What's new in New Space?

Space journeys for $60,000 ... the coming boom in space-junk salvage ... and a settlement on the Martian moon Deimos. These are the long-term outlooks that emerged over the weekend from the NewSpace 2010 conference in California's Silicon Valley.

The annual meeting, organized by the Space Frontier Foundation, champions the role of private enterprise in space exploration. But NASA types are also well-represented on the list of speakers. There was lots of talk about how recent twists and turns in space policy might affect future exploration as well as the development of new players in the space game. You can rely on Clark Lindsey's RLV and Space Transport News for a blow-by-blow recap of the event.

Here are some of the NewSpace 2010 highlights on the Web:

• At The Space Review, Jeff Foust provides a detailed analysis of the current debate over commercial crew transport to the International Space Station. Most members of Congress are reluctant to give private enterprise a freer hand in developing launch systems to replace NASA's space shuttle fleet, but among NewSpace attendees, the sentiment is "full speed ahead." Space policy consultant Jim Muncy emphasized that the debate shouldn't be framed as New Space vs. Old Space, since long-established companies such as Boeing as well as upstarts such as SpaceX hope to get a piece of the commercial space pie. Instead, Muncy said, the real fight is between a "white-collar welfare state space program and a frontier-opening, settlement-enabling, future-changing space strategy." I wonder which side he's on?

• Sometime in the next couple of years, Virgin Galactic is due to offer suborbital space tours for $200,000 - but Space News quoted observers as saying they expect the price for such trips to fall to somewhere between $50,000 and $100,000 by 2014. That could be due to competition from outfits such as XCOR Aerospace, Blue Origin ... and Armadillo Aerospace, which recently partnered with Virginia-based Space Adventures. NewSpace Journal reports that Tom Shelley, Space Adventures' president, discussed the $100,000 price point in his NewSpace 2010 talk. Shelley also indicated there would be "some fun announcements coming out of us in the next few months," apparently relating to multimillion-dollar orbital trips.

• Parabolic Arc's Doug Messier provides bullet points about the opportunities for orbital-debris salvaging and asteroid mining. One possibility for profit is to bring together unused hardware in Earth orbit, and find ways to repurpose or reuse the less junky "space junk." Another possibility is to clear the junk away, just to keep the orbital pathways clear for current and future satellites. Governments or private companies might be willing to pay robotic trash collectors, thus reducing the risks posed by orbital debris. Just today, Space.com published a couple of reports that expanded upon the threats and opportunities associated with asteroids and orbital debris: One report says a NASA task force is recommending that the space agency create a Planetary Defense Coordination Office to deal with asteroid threats, while the other report notes that the European Space Agency's Envisat Earth-observing satellite could pose an orbital-debris threat for 150 years.

Another posting to Parabolic Arc focuses on Deimos, the smaller of Mars' two moons. Putting human settlements on Deimos and near-Earth asteroids could avoid some of the problems associated with operations on the surface of the moon or Mars (such as radiation exposure and the need for heavy-duty landers). Space physician Jim Logan, who discussed zero-G sex at the NewSpace conference four years ago, proposed a 1,000-day mission to Deimos at this year's meeting.

We've already talked about missions to Mars' other moon, Phobos, as well as the possibility of taking shelter within pit craters on the moon or Mars. Is Deimos a better destination? Feel free to weigh in on Logan's idea or other long-term (as well as short-term) New Space outlooks.


Join the Cosmic Log corps by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. And if you really want to be friendly, ask me about "The Case for Pluto."

Discuss this post

Diemos seems like a waste of time and money. I mean, why? If we have the capability, and at a time when we could reach diemos, we could reach Mars very soon after, I just dont see the point. Ask this question in about ten years, when we have a better perspective on the state of the space industry and infrastructure. If we have the money, time, and talent then sure, why not?

Also, its not that we should never return to the moon, but we need to shoot for Mars as soon as possible.

    Reply#1 - Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:02 AM EDT

    A Mars orbit mission or two, allows you to still do useful tings near Mars (no delay control of rovers below, simpler robotic sample return that a crew could rendezvous with, and never be personally exposed) while lander technology is still being developed. Not trying to do both at once, keeps peak NASA spending lower (while having developed spacecraft capable of other missions, like NEOs), and it's unrealistic to expect a large infusion of additional funding to do both.

    And as Mars does indeed have two small, low-mass moons that require very little to effect landings on, this is like getting a pair of asteroid missions at the same time...

    Remember (and I do, even if you can't), Apollo 8 was done as Lunar orbit-only, but no one suggested that it was an unnecessary 'look but don't touch' mission. Access to the surface was definitely coming, but this was a useful mission to conduct while the LM was still in late development.

      #1.5 - Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:02 PM EDT
      Reply

      I believe there is room for both NASA and free enterprise space efforts. I like the idea of cleaning up space debris, too. As for long term human presence in space, figure a way to make it pay off and there would be a something akin to a gold rush. Competiton always spurs innovation.

        Reply#2 - Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:48 AM EDT

        I like all the ideas . But I must agree with you . Clean up space . Your statement about "spur innovation "
        How would you go about this ?
        May I present an idea ? Size has always been one of the problems of putting anything in space . It is going to be even a bigger problem , bring it back down .
        Shred it .
        That's right , shred it into very, very small pieces . Pack it in a capsule , bring the capsule back to earth and recycle .
        Thank You for the article
        RON

          #2.1 - Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:40 PM EDT
          Reply
          You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
          As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.