POSSIBLE fireproof clothing... the best possible to work within the fire no minimum safety requirements have been set... that must be done by commercial space companies no-one has any idea of what safety systems are planned for these things... nearly ZERO for the SS2 will have safety systems, but there is always some risk to spaceflight... true, but only risks that can't be avoided . _________________ . Why the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS . ghostNASA.com . gaetanomarano.it . |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
Space Station Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:04 pm
Posts: 257 Location: Norway ![]() |
gaetanomarano wrote: UK police do not carry guns... after some of them have been killed, they will soon have guns That's already happened, and they still don't - same back home in Norway - guns are not standard issue for police officers. |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
Space Station Commander ![]() ![]()
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 521 Location: Science Park, Cambridge, UK ![]() |
gaetanomarano wrote: . F1 is not raced to the highest possible safety standards... but many drivers have survived to serious accidents UK police do not carry guns... after some of them have been killed, they will soon have guns firemen do not wear the best POSSIBLE fireproof clothing... the best possible to work within the fire Well, you did say the highest possible safety standards. Now you appear to have changed your mind and now mean simply high safety standards. I would expect suborbital spaceflight to also have high safety standards, but not the highest possible safety standards - usually because the incremental improvement in safety is not worth the extra cost. Of course the ultimate safety standard is not to fly at all. Or drive, Or eat, or drink beer, or cross the road. |
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 363 Location: Italy ![]() |
JamesHughes wrote: I would expect suborbital spaceflight to also have high safety standards maybe, in future (and better designed) vehicles, but (as explained in my article) NOT with the SpaceShipTwo that (if remains unchanged) will have VERY LOW safety standards, not enough to fly at low (airlines' jets) altitudes with only test pilots aboard! _________________ . Why the suborbital space tourism is TOO DANGEROUS . ghostNASA.com . gaetanomarano.it . |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
Space Station Commander ![]() ![]()
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 547 Location: B.O.A. UK ![]() |
gaetanomarano wrote: JamesHughes wrote: I would expect suborbital spaceflight to also have high safety standards maybe, in future (and better designed) vehicles, but (as explained in my article) NOT with the SpaceShipTwo that (if remains unchanged) will have VERY LOW safety standards, not enough to fly at low (airlines' jets) altitudes with only test pilots aboard! There is an argument that computer controlled can be safer than human controlled in a lot of circumstances taking out human error which would negate the argument for trained astronauts and test pilots after all the first couple of successfully flights of the Mercury project were flown by HAM and Enos a couple of chimps with a bit of primitive computer control. So whether its for science projects or joy rides i think its upto the individuals concerned to evaluate the risks and benefits of the trips they take, they will i hope be better informed than a chimp that has to decide between banana chip or electric shock. In the early days of planes it was a lot more risky and people still chose to fly for both scientific learning and pleasure. _________________ Someone has to tilt at windmills. So that we know what to do when the real giants come!!!! |
Back to top |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Page 1 of 14 |
[ 200 posts ] |
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests |