I'd be happy to take out a mortgage if this ride includes going around the Earth at least once. If it's just a go up, be up very briefly then I'd be less enthusiastic.
In other words, I am not Besos-rich but hell yes, I am going to space!
In other words, I am not Besos-rich but hell yes, I am going to space!
But neither of those is 0g. Skydiving is sort of 0g at the beginning when you’re accelerating, but that tapers off to 1g as you approach terminal velocity. Same goes for indoor skydiving.
skip to 1:18. That's about 55 miles high view, similar to Blue Origin. It's nice, but perhaps not $200k for most people.
This is sped up view from ISS, which is 250 miles up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG0fTKAqZ5g
Yeah I think a lot of people will gladly pay $200k for the second view... actually probably much more.
Regarding the second video, does anyone know why the limit of the atmosphere is visible?
I'm as skeptical as anyone that SpaceX could pull it off, but the numbers work out. With half-hour flights, BFR could do 10 routes per day whereas a Boeing 747 could only do one. So even if the ship costs five times as much to build as the Boeing, it will amortize in half the time. With such short flights vehicle flight staffing could be a quarter what current airlines staff, and there is no need of meal service. Note also that Gwynne Shotwell said that she has a personal interest in seeing the BFR fly and she firmly believes that it will. She's not Elon: Gwynne actually has both feet on the ground and runs the _business_ side of SpaceX.
The only real hurdles that I see are the high-G launches and reentry, and of course reliability. Current launch vehicles have a ~1:50 launch failure rate. I'll fly on that, but I won't put my kids on it.
5² * π ≈ 80
On the real earth (not KSP) including atmospheric drag you need around 8000m/s delta-V to achieve low earth orbit.