Follow this blog:
RSS

The fleeting fame of commercial space travel

By | September 24, 2012, 8:45 PM PDT

Do you remember where you were when the Dragon launched?

Do you remember where you were when the Dragon launched?

The era of commercial space travel is upon us, and if NASA’s Apollo missions are any precedent, it will likely become routine as the initial excitement fades. Interest in space will wax and wane.

You couldn’t escape the hubbub when SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft launched in May - my colleagues at SmartPlanet fired off a steady succession of articles. A commercial spacecraft linking up with the International Space Station (ISS) is absolutely novel in the wake of the space race and U.S. shuttle’s renowned run of service.

The Dragon is now tentatively scheduled to lift off for its second unmanned space flight in October - with many to follow. SpaceX earned NASA’s stamp of approval to run its cargo missions, and will triumphantly fulfill its service contract with the agency. The public will also be much less tuned in by then.

Even Elon Musk, the company’s prolific CEO, can’t endure our fickle attention spans. The latest gadgets, television, movies, politics, and tabloid gossip provide for endless distractions and interruptions. Our distractibility holds true beyond our own planet, and NASA is proof of that.

NASA was at the height of its popularity in the late 1960’s as the world witnessed its crowning achievement: the 1969 Apollo moon landing. Space was a big deal - both politically and socially - but then public interest began to wane with each succeeding mission. NASA only experienced a brief comeback during the 1980’s.

It’s not fair to single out SpaceX, because there’s plenty of other examples. NASA’s Curiosity rover has been eclipsed by the iPhone 5 launch. And I doubt that launching billionaires into space for kicks, which many other private enterprise aim to do, will prove terribly popular these days.

Could Musk and SpaceX pull off a comeback? Sure, and I hope that he and his team do. SpaceX’s inspirations stretch all the way to Mars and human colonization of space. Musk has stated that his goal is to make trips to mars as affordable as buying a house, and that’s a remarkable vision. Visions just aren’t always shared.

Government contracts sustain commercial space travel for the time being, but a key difference is that NASA has had the Federal government’s checkbook and wherewithal to stick it out for decades. We’ll mine the poles bare before we harvest asteroids or take other commercial activity into space and off the drawing board.

Will private investors be as patient if business goals fall much closer down to Earth? Probably not - unless there’s suddenly a sustained sense of urgency to back it all up.

(Image credit: SpaceX)

Related on SmartPlanet:

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

David Worthington

About David Worthington

David Worthington is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

David Worthington

David Worthington

Contributing Editor

David Worthington has written for BetaNews, eWeek, PC World, Technologizer and ZDNet. Formerly, he was a senior editor at SD Times. He holds a degree from Temple University. He is based in New York.

Follow him on Twitter.

David Worthington

David Worthington

David does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what he covers. Occasionally he consults for other companies; should David cover a topic in which a client is involved, he will disclose this fact in his writing. His views do not represent those of his employers.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
6
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+2 Votes
+ -
I think you're missing the bigger picture
SpaceX and similar efforts aren't supposed to be about being "spectacular". Quite the contrary; They are actually supposed to be about being "routine" and as unexciting as possible. Commercial users of space aren't at all interested in "exciting". They wish to provide useful and reliable services and make money. There's no long-term profitability in "exciting".

Remember, NASA's Shuttle program wasn't meant to be "exciting" either. Quite the contrary; it was intended (or sold as a means) to make space flight as routine as taking an airline flight. (A mission for which it was oversold and incapable of fulfilling)

It is true that people are of short attention spans and are quickly and easily distracted. But even though that characteristic may be viewed as a shortcoming, it also represents opportunity. After all, it's entrepreneurs looking for the next "exciting" thing that often pushes technology forward and ultimately improves our lives. There was a time when having a radio was very exciting. And then television was exciting. Then a color TV. Then a VCR. Personal computers were very exciting. A mere 20 years ago, owning a cell phone was exiting. Now, almost everyone in America can have a smartphone that does all those things in the palm of your hand; exciting enough that people camp out in lines to get the latest model. Eventually smartphones will become pedestrian and we'll move on to the next "exciting" thing. It's not all bad.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 26th Sep
0 Votes
+ -
You've got it right !
Columbus' voyage was exciting, but the point was to make a profit, not cause excitement.
We need to get off the planet, not be thrilled by spectacular exploits.
Posted by tjsobieski@...
25th Sep
+1 Vote
+ -
To the everyday
There's a memorable passage from the movie Apollo 13, when the astronauts' broadcast for TV audiences (before the service module explosion) wasn't even aired over the major networks because it was perceived the public was getting bored by moon flights.

Think about it: For many, the most exciting part about a trip to DisneyWorld or DisneyLand is the roller coaster rides -- without a thought to the incredible advances in aviation technology that get them to Orlando or Anaheim in the first place. What was unimaginable 100 years ago -- transporting millions of people everyday around the globe at altitudes of 35,000 feet -- is just routine today.

Hopefully, space travel will seem just as ho-hum and routine. And in the process, investors will not be scared off by the riskiness of something exotic, no more than they are scared off by the risks of commercial aviation.
Posted by Joe McKendrick
25th Sep
0 Votes
+ -
Do the Ends Justify the Means?
This guy is totally brainwashed with WAY too much money at his disposal. The Walt Disney 'Conquest of Space' movies from the early '60's cast a spell over the Baby Boomer generation and their offspring. Now it's "Mom, apple pie, and LAUNCH THE SPACED-OUT X!"

There is no ENVIRONMENTAL FORETHOUGHT to this endeavor. HUGE egos are clouding certain key players from understanding of the gravity of this situation: http://darinselby.1hwy.com/floattospace.html

I have sent numerous emails to NASA, and it has all fallen on deaf ears. They are under the 'Walt Disney/Wernher Von Braun' spell, where Nazi turns into NASA. And I do mean a 'radio silence' of ZERO replies from anyone there.

Sure, the rocketry technology is quite amazing, to be able to land a vehicle the size of a van on Mars, yet at what cost and what risk? Is this activity of 'full steam ahead' with the space program really having on our environment? It's 'to the Moon, Mars and beyond' with no forethought to the TRASHING of our fragile atmospheric envelope?

I would like to do an expose on all of this, and how we could actually FLOAT to the edge of space (which is really only 25 miles out), and do just about everything that we're trying to do at 10X the distance out.

The name of the movie could be, "What in the world are they SPEWING?" http://darinselby.1hwy.com/4spaceprogramerrors.html
Posted by darinselby
25th Sep
0 Votes
+ -
Sense of proportion?
Any activity that's measured in the number of times monthly, let alone annually, is going to have a negligible impact on air pollution compared to the many other activities that are measured in the quantity daily.
Posted by theotherwill
25th Sep
0 Votes
+ -
Wording
The word "travel" means people to me. "Flight" is a better term for private commercial spacecraft without passengers.
Posted by theotherwill
25th Sep
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!