I wonder if this rocket goes high enough to see the astronomical fees this "Virgin Galactic" will charge.

Considering the percentage of people who will probably get at least a little sick on their flight, was a white interior such a wise choice?

Looks like the puke will be contained by the helmets.

Puke helmets and high prices aside.

Go get 'em folks!
It is only by allowing private enterprise to take these steps that we're going to get some real action in space.
There's -=alot=- of money to be made in space, and that ain't a bad thing.

And bully for Rutan and his crew too!

Yep, air travel used to be a novelty for the ultra rich once upon a time also. So were cars. This is a huge step forward, and a major move in the right direction.

Burt Rutan is as significant a figure as Lindberg, Von Braun or Hughes.

man...If I ever win the powerball..you can bet that $200,000 would be in Richard & Burt's pocket.

Cant wait till 2009 when this thing takes mankind into space by the masses.

Um.. yeah. The thing with space is that there is nothing up there. It is a vacuum with scant little scientific merit, even less novelty (like a planetarium, but dangerous and expensive) and a huge negative environmental impact (what do you think those rockets are filled with, fuel cells?). This isn't practical or cool and to compare it to the airplane or car? Foolish.

By going into space we've learned more about our planet in three decades than everything known prior to that. Satellites, spacewalks, deep-space probes and intrasolar probes have revealed a vast wealth of information about our planet and its place in the solar system.

With an ever-diminishing supply of resources, the next step is to learn to leave our Terran cradle and embrace the wider world beyond. Just as crossing the oceans to explore new worlds was once viewed as foolish and unpromising, crossing the depths of space is the next great wave of exploration.

Allowing private industry to drive this enterprise forward is the right step. Environmental impact from space-bound launches is minimal in comparison to daily commuter rail, air travel and standard industrial waste, and the gains are, pun intended, astronomical.

As the overall scientific intelligence quota of Americans plummets, one can hope that a new generation of explorers and scientists will be spurred by dreams of being able to find new careers and make new discoveries beyond our planets' grasp.

Kudos to the visonaries and and dreamers who can see beyond a tired and mired existence, and see into a future where Earth is not our only home.

Lab, that is a truly ignorant statement.

We'd all still be living in caves if people like you were listened to.

Admittedly walking on the moon was inspiring but all that you mentioned can and pretty much was done with UNMANNED probes. Space is great but we would do much better to learn how to better manage our vast planetary resources better, before we decide to go terraforming Mars.

Awesomist, there is actually a lively debate about the future of science (read Oct coverstory on discovery.com for more) and one point readily conceded is that there are few experiments that actually need to be done in space, if any. My point is that probes are fine but they don't need people doing them (heavy wetware). Commerce also has no place because what do you have, a vacuum, some rocks and a great view? No viable economic model there.

Then there is the issue of delivering thousands of tons of greenhouse gasses directly to the upper atmosphere. If you think commuter rail is equivalent, it isn't. Besides, commuter rail services millions, this is for the rich few who leave a huge hole in the ozone for the rest of us to deal with. No thanks.

p.s. from a geothermal point of view, caves are very practical so, yes, maybe we would live in them if you listened to me. haha.

Admittedly walking on the moon was inspiring but all that is useful and informative can and pretty much was done with UNMANNED probes. Space is great but we would do much better to learn how to better manage our vast planetary resources better, before we decide to go terraforming Mars.

Awesomist, there is actually a lively debate about the future of science (read Oct coverstory on discovery.com for more) and one point readily conceded is that there are few experiments that actually need to be done in space, if any. My point is that probes are fine but they don't need people doing them (heavy wetware). Commerce also has no place because what do you have, a vacuum, some rocks and a great view? No viable economic model there.

Then there is the issue of delivering thousands of tons of greenhouse gasses directly to the upper atmosphere. If you think commuter rail is equivalent, it isn't. Besides, commuter rail services millions, this is for the rich few who leave a huge hole in the ozone for the rest of us to deal with. No thanks.

p.s. from a geothermal point of view, caves are very practical so, yes, maybe we would live in them if you listened to me. haha.

Don't want to put my flame on, but while I do agree with The Lab about managing Earth's resources better and conducting most current research with unmanned missions, you can't seriously expect humanity to remain on the planet. Think about history here - Manifest Destiny, Christopher Columbus, hell the entire Out of Africa Theory! Mankind will always explore new frontiers if opportunity exists, and yes, extraterrestrial opportunity does exist, especially for a species as adaptable as ours. Your basic problem is that you can't see beyond Earth orbit or even the solar system - the thing about space is it's HUGE. Billions and billions of stars and planets and you just want to stay on this one? Very, very narrow-minded.