So story time (hopefully somewhat relevant and not just me rambling):
Several years ago I took a backcountry survival class and sort of got into
a discussion with the class and the rest of the students over the fact that
I solo backpack (I also backcountry ski, but not solo). My moto is "learn
about the risks, mitigate what risks you can, and accept the rest of the
risks (or don't do it)". In the end, the instructor (also a former search
and rescue) conceded and told this story:
He once did body rescue where the gentleman had a heart attack while out
fishing in his row boat. He even had to cut a bass off this guy's fishing
line. And when he had to tell the guy's wife, this was her response
(paraphrasing obviously), "He died doing what he loved and while I'm sad
he's gone, you can't really ask for a better way to go".
Joe
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:18 AM Rick Maschek <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I rock climbed and did mountaineering for 28 years and Search and Rescue
for 16 years. Rescuing people and recovering bodies never seemed to stop
people from wanting to continue. The only time I was injured in an accident
was after returning from a body recovery on a ledge high up a mountain, I
broke my toe on a table leg after coming out of the shower. I practice
amateur experimental rocketry, something I've done since 1959 and was once
injured and sent to the ER...while going to a student competition and
driving from the airport near Washington DC on the interstate at night to
our motel, the light traffic suddenly stopped and a driver far behind that
had fallen asleep plowed into us. I have volunteered to fly on every
unmanned test of a manned spacecraft...so far no takers. Accidents happen
regardless where you are.
A fatal accident in space tourism might dissuade a few but not the many.
Many people throughout human history have chosen the daring and many have
chosen to stay at home. As for investors? There are those that make the
gamble and those that hang on to their money. The real impediment may be
from the regulatory that destroys the industry or the company themselves
trying to maximize their return.
Rick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AR] AW&ST Space Tourism Accident Impact.
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2020 11:06:07 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Speculation article FYI.
Anthony J. Cesaroni
President/CEO
Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
<http://www.cesaronitech.com/> http://www.cesaronitech.com/
(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto
What Happens To Space Tourism If There Is A Fatal Accident?
<https://aviationweek.com/author/michael-bruno> Michael Bruno December 31,
2019
Credit: Virgin Galactic
Next year is likely to herald the dawn of routine space tourism, with
Virgin
Galactic anticipating its first commercial launch in 2020. One goal of
billionaire-backed upstarts such as Virgin, Blue Origin and others is to
make orbital experiences as common for paying passengers as flying on an
airliner.
* Publicly traded Virgin Galactic's operational debut sparks accident
analyses
* Past is prologue and there might be more customer demand than fear
But as the Dec. 20 timer glitch that kept Boeing's Starliner spacecraft
from
reaching its intended rendezvous with the International Space Station
proves, even an unmanned space mission that goes wrong can generate big
headlines these days. So, what happens to a business that provides space
tourism if a tragic, fatal mishap occurs, especially in the beginning of
operations? Investors want to know and, to a degree, publicly traded and
regulated companies such as Virgin Galactic need to have a response ready,
because it is a key business risk.
Virgin Galactic has responded, saying balancing risk with shareholder
reward
is part of the business and investors and customers are being made aware of
all the risks
<
https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/space/virgin-galactic-aims-fly-1500-
space-tourists-year-2023> (AW&ST Nov. 11-24, 2019, p. 47). Of course,
Virgin
Galactic's supplier Scaled Composites already had a fatal crash in 2014
when
one pilot died. But that was in a testing phase, and investors want to know
about business prospects now as Virgin Galactic prepares for launching
commercial service. In turn, financial analysts are weighing in.
Opinions are divergent, with practically all analysts acknowledging that a
bad accident with a death toll has the potential to shut down Virgin
Galactic. "A major accident could slow or close the business, or cause
demand to decline significantly," Credit Suisse analyst Rob Spingarn and
his
team said in November. "A catastrophic accident could leave the company
valueless, in our view."
But not everyone agrees that outcome is likely. Vertical Research Partners
analyst Darryl Genovesi, in his own November report, goes into detail about
how a fatal mishap may not necessarily ground space tourism. Genovesi's
team
looks back on the NASA space shuttle and NASA-Defense Department X-15
programs for guidance, as well as niche extreme-adventure marketplaces such
as mountain climbing, which serve the same level of wealthy clientele that
space tourism companies seek initially.
The Genovesi team believes the 1960s-era X-15 program, featuring the
world's
first spaceplane, is the best comparison to Virgin Galactic's approach.
The X-15 was carried to an altitude of around 45,000 ft. by a mother ship,
a
modified Boeing B-52, and then airdropped before firing its rocket engine
and accelerating to apogee in space, reentering, and gliding home to make a
horizontal landing. Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo (SS2) mission profile is
"very similar" to the X-15's, according to the Vertical analysts.
SS2s will be lofted to around 45,000 ft. by twin-fuselage mother ships
called WhiteKnightTwo, according to Virgin Galactic. The SS2 is then
airdropped and a rocket hybrid propulsion system called RocketMotorTwo
kicks
in to project the SS2 into a space trajectory.
Source: Vertical Research Partners
In its time, three X-15s were built, completing 199 flights between 1959
and
1968, of which 13 flew higher than 50 mi., the altitude required for NASA
to
recognize them as spaceflights and award astronaut wings to the pilots. The
X-15 experienced one total loss in 1967, near the end of its program, when
aircraft No. 3 broke apart during reentry, killing the pilot. The accident
was attributed to a combination of pilot error and degraded flight control
authority following an electrical disturbance earlier in the flight. There
was also a landing accident in 1962, although that aircraft, No. 2, was
subsequently repaired and the injured pilot survived.
"If we assume that the probability of a fatal crash is [about] 0.5% per
commercial flight, which is what X-15 actually realized during the late
1950s and early 1960s flying the same mission (one fatal crash over 199
flights), then the probability of Virgin Galactic crashing once over its
next 131 commercial flights over the next two years, is [about] 48%," the
Vertical team says.
By the end of 2020, the company will have completed 16 of the 131 flights.
Keeping with a 0.5% per flight likelihood, the probability of Virgin
Galactic crashing during 2021 would then drop to around 44%. "We don't
estimate a probability of it crashing in a subsequent flight (beyond 131),
but we do assume a crash out there doesn't result in a program pause or
meaningful loss of revenue subsequently," they say.
Another way to look at the potential effect of a fatal crash on a space
tourism business is whether customer demand would evaporate. Here, Genovesi
dives through space shuttle history for indications. That fleet made 135
spaceflights, including four flights during developmental testing in
1981-82
and then 131 operational flights from 1982-2011. Five fully functioning
orbiter vehicles were built, two of which were destroyed, one during launch
and one during reentry, killing the entire seven-person crew in each
instance. The fatal mishaps represent about 1.5% of total missions flown.
The Space Transportation System used a significantly different
configuration
to get into orbit, including dual solid rocket boosters and a shuttle, all
strapped to an even larger external fuel tank. The orbiters were built to
take a 60,000-lb. payload up to 110 nm or a 35,000-lb. payload to 220 nm.
By
contrast, SS2s are designed to take six passengers up 50 nm without
accelerating to orbital speeds to launch payloads.
"The shuttle program didn't end after its two catastrophes-and neither did
the X-15 program after its fatal crash, and neither did the Virgin Galactic
program after its fatal crash," says Genovesi's report. Instead, after the
Challenger disaster, NASA built another shuttle.
That was possible due to widespread public support for the space program.
In
fact, applications to become a NASA astronaut rose after both fatal
accidents (see chart above).
Analysts believe public support is even more pervasive now. They cite a
2019
Pew Research study that found 58% of Americans polled think human
astronauts
are essential, while half think human space travel will become routine in
the next half-century. More than 40% indicated interest in traveling to
space themselves. Regarding private space exploration companies, about 77%
of respondents indicated a fair amount or great confidence that they could
build safe and reliable spacecraft.
Finally, the analysts point to extreme mountain climbers, a niche group of
usually highly ambitious and wealthy individuals. They note that around 5%
of the roughly 2,000 people who attempt to climb mountains at least 8,000 m
(26,000 ft.) tall die every year trying.
"Said differently, [about] 5% of the die-hards do literally die," Genovesi
wrote. "Everyone who tries knows what he's getting into and chooses to
devote significant time and resources to the adventure anyway. Virgin
Galactic is counting on a similar commitment from its customers wherein
there is some meaningful risk of [a] fatal accident, even if they can't
exactly quantify it."
<https://aviationweek.com/author/michael-bruno> Michael Bruno
Based in Washington, Michael Bruno is Aviation Week Network's Senior
Business Editor and Community and Conference Content Manager. He covers
aviation, aerospace and defense businesses, their supply chains and related
issues.
------------------------------
