> Perfect crystals. Also, the proof-of-concept drug was ritonavir, and it's nearly impossible to consistently grow large crystals of it on Earth. All of the labs that work with ritonavir are contaminated by a more stable form ("polymorph") that rapidly converts any ritonavir crystals into a less-useful form.
In short: yes, you're correct, but I am just parroting somebody else; personally, I posses no actual knowledge of chemistry involved.
I clicked on the link imagining some sort of Walter White situation, not knowing what Varda's Winnebago was, so I agree the sub heading is less misleading.
Reality though: "This was the first in a series of missions Varda plans to build and launch. Varda calls this design the Winnebago series, designed to bring pharmaceutical research specimens back to Earth for laboratory analysis and eventual commercial exploitation. This satellite launched on June 12 on a SpaceX rideshare mission, and less than three weeks later, it completed a pioneering drug manufacturing experiment."
Varda lost multiple opportunities to do re-entry because the feds couldn't get their shit together for a year+....
...and meanwhile Richard Branson didn't abort a launch when there was a malfunction that caused his craft to massively miss the re-entry flight plan, thus endangering commercial and private aviation. The FAA took less than a month to investigate Virgin's fuckup and said "whatevs, it's cool, just change a few things": https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/29/faa-clears-virgin-galactic-f...
It goes to show how the emperor has no clothing when it comes to romanticising space exploration as being this matter of science, knowledge, wonder, etc. Space isn't about any of that as far as the government is concerned. It's about military applications and letting rich people do what they want.
anyone have an example comparison of the economics of manufacturing Drug A on earth vs in space with launch and reentry costs included? Is the yield improved that much for certain pharmaceuticals? Is it because we can just yeet waste substances towards the sun?
The article mentions increased yield, but from what I can find on their website its mostly about the different crystal structures that result from zero g
It's absurdly energy-intensive to get something to fall into the sun, so there would be no point unless it was too dangerous to have on earth. If that were true, then the risk of launch failure, failure to enter and leave orbit, etc would be too great.
It's worth also qualifying that the opposite: leaving the solar system entirely - is actually less delta-V intensive to do. If you want to get something to leave and not come back, shooting it out of the solar system is the better plan.
It looks like improved yield, but also there's the possibility of producing a product that has different properties than that produced on earth.
If, for example, the larger ritonavir crystals they can produce in space produce a dramatically more effective treatment, somebody's going to be interested in paying a premium for that.
Orbital mechanics, Earth does not fall to Sun because it is going around Sun pretty fast. To drop in Sun you have to lose this velocity. And there is no mentionable drag. Kinda similar how satellites around Earth need to go fast too to stay up. Go fast enough and you get out, but you are still stuck with sun.
To expand on and put numbers to this: to escape the solar system from Earth, you need to add about 17 km/s on top of the energy you start with by working from Earth's orbital energy. Earth is going about 30 km/s around the Sun, which helps quite a lot!
However, this also means that to hit the Sun, you need to remove more or less all of the energy that Earth starts you with. This is the key insight - if you do a bit too much or a bit too little, it slingshots around the Sun (getting close to it but not going into it) and stays in orbit rather than landing in the Sun.
Nope. You’re in orbit around the sun too. You have to modify your solar orbit so the short axis of your ellipse is close enough to fall in with atmospheric drag.
Then that will become a piece of orbital debris, just on solar orbit. Unless you can accelerate it when it is near sun and thus yeet it away from solar system. Doubt that's cost effective either.
The only space Winnebago that comes to mind when reading this is Lone Starr's lol. I wonder if that influences the naming of the projects. After all SpaceX names their barges after scifi vessels too.
