Author Topic: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)  (Read 661190 times)

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 1022
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #620 on: 10/30/2014 11:27 am »
There's a big banner on the Bigelow site announcing they're hiring for 100 new positions
Bigelow Aerospace Career Opportunities
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17267
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3065
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #621 on: 10/30/2014 01:28 pm »
There's a big banner on the Bigelow site announcing they're hiring for 100 new positions
Bigelow Aerospace Career Opportunities

Bigelow always said that he was waiting for commercial crew to be in place before launching his habitats. Looks like he really meant it. 

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7348
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #622 on: 10/30/2014 09:38 pm »
There's a big banner on the Bigelow site announcing they're hiring for 100 new positions
Bigelow Aerospace Career Opportunities

Bigelow always said that he was waiting for commercial crew to be in place before launching his habitats. Looks like he really meant it. 

I never doubted it.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Orbital Debris

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Glad to be out of Vegas
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #623 on: 11/03/2014 12:56 am »
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/careers.php
"1 hour lunch"
HAHAHAAHAHAAHA!

The fact that they list this among their benefits should be a warning sign.  Engineers have to clock in and clock out with a swipe card, and have to make up every minute over 60 for lunch.  For the sake of future employees I hope they have revised the vacation policies.  They have a long way to go to even come close to mainstream company benefits.

Bigelow Aerospace is currently a mock-up of a space company.  If Robert Bigelow really decides to 'get serious' he will need to cultivate the properties of a real company.

Offline MattMason

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1062
  • Space Enthusiast
  • Indiana
  • Liked: 772
  • Likes Given: 2016
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #624 on: 11/03/2014 04:18 pm »
I've read through the entire thread to this point, over 1.5 years of posts.

Given that Bigelow got into commercial real estate business to cultivate resources for his modules, and now that NASA's space taxis are selected and greenlighted, there still seems to be a "critical mass" element missing in the Bigelow plan as expressed by many here: Interest. The tech appears to be solid (no pun intended) and will get the official nod once BEAM's tests are done.

Before the Virgin Galactic incident, I would easily suggested a courting by Bigelow with major hotel chains to construct the first space hotel. The room rate would be as stellar in cost as the view, but we're aware of plenty of idle millionaires looking for something to do. Labor and their lodging, with supplies and contingencies for rescue and accident (NASA's old STS rescue balls (http://www.astronautix.com/craft/reseball.htm) came to mind) would make things more stratospheric but not impossible.

It would seem this would be a more practical and primary starting avenue to further the module's use, with semiconductor and pharmacological businesses next in line. After all, a space factory is one thing, but anyone at work in space for any reason have to be able to eat, sleep and recreate comfortably as well in the same place.

While I don't necessarily see the VG incident causing a long-term fear of spaceflight (barnstorming or LEO-style), has anyone noted any firmer recent reports of a collaboration to create a prototype hotel?
"Why is the logo on the side of a rocket so important?"
"So you can find the pieces." -Jim, the Steely Eyed

Offline RanulfC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4595
  • Heus tu Omnis! Vigilate Hoc!
  • Liked: 900
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #625 on: 11/03/2014 06:47 pm »
I've read through the entire thread to this point, over 1.5 years of posts.

Given that Bigelow got into commercial real estate business to cultivate resources for his modules, and now that NASA's space taxis are selected and greenlighted, there still seems to be a "critical mass" element missing in the Bigelow plan as expressed by many here: Interest. The tech appears to be solid (no pun intended) and will get the official nod once BEAM's tests are done.

Before the Virgin Galactic incident, I would easily suggested a courting by Bigelow with major hotel chains to construct the first space hotel. The room rate would be as stellar in cost as the view, but we're aware of plenty of idle millionaires looking for something to do. Labor and their lodging, with supplies and contingencies for rescue and accident (NASA's old STS rescue balls (http://www.astronautix.com/craft/reseball.htm) came to mind) would make things more stratospheric but not impossible.

It would seem this would be a more practical and primary starting avenue to further the module's use, with semiconductor and pharmacological businesses next in line. After all, a space factory is one thing, but anyone at work in space for any reason have to be able to eat, sleep and recreate comfortably as well in the same place.

While I don't necessarily see the VG incident causing a long-term fear of spaceflight (barnstorming or LEO-style), has anyone noted any firmer recent reports of a collaboration to create a prototype hotel?

Ehm, point? He (Bigelow) made his money in real estate specifically cheap but good motel rooms for travellers. THEN he decided to get into the space module business. Not the other way around. :)

He made his millions and then decided to build space habitat modules (And keeps insisting they are NOT going to be a "Space Hotel" BTW :)

Randy
From The Amazing Catstronaut on the Black Arrow LV:
British physics, old chap. It's undignified to belch flames and effluvia all over the pad, what. A true gentlemen's orbital conveyance lifts itself into the air unostentatiously, with the minimum of spectacle and a modicum of grace. Not like our American cousins' launch vehicles, eh?

Offline obi-wan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 329
  • Liked: 691
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #626 on: 11/03/2014 08:31 pm »
I do wonder how the lunar buildings will land vertically when the engines are horizontal.
When comes to landing on moon the bulk of DV required is for deorbit burn which is horizontal. The actual energy and propulsion required for final vertical landing is quite small. Google ULA DTAL and Masten Xeus landers. Using these concepts you could land a BA330 by using a large propulsion stage at one end and small propulsion stage at the other end. The large propulsion stage would to do the deorbit burn with its main engine eg RL10. The small vertical thrusters (can use storable propellant) on each stage would do the final landing.

There are variations on this idea. Use a standard Centuar upper stage to do bulk of deorbit burn, then separate and return to orbit. Leaving 2 small stages for final landing. Allows you to reuse the expensive Centuar stage.

Using storable propellant for vertical thrusters would allow you fly BA330 to different location close by. Eg into lava cave.

From low lunar orbit, the powered descent initiation burn (PDI, to borrow Apollo nomenclature) is 22 m/sec. The remaining 2700 m/sec is used to decelerate and land, with ~250-300 m/sec allocated for hover and landing point diversion. A lot of lander concepts adopt the use of one or more "lunar crashes" stages that burn to depletion and are staged during descent, allowing the lander to be smaller and put the crew closer to the surface (unlike Altair in the Constellation architecture, where the crew would exit their lander and be looking at an ~8 meter drop to get to the surface.)

Offline MattMason

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1062
  • Space Enthusiast
  • Indiana
  • Liked: 772
  • Likes Given: 2016
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #627 on: 11/03/2014 08:33 pm »
I've read through the entire thread to this point, over 1.5 years of posts.

Given that Bigelow got into commercial real estate business to cultivate resources for his modules, and now that NASA's space taxis are selected and greenlighted, there still seems to be a "critical mass" element missing in the Bigelow plan as expressed by many here: Interest. The tech appears to be solid (no pun intended) and will get the official nod once BEAM's tests are done.

Before the Virgin Galactic incident, I would easily suggested a courting by Bigelow with major hotel chains to construct the first space hotel. The room rate would be as stellar in cost as the view, but we're aware of plenty of idle millionaires looking for something to do. Labor and their lodging, with supplies and contingencies for rescue and accident (NASA's old STS rescue balls (http://www.astronautix.com/craft/reseball.htm) came to mind) would make things more stratospheric but not impossible.

It would seem this would be a more practical and primary starting avenue to further the module's use, with semiconductor and pharmacological businesses next in line. After all, a space factory is one thing, but anyone at work in space for any reason have to be able to eat, sleep and recreate comfortably as well in the same place.

While I don't necessarily see the VG incident causing a long-term fear of spaceflight (barnstorming or LEO-style), has anyone noted any firmer recent reports of a collaboration to create a prototype hotel?

Ehm, point? He (Bigelow) made his money in real estate specifically cheap but good motel rooms for travellers. THEN he decided to get into the space module business. Not the other way around. :)

He made his millions and then decided to build space habitat modules (And keeps insisting they are NOT going to be a "Space Hotel" BTW :)

Randy

While Wikipedia is typically as reliable as a news source as Robitussin is as a topical antiseptic and floor wax, an interview in the following article seems to confirm Bigalow's dream (even if he later adapted his work to his current view).

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/nevadan-work-moon-and-beyond-las-vegas-developer
"Why is the logo on the side of a rocket so important?"
"So you can find the pieces." -Jim, the Steely Eyed

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #628 on: 11/11/2014 01:29 pm »
There's a big banner on the Bigelow site announcing they're hiring for 100 new positions
Bigelow Aerospace Career Opportunities

Must be screening for 2015; was by there the last few days; no discernable new numbers of new employees.
 
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline HIP2BSQRE

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #629 on: 11/29/2014 05:07 pm »
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/careers.php
"1 hour lunch"
HAHAHAAHAHAAHA!

The fact that they list this among their benefits should be a warning sign.  Engineers have to clock in and clock out with a swipe card, and have to make up every minute over 60 for lunch.  For the sake of future employees I hope they have revised the vacation policies.  They have a long way to go to even come close to mainstream company benefits.

Bigelow Aerospace is currently a mock-up of a space company.  If Robert Bigelow really decides to 'get serious' he will need to
 cultivate the properties of a real company.

What would be some of the things that you would change?

Offline HIP2BSQRE

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #630 on: 11/29/2014 05:09 pm »
What happened to the Gate 1 and Gate 2 reports that Bigalow presented to NASA?  Are they in the public domain?

Offline Orbital Debris

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Glad to be out of Vegas
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #631 on: 11/30/2014 04:26 pm »
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/careers.php
"1 hour lunch"
HAHAHAAHAHAAHA!

The fact that they list this among their benefits should be a warning sign.  Engineers have to clock in and clock out with a swipe card, and have to make up every minute over 60 for lunch.  For the sake of future employees I hope they have revised the vacation policies.  They have a long way to go to even come close to mainstream company benefits.

Bigelow Aerospace is currently a mock-up of a space company.  If Robert Bigelow really decides to 'get serious' he will need to
 cultivate the properties of a real company.

What would be some of the things that you would change?
I don't want to bog the thread down with a long list, so I will address one of the worst 'benefits' that outsiders should understand.  BA needs to have better sick and vacation time policies.
BA's PTO (Paid Time Off) policies are the farthest from main stream engineering companies. Employees with two years get 11 days PTO which is combined vacation and sick time.  Every hour away from the office (i.e. routine doctor/dental visits/personal business) is strictly counted against that time and (officially) cannot be made up.  Vacation days adjacent to holidays (such as turning a 3 day weekend into 4 days) were not allowed unless approved by top management.  Calling in sick adjacent to a holiday would result in no pay for the holiday. These were the policies from his hotel business, so this was applied for the engineers.  Unofficially, you could make up a few hours here and there if you were well established within the company.
For a while, employees with >2 years could accrue additional days.  However, around April 2011 they arbitrarily changed the policy, reducing the PTO hours for existing employees.  Employees with less than 2 years had 5 days total PTO, 3-5 years had 11 days,  >5 years got 15 days.  This shaved about a week off of everyone's PTO, and was not grandfathered for existing employees. 

With new management, hopefully they have revised this, because 5 days combined sick and vacation for 2 years is pretty tight. I can't imagine they would recruit quality engineers with this policy.

This is why I react with derision when they tout their benefits as good compensation. 

Offline Hauerg

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 901
  • Berndorf, Austria
  • Liked: 520
  • Likes Given: 2574
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #632 on: 11/30/2014 04:39 pm »
This is ridiculous. This is a shame.
Ok, i am doing some 200-400 hours of overtime every year without compensation. Depending on project needs, is my own decision.
But i do get 28 days of free time. I.e. 5 weeks and 3 days.
Sick leave is bad luck for the employer. (But was only 3.5 days in total for total 2010-2013)
So would i ever consider working for Mr. B.?
Afraid not.
Anyway, as citizen of "communist" (haha) Austria I would not qualify anyway.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17267
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3065
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #633 on: 12/03/2014 04:02 pm »
I missed it when it came out in October but NASA is asking industry for concept studies on habitats (more specifically on an exploration augmentation module) through a BAA:

http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/october/nasa-seeks-proposals-to-develop-capabilities-for-deep-space-exploration-journey/

See pages 17 to 19 of the BAA:
https://prod.nais.nasa.gov/eps/eps_data/163051-SOL-001-001.pdf

Quote from: Page 17 of the BAA
These initial capabilities will be accomplished with the development of the Exploration Augmentation Module (EAM). The EAM will serve as a foundational component of a future in-space habitation capability and may include multiple elements as the architecture is further refined.

The funding is for concept studies:

Quote from: page 19 of the BAA
Funding Allocation: Individual award amounts up to $500K – $1M for this phase of efforts not to exceed a 6-12 month period. Contracts shall be firm fixed price with milestone payments. The Government’s obligation to make awards is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payments can be made and the receipt of proposals that NASA determines are acceptable.

I would expect Bigelow to submit a proposal for this concept study.
« Last Edit: 12/03/2014 04:16 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17267
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3065
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #634 on: 12/03/2014 09:25 pm »
What happened to the Gate 1 and Gate 2 reports that Bigalow presented to NASA?  Are they in the public domain?

I asked Mike Gold from Bigelow that question last spring and he said that they wouldn't be released.
« Last Edit: 12/03/2014 09:26 pm by yg1968 »

Offline ThereIWas3

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 948
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 338
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #635 on: 12/06/2014 03:03 pm »
I was looking over the comments on working at Bigelow at glassdoor.com.  In addition to the poor vacation and working time issues mentioned above, what I find more worrisome is the lack of communication between departments and complete disregard for proper engineering practice.  It reminds me a lot of what went wrong at North American when they were building the block-1 Apollo modules.  And we all know what a horror show those were.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #636 on: 12/06/2014 03:34 pm »
THAT is some fascinating reading. What other companies are investigating inflatable space habitats?

Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1996
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #637 on: 12/06/2014 03:55 pm »
Any new news on Beam. We should be hearing more about it soon as it's slated for 2015.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #638 on: 12/06/2014 06:00 pm »
THAT is some fascinating reading. What other companies are investigating inflatable space habitats?

Besides Bigelow there's Thin Red Line in Chilliwack BC, CA  who has worked with Bigelow,

http://www.thin-red-line.com

and Paragon SDC (Paragon Space Development Corp.) of Tucson, Arizona,

http://www.paragonsdc.com/index.php

ParabolicArc article....
« Last Edit: 12/06/2014 06:01 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)
« Reply #639 on: 12/07/2014 12:27 am »
Any new news on Beam. We should be hearing more about it soon as it's slated for 2015.

local for me, so trying to keep my eyes and camera on it ;)

Is it possible beam is just waiting to be shipped?
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0