A few photos from the X Prize event in LA today:

From left: Bob Weiss of the X Prize Foundation, Larry Page of Google, Peter Diamandis of the X Prize Foundation, and Buzz Aldrin answer questions after the press conference.

While Diamandis talked, a small robotic rover (built by the Univ. of Oklahoma) rolled out onto the stage and onto some faux lunar rocks (where it remained until it was moved by hand later in the press event, either by design or because it got stuck)

A closeup of a model of a future lunar explorer, with a famous past human lunar explorer in the background.

During opening ceremonies for NextFest just before the X Prize announcement, a man with a rocket backpack flew over the crowd (literally — my ears were ringing from the noise of the rocket!) to “deliver” a proclamation to the mayor of LA in honor of the event.

A sentimental favorite: Thursday was an educational day at NextFest, with thousands of students in attendance. After the X Prize event was over a group of kids came over and took positions under a giant model of the Moon by the stage. Education and inspriation of youth was a big theme of the X Prize announcement; let’s hope these kids stay inspired.

The Russian space agency Roskosmos is reviewing applications from several Russians reportedly interested in flying to the ISS as space tourists, the Russian publication Kommersant reported. Space Adventures has reserved the available seat on Soyuz taxi flights to the ISS in the fall of 2008 and spring of 2009, so it’s not clear from this article what role Roskosmos is playing here; the article states that Alexey Krasnov, head of Roskosmos manned flight programs. “appeared never doubting Roskosmos ability to agree with Space Adventures on the issue.” Space Adventures announced last month that it had finalized contracts with Roskosmos for those two flights and would announce who would go on those flights in the “coming weeks”.

There are few new developments into the investigation of the fatal explosion last week in Mojave. The Bakersfield Californian reports that Cal/OSHA investigators continued their work at the airport, a process that is expected to last a few weeks. The three injured Scaled Composites employees remain hospitalized, two in critical condition and one in fair condition.

Scaled’s web site is back online with information about the accident and support fund donation details.

A brief editorial in the Colorado Springs Gazette Tuesday is largely supportive of the emerging industry in spite of the accident. The accident “a reminder – for those who need it – that sending humans into orbit isn’t an easy or risk-free endeavor whether it’s undertaken by the private or the public sector,” the newspaper writes (nevermind that SpaceShipTwo is actually a suborbital vehicle). “But we doubt it will set the effort back for long.”

Yesterday Space Adventures announced that they have finalized the contracts for the next two tourists to visit the ISS. The company didn’t disclose the names of the tourists, saying only that more details would be released “in the coming weeks”. That’s not too surprising: the company had been dropping hints for some time that they were in negotiations with a number of prospective tourists. The dates of the flights, fall 2008 and spring 2009, are not surprising either, since those are the next two available flight opportunities (the seats in the next two flights, this fall and next spring, have been secured for guest cosmonauts from Malaysia and South Korea.)

What was surprising, though, was the news as reported by the AP that the cost of a trip to the ISS was going up significantly, to as much as $40 million. (SPACE.com also reported the increase, saying the cost would now be “no less than $30 million”.) Space Adventures’ Eric Anderson said that the increase was due primarily to the weak dollar. However, there are a few factors to suggest that this is not the only factor:

1. The dollar has grown weaker compared to the ruble: from about 32 rubles to the dollar in 2002 to 25 rubles today. But that would mean that a flight that cost $20 million in 2002 would cost a little over $25 million now, everything else being equal. (A $25-million price in 2002 would be a little over $30 million now.) It’s tough to get to $40 million on that alone.
2. While the dollar was relatively strong compared to the ruble in 2002, it was actually weaker in 2001: about 28.5 rubles to the dollar in April 2001, around the time Dennis Tito made his historic flight to the ISS. (You can calculate historic currency rates here.)
3. Russian reports of the price has typically always been quoted in dollars, not rubles, such as this article from May by the RIA Novosti news agency. That article, incidentally, said that the price Roskosmos was charging from Soyuz seats was going up to $21.8 million.

It’s not surprising that currency rates are making Russian spaceflights more expensive, but it doesn’t seem like it can be the only factor to explain the increase. Other factors, such as the increased cost of raw materials for the production of Soyuz spacecraft and launch vehicles (which has affected the price of other Russian vehicles in the last couple of years), as well as the laws of supply and demand, may play a significant role as well.

Some reaction (and clarification) on the EADS Astrium announcement this week about its plans to develop a suborbital vehicle for space tourism markets:

Burt Rutan, contacted by SPACE.com, doesn’t think much of the plan. He thinks it, and other rocket-powered aircraft that take off from a runway under rocket or jet power, will be more expensive to develop and operate, and also have greater operational risks. “The non-recurring development cost of a suborbital spaceship that has rocket and jet engines — both of which leave the atmosphere and experience reentry — will be far more than our SpaceShipTwo program,” he said.

The vice president of the European Commission, Guenter Verheugen, is also dissatisfied with the Astrium proposal, but for very different reasons: “It’s only for the super rich, which is against my social convictions,” he told Reuters. (One wonders what he thinks of the many terrestrial luxury items and resorts that are also affordable only by the “super rich” in Europe or elsewhere.) The article also notes that an Airbus official “declined to answer a question on the apparent paradox of a company trying to cut emissions in one area while investing in a project to blast rich travellers into space.” Perhaps because the paradox wasn’t apparent to him or others.

Also, thanks to a few readers that helped alleviate my ignorance about the seating inside Astrium’s “space jet”. It turns out the seats are hinged on each end, allowing the seats to rotate into the proper position during ascent so that the g-forces are aligned on the G_x vector through the body. It turns out there’s an illustration in a brochure about the vehicle, although, curiously, no matching image in a photo gallery. In any case, it makes much more sense to me now.

Yesterday the European aerospace company EADS Astrium announced its proposal to develop a suborbital vehicle to serve the space tourism market. While this is a new design, the concept of operations is almost identical to what Rocketplane Global has been developing for several years: a vehicle the size of a business jet that takes off under jet power, ignites a rocket engine at altitude to fly a suborbital trajectory, then land again under jet power. If nothing else, the Rocketplane people should feel pleased that concept has been “borrowed” by a big aerospace company (even though Astrium’s actual vehicle design is somewhat different from the Rocketplane XP.) It also appears that those earlier reports about the use of an A380F as a carrier aircraft turned out to be unfounded.

EADS didn’t release a lot of technical details about the vehicle design, but one thing about it struck me as odd. Look at the seating design of the cabin:

I can understand why the designed put the seats sideways: it makes it easy for passengers to look out windows, and may allow for a shorter passenger cabin. However, during ascent, this design means that the g-forces experienced by passengers will be on the G_y vector: across the body from left to right (or right to left, depending on how you’re oriented), which doesn’t seem as preferable as taking the g-forced through the body on the G_x vector. One of the features of the SpaceShipTwo cabin, for example, is the movable seat, so that the g-forces go through the G_x vector on both launch and reentry.

So what does Astrium’s entry into the market mean for space tourism in general, and other companies in the market? The endorsement of the suborbital space tourism concept by one of the world’s largest aerospace companies does certainly give industry an additional air of legitimacy, although it’s not clear just how important or necessary that endorsement is (except, perhaps, in the eyes of some contrarians.) And the addition of new ventures may increase the likelihood that one or more of them are eventually successful.

However, how seriously should this proposal be taken? According to the BBC Astrium estimates that it will cost €1 billion (US$1.3 billion) to develop the vehicle, and that the company will seek additional investment. They plan to charge €150,000-200,000 (US$195,000-265,000) per ticket, which puts them on the high end of known prices, particularly compared to Virgin’s $200,000 list price. It’s tough to see how the business plan for this would close, given the huge investment required: at the €200K ticket price, that means a revenue per flight of €800K. That would mean Astrium would have to fly the vehicle 1,250 times to recoup their investment—and that assumes a marginal cost per flight of zero! That’s sharply different from other companies, which require anywhere from five to 20 times less money to develop their vehicles, making it much more likely they can fly enough to pay off the investment.

A conspiratorially-minded person might wonder if this is an example of what’s known in the computer industry as FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt): by playing up their experience and putting such a high price tag on the venture, it could create uncertainty in the market that smaller, less experienced companies can pull off their plans. That may not be an intentional effect, but it is something to look out for in the months to come.

An article in the Sunday Times of London reports that EADS Astrium will announce this week plans to provide suborbital space tourism services. The article is short on details, although EADS is apparently looking at a suborbital vehicle that would reach 100 kilometers altitude, with a per-ticket cost similar to Virgin Galactic’s going rate of $200,000. One possibility is that EADS will offer an air-launched solution using the freighter variant of the A380 super jumbo jet as the carrier aircraft, something reported back in April by Flightglobal.com and this month by Engineering News.

The Times article breathlessly claims that “Europe is to enter manned space travel for the first time” because of this project, but that’s a debatable claim. Even if EADS does go ahead with this venture, there are already ventures at least partially based in Europe that may get there first: besides Virgin Galactic (which eventually plans to operate out of Kiruna, Sweden), of course, there’s Starchaser, which is based in the UK although with growing operations in the US. There’s also ARCA, the Romanian effort that competed for the X Prize and continues work at some level; it even calls itself “The European Private Manned Space Program”. There have also been a number of other European proposals and studies in recent years. The advantage EADS has, though, is that it has financial resources that no one else save Virgin can bring to bear on this, if it chooses to do so.

Ad Astra/SPACE.com reports that Benson Space Company and SpaceDev plan to release a new design for their Dream Chaser suborbital spacecraft during the ISDC this weekend here in Dallas. The design drops the HL-20-based lifting body approach for the vehicle in favor of a more conventional rocketplane approach that bears similarities to the X-15, albeit with a cockpit studded with portholes like SpaceShipOne. This vehicle is intended to be “safer and more aerodynamic” that the earlier design, Benson said. The article has only a few other details, but Benson is scheduled to speak Friday afternoon during a panel session at the ISDC, which may be his opportunity to talk more about the new design and its implications for the company’s space tourism plans.

Update: Just after I posted this Benson Space issued a press release announcing the new design.

I’m in Dallas right now for this year’s International Space Development Conference, which gets underway today with the Space Venture Finance Symposium, featuring a number of companies in the personal spaceflight or related fields. Some highlights from the rest of the conference, which runs through Monday morning:

• Alex Tai of Virgin Galactic will speak during a plenary session on Friday morning;
• Eric Anderson of Space Adventures will be the luncheon speaker on Friday, talking about his company’s proposal for circumlunar spaceflights for tourists;
• A “Space Business” track Friday afternoon features, among others, John Carmack of Armadillo Aerospace, Jim Benson of Benson Space Company, Chuck Lauer of Rocketplane, David Gump of t/Space, and Rick Tumlinson of Orbital Outfitters;
• A “Frontier Transport” track, also Friday afternoon, includes talks about space tourism and spaceports;
• Another Friday afternoon track on “Spaceflight Law and Insurance” covers some related issues, including “Insuring Space Tourism: It Isn’t Rocket Science - Is It?”;
• There will be a session on NASA’s COTS effort Saturday afternoon, with speakers from NASA, Rocketplane Kistler, and SpaceX;
• The COTS session will be followed by talks by Brett Alexander of the Personal Spaceflight Federation and Rick Homans of the New Mexico Spaceport Authority;
• A session Sunday afternoon will be devoted to NASA’s Centennial Challenges program and the X Prize Foundation;
• There will be two space medicine tracks, on Sunday afternoon and Monday morning, with a particular focus on space tourism medical issues.

There’s actually a lot more, but those are (some of) the highlights. I’ll post updates from these sessions as time permits. There will be plenty of other reports from other outlets, as well: Alan Boyle of MSNBC has already posted a preview article about the conference with a nice overview of the status of a number of companies in the field.

Jeff Greason of XCOR Aerospace gave an overview of his company’s work at Space Access this morning. He noted that the company actually turned a profit last year, with revenues of approximately $3.8 million; the profit was an artifact of the timing of the contracts it was working on, and he said he doesn’t anticipate being profitable again this year, although revenues should be similar to 2006. Because XCOR doesn’t have an independently wealthy founder or patron, “we have to flip burgers for a living”: doing developmental work for a number of government and commercial customers. XCOR selects that work based on the problems XCOR is facing for its own projects, thus in effect getting a customer to pay for XCOR’s R&D. “We have turned R&D from a cost center to a profit center,” he said.

XCOR is working on three engine projects: a 50-lbf engine for RCS applications, a 1,500-lbf engine for the Rocket Racing League (RRL), and a 7,500-lbf engine with ATK for NASA. The efforts are all going well, and Greason said that the RRL engine work, which had been going slowly at the request of the customer, is now ready to go back into high gear. XCOR is also still developing its own suborbital vehicle design, although Greason gave few specific details about the project, and no development schedule or funding information (although he did say later that have not finished raising all the money they need for the effort, but are close.) He did say that XCOR will, in the future, offer more details about its long-term roadmap, in much the same way Masten Space Systems does. “Suborbital is not the last step on our road.”