I was curious what the ultimate goal of Virgin Galactic, and the other sub-orbital space companies are. Since they are sub-orbital, they can't really take anyone to what I would consider "space" -- you have this big rubber band (gravity) attached to you that immediately starts pulling you back home. So is the idea just so passengers could say they've "been to space" (really, just reached a height high enough to be in a super thin atmosphere)? Or is the idea that by going high enough that you get a few minutes of free fall, to give passengers a glimpse of what being in space is like?
Now I realize that the early Mercury program was sub-orbital too, but that was gaining knowledge and practice prior to developing Mach 25 (orbital) technology. Is that also the goal of Virgin Galactic, to use the current design as a stepping stone?
There is no connection between being in space and being in orbit. You can be really far out in space without being in orbit (or rather, you are in an orbit that intersects the Earth's surface.) You are no less "in space" than the ISS crew just because you are only there for a few minutes.
I agree with that, but my point was that it doesn't seem very valuable to go "to space" when you can't stay -- kind of like how flying across the country, and flying over Nevada is different than "going to Vegas". So to me, the fact that they reach space really isn't the selling point, it is the fact that it is a thrill ride which lasts for however many minutes (more in line with a super roller coaster ride, or a step up from one of those parabolic curve plane flights).
Now I realize that the early Mercury program was sub-orbital too, but that was gaining knowledge and practice prior to developing Mach 25 (orbital) technology. Is that also the goal of Virgin Galactic, to use the current design as a stepping stone?