Private industry in space a risky, slow business: experts

AFP ^ | 02/04/10

[KevinDavis]

WASHINGTON (AFP) – NASA's plan for the private sector to build spacecraft to fly astronauts to the International Space Station is a high-risk undertaking that won't show results for years, experts said.

The abrupt shift "harnesses our nation's entrepreneurial energies, and will create thousands of new jobs," the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy said in a statement issued as the budget for the fiscal year that begins October 1 was unveiled Monday.

[KevinDavis]

For other space news go to: http://www.spacetoday.net
For a list of Private Space Companies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_spaceflight_companies

[cranked]

Wait till the first time they have an incident...wow, the insurance premiums will be outrageous. /s

[cripplecreek]

At this point I wouldn’t call it any riskier than exploring for oil in Antarctica. Unfortunately its just as profitable for exactly the same reason.

[Coyote Choir]

Couldn’t an Obama-like administration simply wait until private space development gets further along and then step back in and nationalize it all for reasons of national security?

[r9etb]

At this point I wouldn’t call it any riskier than exploring for oil in Antarctica. Unfortunately its just as profitable for exactly the same reason.

Nailed it.

The problem with privatizing space is return on investment. There are some places where space is a money-maker; but most stuff -- especially manned -- has no apparent short-term profit.

[cripplecreek]

I was looking at the fact that space treaties dictate that space belongs to the world, just like Antarctica but the premise is still the same. The profit just isn’t there at this point.

[dsrtsage]

That’s interesting. Why is the Obama administration doing the reverse of its MO on space. Are they somehow implying that the private sector would be cheaper and more efficient at doing this somehow? I thought government was better at running auto companies, banks, power companies, etc...why is the private sector better at space?

[PIF]

“The problem with privatizing space is return on investment. There are some places where space is a money-maker; but most stuff — especially manned — has no apparent short-term profit.”

And no long term profit either. Private companies will self-limit to LEO tourism and satellite launches. Ventures beyond LEO will be done by other governments - at whose mercy those much ballyhood US private companies will be.

Eventually, because of failing educational standards in the US and because of economies of scale generated by those other countries endeavors, the few US private companies will gradually fail.

[Prospero]

An examination of the regulatory atmosphere, ITAR and the supervision by the FAA - in the context of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 - shows some high hurdles. All issues talked about at great length in the "space community" but unaddressed by this atypical announcement from the Obama Regime.

Somewhere in that mess, however, may be some clue why this administration has gone against its own stubborn belief system to appear to embrace privatized space.

I wish I could believe them, but why should I believe anything they have to say? The key, perhaps, is the difference between commercial and private space development.

[Prospero]

Hey, put me on that list

- http://lunarnetworks.blogspot.com

[PIF]

“Somewhere in that mess, however, may be some clue why this administration has gone against its own stubborn belief system to appear to embrace privatized space.”

A) Money to NASA goes to the ASW scam and scammers.
B) LEO only is a loser money wise.
C) Third world countries do not have government sponsered space programs.

[ThomasSawyer]

"The problem with privatizing space is return on investment. There are some places where space is a money-maker; but most stuff -- especially manned -- has no apparent short-term profit."

I see your point. Unlike government, private enterprise is not going to pursue a large goal like space unless there's a profit to be made in a reasonable amount of time so as to not only sustain the program, but also provide a financial reward to those with time and/or money invested in the venture. Private enterprise can't afford to not make a profit.

Another problem with privatizing space, at least right now, is national security. In today's world, air superiority is important in any conflict. How important is space superiority and how much more important will space superiority be in the conflicts of tomorrow? The Chinese seem to know the answer to this.

All this said; history shows that exploration of new frontiers by governments is eventually followed up by private interests when it is found to be profitable.

[wastedyears]

JFK didn’t live to see a man walk on the moon, but we went from no space program to walking on the moon in quite a short period of time.