Posted on 03/19/2019 11:54:10 PM PDT by LibWhacker
UBS believes there will be very lucrative ramifications from the space flight efforts currently led by Virgin Galactic, SpaceX and Blue Origin.
A lengthy UBS report published on Sunday found that, in a decade, high speed travel via outer space will represent an annual market of at least $20 billion and compete with long-distance airline flights. Space tourism will be a $3 billion market by 2030, UBS estimates.
"While space tourism is still at a nascent phase, we think that as technology becomes proven, and the cost falls due to technology and competition, space tourism will become more mainstream," UBS analysts Jarrod Castle and Myles Walton wrote in the note. "Space tourism could be the stepping stone for the development of long-haul travel on earth serviced by space."
UBS expects the broader space industry, which is worth about $400 billion today, will double to $805 billion by 2030 when accounting for these innovations. While these sub-sectors would be a small part of that, Castle and Walton said "the outlook for the space economy, space tourism and long-haul travel using space has become much more bullish."
Private space companies "are investing aggressively across the space opportunity," UBS said, and the firm believes access to space "is the enabler to broader opportunities for investment." Revolutionizing long distance travel
Long haul airplane flights that are more than 10 hours in duration would "be cannibalized" by point-to-point flights on rockets, UBS said. The firm pointed to SpaceX's plans to use the massive Starship rocket it is building to fly as many as 100 people around the world in minutes. SpaceX said that Starship would be able to fly from New York to Shanghai in 39 minutes, rather than the 15 hours it takes currently by airplane. A rendering of SpaceX's Big Falcon Rocket (BFR). SpaceX A rendering of SpaceX's Big Falcon Rocket (BFR).
UBS estimates that there are more than 150 million passengers a year that fly routes longer than 10 hours. Last year, those routes saw 527,000 routes on airplane that had an average of 309 seats, UBS said.
"If we assume that 5 percent of these flights in the future are serviced by space at $2,500 per trip, the revenue opportunity as of today would be more than $20 billion per year as of today," UBS said
"Although some might view the potential to use space to service the long-haul travel market as science fiction, we think ... there is a large market," UBS said.
UBS noted that "it is unlikely that a rocket will carry over 300 people anytime soon," so the Starship's capacity of 100 will be the maximum for the foreseeable future. However, UBS believes there may be an "increased frequency of space travel during the day to enable the same volume of passengers," the firm said. Elon Musk reveals his plan to transport passengers anywhere on earth in under 60 minutes, for the price of a plane ticket Elon Musk reveals his plan to send passengers anywhere on Earth in under 60 minutes, for the price of a plane ticket 12:57 PM ET Fri, 29 Sept 2017 | 01:05
"Given the length of long-haul commercial travel, and the rules around crewing and take-off and landing time slot restrictions at airports, we think a re-usable rocket (especially if not land-based) would have materially better utilisation rates than a commercial plane," UBS said.
As a result, UBS believes the $20 billion estimate "could prove conservative," the firm said. More than 10 percent of people in a recent UBS survey said they would choose a spacecraft over an aircraft for long distance travel.
"While the timing of such a long haul service is uncertain, we think our base-case assumptions are conservative," UBS said. Space tourism's market potential
The billions of dollars pouring into private space companies represents "a high level" of capital formation, UBS said. Even though space tourism "is still nascent," UBS said they believe the sub-sector "will become mainstream as the technology becomes proven and cost falls."
To date, space tourism has largely been limited to the few flights organized by U.S.-based Space Adventures. Over the past two decades, the company has flown seven tourists using Russian Soyuz rockets. At a reported cost of more than $20 million per person, the private clients typically spent over a week on board the International Space Station.
But now "there are a number of commercial space ventures to open up suborbital travel," UBS noted. Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin are leading those efforts, both getting steadily closer to launching paying tourists.
"This area seems to be the market that has the greatest potential to gain traction quickly," UBS said. Virgin Galactic's First Spaceflight on December 13th 2018 Virgin Galactic sends its first test passenger to the edge of space 4:25 PM ET Fri, 22 Feb 2019 | 01:31
Virgin Galactic is deep into the development program of its spacecraft. Last month, the space venture owned by Sir Richard Branson sent test passenger Beth Moses on Virgin Galactic's spaceflight – a first for a private U.S. company. Virgin Galactic's spacecraft holds up to six passengers along with the two pilots. As the company has more than 600 would-be astronauts signed on to launch, Moses' work is key to preparing Virgin Galactic for commercial operations. Tickets for Virgin Galactic's flights are priced at $250,000 each.
UBS believes Virgin Galactic's business model, as both a tourism company and manufacturer of spaceships, mimics the growth of businesses in the early days of aviation.
"In this way history could repeat itself as United Airlines today can trace back its roots to the Boeing Aircraft & Transport Company," UBS said.
Blue Origin, the company founded by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, is also nearing its first spaceflights with human passengers. Blue Origin is developing the New Shepard rocket system for the company's space tourism business.
As both Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin utilize reusable spacecraft systems, UBS believes the companies will be able to make space tourism "a more common occurrence" as reliability increases and prices decline.
"We estimate space tourism will be a $3 [billion plus per year] opportunity growing at double digit-rates," UBS said. "This would be similar to what happened in commercial aviation, especially after the rise of low-cost airlines."
SpaceX could also see significant cash flow from space tourism, UBS believes, through two different ventures. Elon Musk's company just completed a historic test flight of its Crew Dragon capsule, which will be able to send as many as four astronauts to the space station. UBS estimates that NASA will pay SpaceX about $58 million on average per astronaut, compared to the $81 million per astronaut for flights on Russian Soyuz rockets.
The second SpaceX opportunity is for early flights of Starship to send tourists on missions beyond the Earth's immediate orbit. In September, Musk announced Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa signed with SpaceX to fly around the moon on Starship. Maezawa expects to fly in 2023, with six to eight guests joining him for the flight.
There's only one company there doing anything of note, and they're not doing super high flights using oxygen-breathing engines.
Once super fast for flights over five hours becomes cost feasible then hell yeah
I flew the concord several times.....crammed in but fast no question
But it was like Mercedes sponsoring F1
No money in it
Prestige
If you accelerate at 1g it takes less than a year to get to the speed of light (almost to the speed of light, you can't ever actually get to light speed). So, that would take 4 years to speed up and slow down coming and going, plus the additional time traveling at the speed of light to cover the distance, but minus the slow down in time that you experience when close to the speed of light. Perhaps the 7 years figure the poster cited came from a calculation of this sort. At any rate, time on the earth will not slow down and everyone here would be much more than 7 years older when you get back.
Now all we have to do is invent a spaceship that can get to 99+% of light speed.
Better hurry..... the Greenies say we're toast in around 12.
Nope, the other way around. Ignoring for the moment the time required to accelerate and decelerate, the 7 year round trip is in Earth's time frame reference.
The passenger on board the space craft will experience less than 7 years travel time. How much less depends solely on how close to C the rocket travels.
Earth cannot experience more than 7 years of time passage.
The reuse of a passenger rocket liner after a day or two for servicing will be crucial if such flights are to be routine and capable of supporting an airline business model. Space-X aims for a same day reuse capability for its Falcon boosters, so they seem on course to meet the technical challenge of reliable, reusable rocket engines. I am not so sure that it can be done at an affordable price and bearable g stress on the passengers. After all, those who can afford super pricey tickets tend to be in their fifties or sixties.
Oh, come on! Where's the [/just kidding] tag?
Doesn't it take some time to get to 'outer space' in the first place? I mean, it's not like you get picked-up at the curb and hop on a bus to get there to connect with your rocket...
I admit to not reading very far into the article, but this seems so ridiculous that I just couldn't get interested...
Hmmmmm... I wouldn't think that suborbital = "outer space", but this, at least, sounds somewhat plausible...
I agree, there’s definitely a market there for top-end travelers. While a Business Class or First Class seat might be nice relative to coach, you’re still losing pretty much a whole day in each direction of travel...and you’re still cooped up in an airplane.
The size of the market will, of course, be determined by the cost. The fuel cost alone for this type of travel is probably 10 times that of air travel, and almost totally depends on weight, so there will be some interesting ramifications. For starters, I’d expect a flat fee, say $5000 for the first 110 lbs. (50 kilograms), and then maybe $100 per kg after that.
So given that type of pricing, what people ultimately pay will be determined by their overall weight impact to the rocket, meaning their body weight and the weight of their clothes and personal effects. It also means that people may opt to send their luggage on regular air freight service, and may even try Keto before flying to save a few thousand.
But things will sure be interesting if they do attempt a pricing structure as above...
Thank you!
Things like this are what make my head hurt when anybody starts talking about light-speed travel. Sure, open space is 'vast', but it's not completely empty. It seems like there'd be plenty of opportunity to run into something.
You're not exactly looking out the windscreen, steering clear of obstacles at that speed...
Fifty years? Maybe.Ten years? No way!
What about radiation exposure? You get mild exposure when you fly at typical aircraft heights but obviously this will much higher. Any thoughts about this?
I did a paradigm shift a few years ago, regarding interstellar travel. That is, all interstellar trips would be, for all intents and purposes, one way trips.
That’s assuming we don’t figure out some faster than light, space folding, warp drive or other methodology for making it a quick trip.
Aerospace engineer here and there are some real problems which this article doesn’t address.
Unless a new propulsion system is found that makes use of combined cycles (A subsonic air breather, supersonic air breather, hypersonic air breather and a hypersonic closed cycle.) that is cost effective, the British may have one with the SABER, there is no way this will be economical nor meet the noise requirements at your local airport.
And I don’t see anyone poring money into a vertical launch service at your local airport either. Are you really going to pay $200,000 for a one way ticket between New York and Tokyo?
And what would Star Trek transporters do?
We vacation in the Philippines about once every 3 - 5 years.
I thought about that as a regular travel rt.
We leave someplace in Florida at a rocket angle of some computered degree and just glide back down into Manila.
It would sure beat the three planes we presently take from Pittsburgh and the 23 hr flight time !
BUT .... OUR money is only good for two every 3 -5 years ..... THAT'S no way to plan an expensive business venture.
So WHO would benefit and USE that style of travel ?
Are there REALLY that many global travelers all year long to justify this venture.
I personally don't think so.
I'm jealous !
Kill you then assemble a copy of you on the other end.
Just another costly difficulty this article doesn’t address. My thoughts? The author is way too optimistic.
A businessman needing to be there to sort out a problem before a billion dollar deal fails? Sure. Regular people on vacation? No.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.