Search

This paper investigates the future U.S. demand for streamlined space tourism by showing the missions and factors impacting traveler choices with machine learning. Space tourism is growing and is expected to become available to the masses soon. While private companies need to better understand the demand for space tourism to customize their services, transportation agencies require guidance to support fund management related to commercial space exploration. This work analyzes the three most prominent missions for streamlined space tourism (i.e., suborbital, orbital, and space tourism around the moon) and their selection determinants (i.e., price, safety, training, number of passengers, take-off locations, among other decision-maker factors). A stated preference experiment is constructed to collect data that is analyzed using machine learning. Results provide valuable insights into the mixed opinions of Americans with respect to space tourism, their mission preferences, and risk considerations. • Space tourism serves a niche of high-income travelers. • We investigate the future U.S. demand if space tourism is available to the masses. • A stated preference experiment is constructed to collect data from Americans. • The collected dataset is analyzed using machine learning paradigms. • Results unveil the mission and traveler factors impacting space tourism choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Between the 1950s and 1980s, U.S. space sector activities were government-driven, government-sponsored, government-managed, and assisted by the industry-sector. Awareness of non-governmental space activities originated in the 1980s and gained prominence in the early 2000s with the founding of well-funded private companies. This paper takes an organizational evolution perspective to refine what is meant by "commercial" space markets and activities and compares the results to previous discussions offered by space community authors. From an organization theory perspective, the three primary forces of the evolution change model (variation, selection, and retention) provide a framework for renewed commercial space activity discussions. Together, the strength of these three forces can indicate how "commercial" a market is. Two case examples are presented to illustrate application of this framework: the U.S. space race era activities during the 1960s, and the current space tourism market. Despite competitions for various contracts awarded to industry-sector firms, the Apollo program was clearly government-driven, and was not "commercial" to any significant extent. The current space tourism market is clearly considered "commercial," but with qualifications. Conclusions from this review include the appropriate levels of analysis to discuss space market characteristics, a comparative analysis of the "commercial" activities of the U.S. space race era and the current space tourism, the inference of proxies for estimating the strength of the three evolution model forces, and a caution about the accuracy of "commercial" market forecasts. • This paper uses an evolution change mechanism lens to estimate the degree that space sectors are considered "commercial". • Identification of appropriate levels of analysis for discussion of commercial space markets. • Comparison of space race era activities in the United States and current space tourism activities. • U.S. space race activities are best characterized by the teleologic change motor. • Current space tourism activities are best characterized by the evolution (variation, selection, retention) change motor. • Prior studies of "commercial" space activities are reviewed in the context of the evolution organization change mechanism. • Inference of independent variables to estimate evolution model force strength. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

NASA planning for the human space flight frontier is coming into alignment with the goals of other planetary-capable national space agencies and independent commercial actors. US Space Policy Directive 1 made this shift explicit: "the United States will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization". The stage is now set for public and private American investment in a wide range of lunar activities. Assumptions about Moon base architectures and operations are likely to drive the invention of requirements that will in turn govern development of systems, commercial-services purchase agreements, and priorities for technology investment. Yet some fundamental architecture-shaping lessons already captured in the literature are not clearly being used as drivers, and remain absent from typical treatments of lunar base concepts. A prime example is general failure to recognize that most of the time (i.e., before and between intermittent human occupancy), a Moon base must be robotic: most of the activity, most of the time, must be implemented by robot agents rather than astronauts. This paper reviews key findings of a seminal robotic-base design-operations analysis commissioned by NASA in 1989. It discusses implications of these lessons for today's Moon Village and SPD-1 paradigms: exploration by multiple actors; public-private partnership development and operations; cislunar infrastructure; production-quantity exploitation of volatile resources near the poles to bootstrap further space activities; autonomy capability that was frontier in 1989 but now routine within terrestrial industry. It outlines new work underway to close these gaps; and articulates conclusions that can guide future work. • Most of the time, most of a Moon base is robotic. • Base elements designed for robotic operations challenge conventional concepts. • Hierarchical supervisory control is essential. Full autonomy is not. • All known base functions can be emplaced completely robotically. • A habitable, oxygen-producing base can be constructed in less than four years of quarterly flights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The possibility of an asteroid striking the earth is well known. The chosen technique for diverting such an asteroid depends on the lead time measured from the determination that an asteroid has a large probability of colliding and the expected time of such a collision. There are a large number of possible deflection techniques that are available, each suited to different lead times. If the lead time is unpleasantly short, desperation measures such as using nuclear devices may apply. If the lead time is comfortably long, the heralded gravity tractor (GT) is a good option. It is capable of precisely and verifiably altering the orbit of a threatening asteroid. If the lead time happens to be somewhere between desperate and comfortable, it is not clear what option may be invoked. It is likely the most probable scenario to occur is one where the lead time is somewhere in between very short and very long. There is a plethora of different techniques in the literature, but some are so fanciful that their reliability would certainly be in question. There is a need for a new deflection technique that has the reliability and the precision of the gravity tractor but is able to produce larger deflection forces to handle much shorter lead times. This is the problem that this paper addresses. The proposed solution to this problem is a push-pull asteroid magnetic tractor(MT) that is shown to produce orders of magnitudes larger deflection forces and to accommodate much shorter lead times than the GT. Highlights • Novel New Asteroid Deflector. • Push or Pull Forces. • Sufficient Impulses in Shorter Time Than the Gravity Tractor. • Exacting, Precise Control of Asteroid States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]