Beal Aerospace is not the only firm attempting to capitalize on the heavenly commercial launch market. The FAA is in licensing talks with more than a dozen companies, including Beal. But the Frisco start-up is one of only a few that is being taken seriously by the industry.

   “I think everybody realizes this guy has a vision and the funds to back it up,” says industry analyst Caceres. “The one thing he doesn’t have to worry about is funding. If he wants to lose his money, it’s up to him.”

   Some reported rocket rivals are struggling for funding, hoping to score business development aid from the federal or a state government. Others rely on funds from investors who may have high demands for return on investment and a low tolerance for long-term risk. Beal does not have to worry about his funding being yanked. But there are other dangers.

   The rocket could fail, the market could fail, or Beal might have made the wrong choice when he went with an expendable rocket over a re-usable one.

   Every new launch vehicle developed in the past five years has misfired at least once. The failure last May of a Boeing Delta 3 rocket temporarily put the kibosh on Delta 3 launches and on the launches of three Atlas rockets, which use the same component that failed in the Delta 3. Beal considers the possibility—some say the probability—his rocket will fail with characteristic determination. “If that happens,” he says, “we’ll do failure analysis, then we’ll launch again.”

   While he has control over what he will spend to make his rocket successful, Beal has no control over its potential market. 1999 is a point in case. Industry insiders had expected to exceed last year’s number of commercial space launches, in part because of an ambitious plan by the Iridium consortium to sell high-end satellite telephone service. But subscriber rates for the service were drastically below projections, and the consortium has filed for bankruptcy.