OZMENS’ SNC ANNOUNCES DETAILS FOR COMMERCIAL SPACE STATION AND LEO COMMERCIALIZATIONCrewed Dream Chaser Spaceplane to Shuttle Private AstronautsSPARKS, Nev., March 31, 2021 – Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), the global aerospace and national security company owned by Eren and Fatih Ozmen, outlined development plans for its low-Earth orbit (LEO) space station – leveraging its transportation and destination technologies – releasing new images, details and video of the unique concept in support of LEO commercialization.The space station is a configuration of multiple large inflatable LIFE™ habitats that can be serviced by both cargo and crew carrying Dream Chaser® spaceplanes.“There is no scalable space travel industry without a spaceplane,” said SNC’s Chairwoman and owner Eren Ozmen. “Dream Chaser and its runway landing offer the scalable, preferred solution for humans and science in support of a vibrant LEO economy.”SNC also released that a crewed Dream Chaser will be able to shuttle private astronauts and to serve as the only vehicle capable of rescuing astronauts from space destinations and returning them to Earth via a safe and speedy runway landing.Among the industries that have demonstrated interest in space-based operations:In-space manufacturing such as 3D printingPharmaceutical and medical researchAgricultural production for food and scienceMovie productionTourismThe Dream Chaser, America’s Spaceplane®, is a reusable, multi-mission space utility vehicle. Dream Chaser Tenacity™ spaceplane and the Shooting Star™ transport vehicle will begin providing cargo delivery and disposal services to the International Space Station under NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS-2) contract late next year.The LIFE habitat is a three story, 27-foot large inflatable fabric environment that launches on a conventional rocket and inflates on-orbit. The LIFE habitat is undergoing a NASA soft-goods certification this year and the full size ground prototype developed under NASA’s NextSTEP-2 contract is in the process of being transferred from Johnson Space Center in Texas to Kennedy Space Center in Florida for further testing on short-and long-term habitation. SNC’s Astro Garden® system also provides fresh food within the habitat.“NASA has asked private industry to come to the table with alternatives to the International Space Station,” said Janet Kavandi former NASA astronaut and SSG executive vice president of SNC’s Space Systems. “SNC intends to lead in LEO commercialization, building on NASA’s efforts to date and welcoming additional public and private partners worldwide.”The first Dream Chaser orbital vehicle is being assembled in Louisville, Colorado. Thermal protection tiles are being installed on the vehicles exterior and its wings will be attached this summer.About Dream Chaser SpacecraftOwned and operated by SNC, the Dream Chaser spacecraft is a reusable, multi-mission space utility vehicle. It is capable of transportation services to and from low-Earth orbit and is the only commercial, lifting-body vehicle capable of a runway landing. The Dream Chaser Cargo System was selected by NASA to provide cargo delivery and disposal services to the International Space Station under the Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS-2) contract. All Dream Chaser CRS-2 cargo missions are planned to land at Kennedy Space Center’s Shuttle Landing Facility.About Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC)Owned by Chairwoman and President Eren Ozmen and CEO Fatih Ozmen, SNC is a trusted leader in solving the world’s toughest challenges through best-of-breed, open architecture engineering in Space Systems, Commercial Solutions, and National Security and Defense. SNC is recognized among The Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Space, as a Tier One Superior Supplier for the U.S. Air Force and is the only aerospace and defense firm selected as a 2020 US Best Managed Company. For nearly 60 years, SNC has delivered state-of-the-art civil, military and commercial solutions including more than 4,000 space systems, subsystems and components to customers worldwide, and participation in more than 450 missions to space, including to Mars.###
New video illustrating SNC’s vision for development plans for a SNC low-Earth orbit (LEO) space station bit.ly/3mk3y01 #FutureofSpace #Space
“SNC intends to lead in LEO commercialization, building on NASA’s efforts to date and welcoming additional public and private partners worldwide” says @janetkavandi #FutureofSpace #Space
I think the scale is off on this. Maybe these are Ultra Dream Chasers or something.
Quote from: ncb1397 on 03/31/2021 07:36 pmI think the scale is off on this. Maybe these are Ultra Dream Chasers or something.If that is a standard robotics grapple fixture like the Canadarm2 uses on Cygnus and Cargo Dragon vehicles, it's diameter is almost 0.7 meters. Looks like you could have 2.5 of them span the height of that astronaut on EVA. So maybe it's a regular sized DreamChaser? (Dimensions for FRGF from here: https://explorers.larc.nasa.gov/HPMIDEX/pdf_files/17C_Robotics-020918_R1.pdf)
Pushing ability of cargo DC to return Astronauts in emergency. Cargo is 80% of crew version, sound like it just needs LAS, fixed wings and extra ECLSS endurance.
Whole event. It's unlisted but I got explicit written permission from SNC to share the link publicly. The event starts about 45:30 in.
The YouTube video is now private :-(Any mention of Launch Abort capability for crewed version?
Quote from: adrianwyard on 04/02/2021 12:56 amThe YouTube video is now private :-(Any mention of Launch Abort capability for crewed version? Dang.Yes...100% abort capable from pad to orbit. Discussed by Steve Lindsey.
Is this the same as the (now private) YouTube video?
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 04/01/2021 08:07 pmPushing ability of cargo DC to return Astronauts in emergency. Cargo is 80% of crew version, sound like it just needs LAS, fixed wings and extra ECLSS endurance.Cargo DC doesn't need LAS or fixed wings. It's already at the space station if the need arises for crew to use it in an emergency. Would need ECLSS.
Another space station concept with no windows I like SNC but I am getting big time Bigelow vibes from this where they are pushing out a concept with nowhere near the business case to make it happen. SNC is leaps and bounds more business savvy than Bigelow, but I won't be holding my breath to see if this goes anywhere.
Quote from: RonM on 04/01/2021 11:37 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 04/01/2021 08:07 pmPushing ability of cargo DC to return Astronauts in emergency. Cargo is 80% of crew version, sound like it just needs LAS, fixed wings and extra ECLSS endurance.Cargo DC doesn't need LAS or fixed wings. It's already at the space station if the need arises for crew to use it in an emergency. Would need ECLSS.Quote from: GWH on 04/02/2021 12:20 amAnother space station concept with no windows I like SNC but I am getting big time Bigelow vibes from this where they are pushing out a concept with nowhere near the business case to make it happen. SNC is leaps and bounds more business savvy than Bigelow, but I won't be holding my breath to see if this goes anywhere.SNC is experienced aerospace company with 4-5000 empolyees, this space station is well within their capabilities. Being privately owned by Ozmens their are free to fund this project, no shareholders to answer too.
SNC is experienced aerospace company with 4-5000 empolyees, this space station is well within their capabilities. Being privately owned by Ozmens their are free to fund this project, no shareholders to answer too.They would be 2nd largest privately own aerospace company behind SpaceX. Blue is closing fast with money Bezos is injecting.
Then there is the major value proposition of an expandable module: flying on 5 meter fairings. Same as what Bigelow proposed with B330. In a world where 7 meter New Glenn should be flying, Vulcan is at least capable of hosting a 7 meter fairing, and "Company X" may or may not be capable of flying 9 meter payloads, I just don't see any particular reason to use expandables in LEO.
Quote from: GWH on 04/02/2021 04:22 pmThen there is the major value proposition of an expandable module: flying on 5 meter fairings. Same as what Bigelow proposed with B330. In a world where 7 meter New Glenn should be flying, Vulcan is at least capable of hosting a 7 meter fairing, and "Company X" may or may not be capable of flying 9 meter payloads, I just don't see any particular reason to use expandables in LEO.That module I was in was huge. I wasn't kidding when I said it felt like my house. My house is 2 stories above ground and 1 below. It's 26 feet total in inside height - about the same size as this module. I've been inside an ISS module mockup (a little over 4m in diameter). It's the difference between a walk-in closet and a whole house.
Quote from: Lee Jay on 04/02/2021 04:40 pmQuote from: GWH on 04/02/2021 04:22 pmThen there is the major value proposition of an expandable module: flying on 5 meter fairings. Same as what Bigelow proposed with B330. In a world where 7 meter New Glenn should be flying, Vulcan is at least capable of hosting a 7 meter fairing, and "Company X" may or may not be capable of flying 9 meter payloads, I just don't see any particular reason to use expandables in LEO.That module I was in was huge. I wasn't kidding when I said it felt like my house. My house is 2 stories above ground and 1 below. It's 26 feet total in inside height - about the same size as this module. I've been inside an ISS module mockup (a little over 4m in diameter). It's the difference between a walk-in closet and a whole house.Lee I’m a little confused. Are you saying they had a full scale mockup you were able to physically examine or are you just going off the presentation? If there is a physical full-scale mock up were you allowed to take and can you post any images?Thanks.
I just don't see any particular reason to use expandables in LEO.
Quote from: JAFO on 04/02/2021 04:56 pmQuote from: Lee Jay on 04/02/2021 04:40 pmQuote from: GWH on 04/02/2021 04:22 pmThen there is the major value proposition of an expandable module: flying on 5 meter fairings. Same as what Bigelow proposed with B330. In a world where 7 meter New Glenn should be flying, Vulcan is at least capable of hosting a 7 meter fairing, and "Company X" may or may not be capable of flying 9 meter payloads, I just don't see any particular reason to use expandables in LEO.That module I was in was huge. I wasn't kidding when I said it felt like my house. My house is 2 stories above ground and 1 below. It's 26 feet total in inside height - about the same size as this module. I've been inside an ISS module mockup (a little over 4m in diameter). It's the difference between a walk-in closet and a whole house.Lee I’m a little confused. Are you saying they had a full scale mockup you were able to physically examine or are you just going off the presentation? If there is a physical full-scale mock up were you allowed to take and can you post any images?Thanks.I was inside it, 2 years ago today, actually, and did post many pictures on L2.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47793.0
Quote from: Lee Jay on 04/02/2021 05:01 pmQuote from: JAFO on 04/02/2021 04:56 pmQuote from: Lee Jay on 04/02/2021 04:40 pmQuote from: GWH on 04/02/2021 04:22 pmThen there is the major value proposition of an expandable module: flying on 5 meter fairings. Same as what Bigelow proposed with B330. In a world where 7 meter New Glenn should be flying, Vulcan is at least capable of hosting a 7 meter fairing, and "Company X" may or may not be capable of flying 9 meter payloads, I just don't see any particular reason to use expandables in LEO.That module I was in was huge. I wasn't kidding when I said it felt like my house. My house is 2 stories above ground and 1 below. It's 26 feet total in inside height - about the same size as this module. I've been inside an ISS module mockup (a little over 4m in diameter). It's the difference between a walk-in closet and a whole house.Lee I’m a little confused. Are you saying they had a full scale mockup you were able to physically examine or are you just going off the presentation? If there is a physical full-scale mock up were you allowed to take and can you post any images?Thanks.I was inside it, 2 years ago today, actually, and did post many pictures on L2.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47793.0Thanks. I had to let my L2 subscription lapse, they raised the prices on Rotax 914s and it’s almost time to buy one.
Announcing Orbital Reef - Your Address in OrbitSee also the press release:https://blueorigin-static-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/orbital-reef-press-release.pdf
Between Sierra Space and Blue this space station is fully funded. They push a head with it regardless of NASA funding.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/13/2022 03:44 amBetween Sierra Space and Blue this space station is fully funded. They push a head with it regardless of NASA funding. Says who? Sierra Space hasn't flown anything on their own dime. Dreamchaser development seems completely tied to the amount of NASA funding, and not speedy even then. I don't see why their space station ideas would get made any faster. Blue Origin has Bezos' billions to back it. But it lacks focus and urgency. Look at the New Glenn program. Do you know something I don't?
Quote from: WmThomas on 03/15/2022 12:03 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 03/13/2022 03:44 amBetween Sierra Space and Blue this space station is fully funded. They push a head with it regardless of NASA funding. Says who? Sierra Space hasn't flown anything on their own dime. Dreamchaser development seems completely tied to the amount of NASA funding, and not speedy even then. I don't see why their space station ideas would get made any faster. Blue Origin has Bezos' billions to back it. But it lacks focus and urgency. Look at the New Glenn program. Do you know something I don't?Watch the video above.Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/15/2022 04:22 pmQuote from: WmThomas on 03/15/2022 12:03 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 03/13/2022 03:44 amBetween Sierra Space and Blue this space station is fully funded. They push a head with it regardless of NASA funding. Says who? Sierra Space hasn't flown anything on their own dime. Dreamchaser development seems completely tied to the amount of NASA funding, and not speedy even then. I don't see why their space station ideas would get made any faster. Blue Origin has Bezos' billions to back it. But it lacks focus and urgency. Look at the New Glenn program. Do you know something I don't?Watch the video above.Sent from my SM-G570Y using TapatalkThats a 20 some minute video to answer a simple question. Can you provide a timestamp to something that says the project is fully funded?
Quote from: deadman1204 on 03/15/2022 05:24 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 03/15/2022 04:22 pmQuote from: WmThomas on 03/15/2022 12:03 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 03/13/2022 03:44 amBetween Sierra Space and Blue this space station is fully funded. They push a head with it regardless of NASA funding. Says who? Sierra Space hasn't flown anything on their own dime. Dreamchaser development seems completely tied to the amount of NASA funding, and not speedy even then. I don't see why their space station ideas would get made any faster. Blue Origin has Bezos' billions to back it. But it lacks focus and urgency. Look at the New Glenn program. Do you know something I don't?Watch the video above.Sent from my SM-G570Y using TapatalkThats a 20 some minute video to answer a simple question. Can you provide a timestamp to something that says the project is fully funded?Not going back through it. SS raised $1.4B in their funding round.Sent from my SM-T733 using Tapatalk
Sounds like crew DC won't have windows in front. Don't need them for landing as screens with cameras and other sensors can do better job. Heat from reentry causes lot engineering headaches with front windows. Will still have windows in rear.
The spacecraft shall provide optically uniform windows with optical performance properties
Sierra Space and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) have signed an agreement to study collaboration on technologies to support a planned commercial space station.The two companies announced March 17 a memorandum of understanding regarding collaboration on a “wide range of technologies” that could be used for Orbital Reef, a commercial space station announced last October with Sierra Space as one of the lead partners.The companies did not elaborate on the technologies they will consider for Orbital Reef under the agreement. MHI does have extensive experience in International Space Station operations as the manufacturer of the Kibo laboratory module, which was installed on the station in 2008. The company also built the HTV cargo spacecraft and H-2 launch vehicle that launched those spacecraft to the station.
Sierra Space and Blue Origin Successfully Complete Orbital Reef System Definition ReviewAUGUST 22, 2022Orbital Reef Space Station Advances to Design Phase After NASA ReviewLOUISVILLE, Colo. and KENT, Wash. – August 22, 2022 – The Orbital Reef team, led by partners Sierra Space and Blue Origin, has successfully completed its System Definition Review (SDR) with NASA.The SDR is an important program milestone to establish the functional baseline for Orbital Reef, a commercially developed, owned and operated space station to be built in low-Earth orbit (LEO). It demonstrates to NASA that the space station design is feasible and achievable while validating that the Orbital Reef system is on-track to proceed into the design phase.The Orbital Reef team, including Amazon Supply Chain, Amazon Web Services, Arizona State University, Boeing, Genesis Engineering Solutions and Redwire Space, is maturing the design of its space station in partnership with NASA under the agency’s Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development (CLDP) program. NASA awarded the agreement in December 2021 to shift NASA’s research and exploration activities in LEO to commercial space stations and help stimulate a growing space economy.The SDR included an extensive review to ensure that the proposed Orbital Reef architecture is responsive to the functional and performance requirements; it examined the proposed system architecture and the flow-down to all functional elements of the Orbital Reef system. The successful SDR supported NASA’s decision to further develop the system architecture and design. Representatives from Blue Origin, Sierra Space, team members, and NASA participated in the review, conducted between mid-June and mid-July to allow in-depth review of documentation and feedback to the team.“We are on the doorstep of the most profound industrial revolution in human history. An industrial revolution marked by the transition from the last 60 years of space exploration to a future where humanity extends our factories and cities into space. It isn’t solely about tourism – it is about unlocking the next great discoveries using the microgravity factories that we will build just 250 miles above the Earth’s surface,” said Tom Vice, CEO of Sierra Space. “The microgravity factories and services provided by Orbital Reef have the potential to revolutionize every industry and become a major growth contributor to the U.S. and world economies.”“This SDR moves Orbital Reef forward,” said Brent Sherwood, Senior Vice President of Advanced Development Programs at Blue Origin. “We are meeting the needs of both the commercial marketplace and NASA’s requirements. Orbital Reef will change the game for human space flight in Earth orbit.”Orbital Reef will open the next chapter of human space exploration and development by facilitating the growth of a vibrant ecosystem and business model for the future. Designed to open multiple new markets in space, Orbital Reef will provide anyone with the opportunity to establish their own address in orbit. This unique destination will offer research, industrial, international, and commercial customers the cost competitive end-to-end services they need including space transportation and logistics, space habitation, equipment accommodation and operations including onboard crew. The station is expected to be operational by 2027.For more information, visit www.orbitalreef.com.
Sierra Space completed a burst pressure test of a one-third scale version of its inflatable LIFE habitat: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220913005422/en/Sierra-Space’s-LIFE™-Habitat-Completes-Successful-Ultimate-Burst-Pressure-Test
So you are making crap up then? Cause a funding round has NOTHING to do with a fully funded station. Thats peanuts.
Quote from: JAFO on 04/02/2021 05:14 pmThanks. I had to let my L2 subscription lapse, they raised the prices on Rotax 914s and it’s almost time to buy one.Not going for the 915is? I hear they're only a few centuries worth of L2 subscription funds.That's Steve Lindsey on the left.
Thanks. I had to let my L2 subscription lapse, they raised the prices on Rotax 914s and it’s almost time to buy one.
Quote from: JAFO on 04/02/2021 05:14 pmThanks. I had to let my L2 subscription lapse, they raised the prices on Rotax 914s and it’s almost time to buy one.That's Steve Lindsey on the left.
Quote from: Lee Jay on 04/02/2021 05:25 pmQuote from: JAFO on 04/02/2021 05:14 pmThanks. I had to let my L2 subscription lapse, they raised the prices on Rotax 914s and it’s almost time to buy one.That's Steve Lindsey on the left.About a year ago I flew with a guy who saw the Dream Chaser sticker on my flight bag (You know you're a Space Geek when...) and played innocent, asking me a bunch of questions about it before divulging that he knew Steve pretty well. I damn near begged him to give me Steve's contact info, but smartly refused. Said despite knowing Steve, he had not been able to get in and see DC, either.
Dec 12, 2022Sierra Space conducted a successful Ultimate Burst Pressure (UBP) test on a sub-scale version of the company’s LIFE™ habitat at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. LIFE, or Large Integrated Flexible Environment, is an inflatable habitation module developed by Sierra Space for use on Orbital Reef, the world’s first commercial space station. A full-scale LIFE habitat expands to the size of a three-story apartment building in space, where astronauts can live and work comfortably for long periods of time. The test exceeded NASA certification requirements for inflatable habitation modules and further establishes Sierra Space as the leader in commercial space station development. Sierra Space is the only active commercial space company to meet multiple successful UBP trials.
Jan 30, 2023Sierra Space’s LIFE (Large Integrated Flexible Environment) habitat launches on a conventional rocket and inflates on-orbit to a large structure that is three stories tall, and 27 feet in diameter. It's stronger than steel and designed to support LEO applications and long-duration missions. "Investing in these types of technologies and developing them for space exploration means that we can leverage it for other applications that directly benefit humanity." - Mickey Mathew, Systems Engineer - Space DestinationsWe look forward to continuing to build this key element in our Destinations portfolio and paving the way for the development of advanced inflatable habitat systems and architectures.
Reasons to Believe | LIFE Habitat for Space ExplorationQuoteJan 30, 2023Sierra Space’s LIFE (Large Integrated Flexible Environment) habitat launches on a conventional rocket and inflates on-orbit to a large structure that is three stories tall, and 27 feet in diameter.
Jan 30, 2023Sierra Space’s LIFE (Large Integrated Flexible Environment) habitat launches on a conventional rocket and inflates on-orbit to a large structure that is three stories tall, and 27 feet in diameter.
Quote from: catdlr on 01/31/2023 05:34 amReasons to Believe | LIFE Habitat for Space ExplorationQuoteJan 30, 2023Sierra Space’s LIFE (Large Integrated Flexible Environment) habitat launches on a conventional rocket and inflates on-orbit to a large structure that is three stories tall, and 27 feet in diameter.That's almost 92% of the diameter of Starship, and almost 50% of the height of the Starship payload bay. You could launch two of these, fully inflated, in one Starship. Or just use the Starship instead.Caveat: Starship has not yet flown.
LOUISVILLE, Colo. – Sept. 20, 2023 – Sierra Space, a leading, pureplay commercial space company building the first end-to-end business and technology platform in space, today announced it completed a fifth, sub-scale test of their revolutionary LIFE™ habitat (Large Integrated Flexible Environment). ILC Dover is the exclusive softgoods technology partner on the Sierra Space platform.This latest successful milestone and the first one in the testing campaign to include a metallic window sub-structure – or blanking plate – now propels Sierra Space into full-scale testing of LIFE by the end of this year. The milestone cements the company’s position as the industry leader in commercial space station development for use in low-Earth orbit (LEO) and deep space.“Sierra Space is putting affordable in-space infrastructure within reach so every boardroom can now look to space for their next breakthrough products,” said Sierra Space CEO Tom Vice. “Our revolutionary space station technology, combined with our highly reusable Dream Chaser spaceplane, significantly decreases the cost of in-space infrastructure and Is ushering in the commercialization of Low Earth Orbit.”On Aug. 17, Sierra Space, in collaboration with ILC Dover and NASA subject-matter experts, conducted an Ultimate Burst Pressure (UBP) test on a one-third-scale version of the inflatable habitat. This test article included a blanking plate – a metallic structure inserted into the softgoods shell to emulate a future design component, such as a window, robotic arm or antenna attachment point. For this burst test, a steel blanking plate was used as a stand-in for a future window.This recent UBP test of the sub-scale LIFE with a blanking plate surpassed all other previous test article maximum burst pressures. The results of this test provide a 33% margin over the certification standard for full-scale LIFE testing, and nearly a 20% improvement over the previous design, aligning with Sierra Space’s two previous sub-scale UBP tests conducted in July and November 2022. Sierra Space is the only active commercial space company to test both UBP (3) and Creep (2) on an inflatable softgoods architecture at sub or full scale and now with a blanking plate.“Inclusion of the blanking plate hard structure was a game-changer because this was the first time that we infused metallics into our softgoods pressure shell technology prior to conducting a UBP test,” said Sr. Director Engineering and Product Evolution Director for Sierra Space Destinations, Shawn Buckley. “With this added component, once again, we successfully demonstrated that LIFE’s current architecture at one-third scale meets the minimum 4x safety factor required for softgoods inflatables structures. This is a phenomenal achievement and provides the necessary engineering foundation that allows us to move into the next phase of the LIFE product line development – full-scale testing of LIFE.”Once fully developed, the LIFE habitat will house a minimum of two windows, and they are a critical feature in the development of the LIFE habitat. They help crew members deal with any feelings of living in a confined space. More importantly, windows provide the crew an opportunity to witness the beauty of planet Earth in a way that can forever change them as people.“As pioneers in softgoods solutions, such as inflatable habitats, we are dedicated to advancing the next era of human spaceflight and sustaining life in low-Earth orbit,” said Robert Reed, President, Space and Engineered Solutions at ILC Dover. “The milestone of this recent burst test underscores our commitment to safeguarding explorers as they push the boundaries and embark on transformative journeys beyond our planet. We are proud to have contributed to this crucial endeavor and further showcase the reliability our inflatable habitat.”This recent UBP test was performed with support from NASA via a Reimbursable Space Act Agreement in which Marshall Space Flight Center provides services to Sierra Space in support of its exploration and commercial low-Earth orbit (LEO) technology development and risk reduction activities. The test occurred in Huntsville, Ala., on Redstone Arsenal in the flame trench of the historic Saturn 1/1B test stand.Sierra Space’s full-scale LIFE habitat product line is a key component of the company’s in-space destinations technology portfolio. The inflatable module is a three-story commercial habitation, science and bio pharma platform designed to allow humans to live and work comfortably in LEO and beyond. It is constructed of high strength, “softgoods” materials (sewn and woven fabrics, primarily Vectran) that become rigid structures when pressurized.
Our team is preparing for the biggest-ever "burst test" of our inflatable, expandable space station technology at @NASA_Marshall in Dec. 2023. This will be a significant milestone for Orbital Reef, in co-development with @BlueOrigin. Link:
Sierra Space Sets the Stage for Pioneering Full-Scale “Burst Test” of Expandable Space Station ModuleNOVEMBER 13, 2023| NEWSUnprecedented Test of Softgoods Structure is a Significant Milestone in the Development of World’s First Commercial Space Station, Orbital ReefLow-Volume Launches Become High-Volume Space Stations on OrbitLOUISVILLE, Colo. – Nov. 13, 2023 – Sierra Space, a leading pureplay commercial space company building the first end-to-end business and technology platform in space, announced today that it is on the brink of a historic moment as the company prepares for its biggest-ever “burst test” of Sierra Space’s inflatable, expandable space station technology.This groundbreaking endeavor marks a critical step in Sierra Space’s co-development of Orbital Reef with Blue Origin, as the company plans to stress test – for the first time in history – a full-scale version of its LIFE™ habitat structure and bring the unit to failure under pressure. LIFE is constructed of high-strength “softgoods” materials, which are sewn and woven fabrics – primarily Vectran – that become rigid structures when pressurized on orbit. To date, Sierra Space has conducted five stress tests on subscale test articles; this next one will be 18x larger – nearly 300 m³ of pressurized volume.Full-Scale LIFE Habitat at MSFCScheduled for December 2023 at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., the Ultimate Burst Pressure (UBP) test is expected to provide Sierra Space and the Orbital Reef program team with critical data in support of NASA’s softgoods certification guidelines. The over-pressurization to failure during the test will not only demonstrate the habitat’s capabilities but also open avenues for structural enhancements.Sierra Space’s expandable space station module technology is highly scalable and flexible to all existing and planned launch vehicle fairing sizes. The softgoods structures launch packed inside conventional rocket fairings – 5m, 7m, 9m and beyond – inflating to capacity on orbit. Low-volume launches become high-volume space stations. The module volume will always be the square of its expansion diameter. For example, with a 2.5x expandable configuration, the volume would be 6.25x of a rocket fairing.“Sierra Space’s inflatable space station module technology offers the absolute largest in-space pressured volume, the best unit economics per on-orbit volume and lowest launch and total operating costs,” said Sierra Space CEO Tom Vice. “Having the best unit economics positions Sierra Space as the category leader in microgravity research and product development – providing customers with the most attractive return on their investment.”Key Dimensions:Full scale LIFE habitat with a height of 20.5 feet (Total height with ground support equipment: 29.5 feet)Diameter: 27 feetVolume: 10,000 cubic feet (283.17 m3)Current Progress:All components and ground support equipment are in the integration phase at NASA Marshall Space Flight CenterUpcoming Steps:Softgoods integration into the test stand will be followed by transportation, utilizing the legendary NASA KAMAG transporter tractor, to the historic testing location adjacent to the flame trench of the Saturn 1/1B test stand — where NASA tested rockets for the Apollo programSetup and calibration of sensors and cameras, alongside operational run-throughs, will prepare for the full-scale UBP test in December 2023Objectives and Lessons Learned:The recent successes of subscale burst tests have emboldened Sierra Space to undertake the full-scale burst test with confidenceSierra Space aims to further refine its technical approach to safety factors and structural integrity through this testInsights from previous tests contribute to technical maturation in support of higher-fidelity manufacturing processesCore Materials and Blanking Plates:The restraint layer for LIFE is constructed of high-strength “softgoods” materials, which are sewn and woven fabrics – primarily Vectran – that become rigid structures when pressurizedUnder normal operating pressure, the Vectran softgoods materials become 5x stronger than steel, exceeding station lifetime performance safety factorsThe restraint layer is complemented by a bladder allowing controlled inflation and pressurization to ultimate burst pressure test failureTwo metallic blanking plates are strategically inserted into the restraint layer, designed for seamless integration into the structural shell with minimal performance degradation or knockdown; blanking plates are metal placeholders for integrating windows, airlocks, robotic arms and other features, into the softgoods layer
Our team has completed the first ever, full-scale ultimate burst pressure test for our commercial space station at @NASA_Marshall. We look forward to sharing more in January 2024.YouTube:
Last value shown before burst was 534 kPa (77.45 psi)
Boeing's Starliner, IIRC from BO's public material about the station.
From the video, they expect the manned version of Dreamchaser to visit any new commercial station.IMHO.
Quote from: Solarsail on 01/23/2024 06:58 amBoeing's Starliner, IIRC from BO's public material about the station.Somebody needs to inform Boeing then because the last I knew Boeing said that there is no business case for Starliner after ISS. And Boeing has shown NO interest in continuing the program.Also AFAIK there are no plans to human rate Vulcan for post Atlas retirement.And it is unlikely that Falcon-9 will be tasked to lift Starliner.Maybe Blue Origin will buy Starliner from Boeing and adapt it to New Glenn?Jeff Bazo's long term plans include flying people so perhaps purchasing Starliner would be a foot in the door. Either way I don't see Boeing being involved after the Atlas inventory is used. So either station staffing will done by SpaceX in a Dragon and/or (eventually) Starship or BO gets into the human spacecraft business by either purchasing Starliner or creating its own spacecraft from scratch.
Who knows what launch vehicle.
Quote from: Kansan52 on 01/23/2024 02:13 pmWho knows what launch vehicle.Yeah, that's a question I've pondered before. Making station access as inexpensive as possible will help keep station utilization has high as possible, which should be a good thing.So, do you qualify Crew DreamChaser on Vulcan? If so, you'll keep dissimilar redundancy vs. F9, but you'll need to pay to have Vulcan crew-rated, and each mission will cost more due to Vulcan's pricing vs. F9.Or do you qualify Crew DC on Falcon 9? You'll lose dissimilar redundancy, but F9 is already crew-rated, and is a not-insignificant amount less expensive to launch than Vulcan. You may lose flights due to redundancy requirements (read: client doesn't want to launch with SpaceX), but you might gain flights because a lower cost expands your potential client pool.Or maybe Terran-R? You retain dissimilar redundancy, and potentially have F9-like pricing, but probably pay for crew-rating, and launch on a rocket with even less flight history than Vulcan will have in 2026+.Going forward, I think Vulcan's higher costs will bite ULA, as not every client is Amazon (or NASA, with cargo DC being on Vulcan) with enough funds to not care about several tens of millions more per flight. Less money being spent getting there means more money available to do whatever it is you're actually there for.I think I'd primarily fly on the cheaper F9 to maximize client base and, thus, DreamChaser -- and space station! -- revenue. For insurance, I'd keep an eye on Relativity's progress, and if Terran-R looks promising, then crew-rate it and shift flights from F9 to Terran-R on an as-needed basis to maximize revenue. Else if Relativity stumbles, crew-rate Vulcan and buy an option on a flight or two as insurance, but still mostly flying F9 to the station.
Quote from: GreenShrike on 01/23/2024 09:00 pmQuote from: Kansan52 on 01/23/2024 02:13 pmWho knows what launch vehicle.Yeah, that's a question I've pondered before. Making station access as inexpensive as possible will help keep station utilization has high as possible, which should be a good thing.So, do you qualify Crew DreamChaser on Vulcan? If so, you'll keep dissimilar redundancy vs. F9, but you'll need to pay to have Vulcan crew-rated, and each mission will cost more due to Vulcan's pricing vs. F9.Or do you qualify Crew DC on Falcon 9? You'll lose dissimilar redundancy, but F9 is already crew-rated, and is a not-insignificant amount less expensive to launch than Vulcan. You may lose flights due to redundancy requirements (read: client doesn't want to launch with SpaceX), but you might gain flights because a lower cost expands your potential client pool.Or maybe Terran-R? You retain dissimilar redundancy, and potentially have F9-like pricing, but probably pay for crew-rating, and launch on a rocket with even less flight history than Vulcan will have in 2026+.Going forward, I think Vulcan's higher costs will bite ULA, as not every client is Amazon (or NASA, with cargo DC being on Vulcan) with enough funds to not care about several tens of millions more per flight. Less money being spent getting there means more money available to do whatever it is you're actually there for.I think I'd primarily fly on the cheaper F9 to maximize client base and, thus, DreamChaser -- and space station! -- revenue. For insurance, I'd keep an eye on Relativity's progress, and if Terran-R looks promising, then crew-rate it and shift flights from F9 to Terran-R on an as-needed basis to maximize revenue. Else if Relativity stumbles, crew-rate Vulcan and buy an option on a flight or two as insurance, but still mostly flying F9 to the station.Tory Bruno has said that the Vulcan was designed and built with crew rating in mind / lessons learned from Atlas V crew rating, so I expect it should be a very straightforward process should anyone want to launch a crew vehicle on Vulcan. One you forgot - New Glenn was also designed with crew rating in mind. Their big launch tower at LC-36 has crew access pathways built in. New Glenn should be significantly cheaper than Vulcan as well.
Can NG launch crewed DC? Crewed DC needs to be "naked". Not inside a fairing. Starship will not be able to launch Crewed DC.
They REALLY had to get a insult in at the end of the video "We are not a company that thinks we oughta leave the planet"
Quote from: cpushack on 01/24/2024 12:16 amThey REALLY had to get a insult in at the end of the video "We are not a company that thinks we oughta leave the planet" It wasn't an insult. It was a statement of company goals. They want to create an orbital research outpost which focuses on earth-based needs that can only be properly addressed in microgravity.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 01/23/2024 11:08 pmTory Bruno has said that the Vulcan was designed and built with crew rating in mind / lessons learned from Atlas V crew rating, so I expect it should be a very straightforward process should anyone want to launch a crew vehicle on Vulcan. One you forgot - New Glenn was also designed with crew rating in mind. Their big launch tower at LC-36 has crew access pathways built in. New Glenn should be significantly cheaper than Vulcan as well.Can NG launch crewed DC? Crewed DC needs to be "naked". Not inside a fairing.
Tory Bruno has said that the Vulcan was designed and built with crew rating in mind / lessons learned from Atlas V crew rating, so I expect it should be a very straightforward process should anyone want to launch a crew vehicle on Vulcan. One you forgot - New Glenn was also designed with crew rating in mind. Their big launch tower at LC-36 has crew access pathways built in. New Glenn should be significantly cheaper than Vulcan as well.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 01/24/2024 12:20 amQuote from: whitelancer64 on 01/23/2024 11:08 pmTory Bruno has said that the Vulcan was designed and built with crew rating in mind / lessons learned from Atlas V crew rating, so I expect it should be a very straightforward process should anyone want to launch a crew vehicle on Vulcan. One you forgot - New Glenn was also designed with crew rating in mind. Their big launch tower at LC-36 has crew access pathways built in. New Glenn should be significantly cheaper than Vulcan as well.Can NG launch crewed DC? Crewed DC needs to be "naked". Not inside a fairing. I don't see why it would not be able to.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 01/24/2024 03:20 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 01/24/2024 12:20 amQuote from: whitelancer64 on 01/23/2024 11:08 pmTory Bruno has said that the Vulcan was designed and built with crew rating in mind / lessons learned from Atlas V crew rating, so I expect it should be a very straightforward process should anyone want to launch a crew vehicle on Vulcan. One you forgot - New Glenn was also designed with crew rating in mind. Their big launch tower at LC-36 has crew access pathways built in. New Glenn should be significantly cheaper than Vulcan as well.Can NG launch crewed DC? Crewed DC needs to be "naked". Not inside a fairing. I don't see why it would not be able to.I think this implies a non-reusable US, which in turn affects the ultimate cost. It would compete with F9/Crew Dragon and with Starliner/Atlas, but not with the eventual crewed Starship.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 01/24/2024 03:33 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 01/24/2024 03:20 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 01/24/2024 12:20 amQuote from: whitelancer64 on 01/23/2024 11:08 pmTory Bruno has said that the Vulcan was designed and built with crew rating in mind / lessons learned from Atlas V crew rating, so I expect it should be a very straightforward process should anyone want to launch a crew vehicle on Vulcan. One you forgot - New Glenn was also designed with crew rating in mind. Their big launch tower at LC-36 has crew access pathways built in. New Glenn should be significantly cheaper than Vulcan as well.Can NG launch crewed DC? Crewed DC needs to be "naked". Not inside a fairing. I don't see why it would not be able to.I think this implies a non-reusable US, which in turn affects the ultimate cost. It would compete with F9/Crew Dragon and with Starliner/Atlas, but not with the eventual crewed Starship.As-is, New Glenn does not have a reusable upper stage.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 01/24/2024 04:03 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 01/24/2024 03:33 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 01/24/2024 03:20 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 01/24/2024 12:20 amQuote from: whitelancer64 on 01/23/2024 11:08 pmTory Bruno has said that the Vulcan was designed and built with crew rating in mind / lessons learned from Atlas V crew rating, so I expect it should be a very straightforward process should anyone want to launch a crew vehicle on Vulcan. One you forgot - New Glenn was also designed with crew rating in mind. Their big launch tower at LC-36 has crew access pathways built in. New Glenn should be significantly cheaper than Vulcan as well.Can NG launch crewed DC? Crewed DC needs to be "naked". Not inside a fairing. I don't see why it would not be able to.I think this implies a non-reusable US, which in turn affects the ultimate cost. It would compete with F9/Crew Dragon and with Starliner/Atlas, but not with the eventual crewed Starship.As-is, New Glenn does not have a reusable upper stage.Yep. I considered that. Unfortunately the name "New Glenn" by itself can mean either the initial partially-reusable version or the eventual fully-reusable version. The typical payload will eventually benefit from full reusability. DC will not, and this may affect the long-term viability of DC.
Have SNC confirmed DC200 must be launched unfaired? Of the three human spaceflight systems currently in active operation, two of them are faired and retain abort capability, so keeping crew vehicles unfaired is not a hard requirement. It would require a custom fairing (for abort motor mounts and vehicle links) that may need modification to mate with different launch vehicles, but customisation for different launch vehicles would be required anyway even if unfaired, to handle the aerodynamic asymmetry issue, and to handle different abort mode requirements for different vehicle ascent profiles.
Sierra Space’s DC-200 crewed spaceplane variant will be launched in a similar configuration but without a fairing, which will still offer protection from debris since the rocket will be located below the vehicle.
Someone at Sierra Space need to make a decision soon about which launcher is the Dreamchaser series 200 vehicles are launching on.There is currently only one choice that is cheap and launches frequently. Other choices is much more expensive on brand new or yet to fly launchers that already has big manifests.So in summary there isn't really an alternative to the folks from Hawthorne if you want to launch a crew vehicle safely, cheap and often, IMO. Maybe a second launch provider might be added later for pricey redundancy. However the beancounters will likely objected that adding a new launcher is costly and comes with unproven launch reliability.
DC-200 specific crew access arm construction at a launchpad will be a dead giveaway of who they would attempt to certify with. SpaceX would have to mod their arm, Vulcan has provisioning for a crew access arm, but there doesn't seem to be yet talk about it being multi-tenant/multi-vehicle adaptable.
The discussion over picking and crew-rating a launcher seems to be putting the cart before the horse to me; where is SNC going to get the billions of additional funding to complete and crew rate the DreamChaser itself? Compared to that shortfall, paying for crew-rating a launcher is small potatoes.
Quote from: abaddon on 01/24/2024 09:57 pmThe discussion over picking and crew-rating a launcher seems to be putting the cart before the horse to me; where is SNC going to get the billions of additional funding to complete and crew rate the DreamChaser itself? Compared to that shortfall, paying for crew-rating a launcher is small potatoes.It depends in large part on the owners of the company, Eren Ozmen & Fatih Ozmen, and how committed they are to developing a crew-rated spacecraft. While they do not have as deep pockets as Elon Musk does, they are independently wealthy enough to take a similar path as he did and self-fund that effort. But before they do that I would think that they would need to nail down what launch vehicle to use. The entire future of the Dreamchaser spacecraft, crewed or not, comes down to that choice.
Of course, given the shaky future of Starliner, NASA might be interested in helping to fund that effort once Dreamchaser 200 has demonstrated a couple of safe flights.
Sierra Space raised $1.4 billion in November 2021, and $290 million in a second funding round in September 2023. Presumably a chunk of that $1.7 billion is going to DC-200.
Quote from: clongton on 01/25/2024 09:09 pmQuote from: abaddon on 01/24/2024 09:57 pmThe discussion over picking and crew-rating a launcher seems to be putting the cart before the horse to me; where is SNC going to get the billions of additional funding to complete and crew rate the DreamChaser itself? Compared to that shortfall, paying for crew-rating a launcher is small potatoes.It depends in large part on the owners of the company, Eren Ozmen & Fatih Ozmen, and how committed they are to developing a crew-rated spacecraft. While they do not have as deep pockets as Elon Musk does, they are independently wealthy enough to take a similar path as he did and self-fund that effort. But before they do that I would think that they would need to nail down what launch vehicle to use. The entire future of the Dreamchaser spacecraft, crewed or not, comes down to that choice.Recall there was some bad blood between the Ozmens and Musk in the past.However if the Ozmens wants the Dreamchaser 200 (crew-rated) to happen. They have to consider the cost, reliability and availability of a launcher for the Dreamchaser 200. The launcher choice will likely impact on getting customers and overall vehicle development cost. The Ozmens don't have spare cash for the luxury of a no SpaceX policy like Jeff Bezos did with Project Kuiper.It was a mistake in hindsight with the cargo Dreamchaser launching on the Vulcan. Which is late and and have a manifest backlog along with a higher launch cost.
Well, I found the artist's impression of Orbital Reef: There's a CST-100 docked to it, and the article makes ambiguous reference to Boeing being involved.https://spacenews.com/orbital-reef-passes-nasa-review/ (From 2022)
Several other companies and organizations will participate on Orbital Reef. Boeing will provide a science module and its CST-100 Starliner crew vehicle, as well as handling station operations, maintenance and engineering
It won't be able to compete with other stations that use the much cheaper Dragon transport.
I want to repeat something I've said before. I got a chance to visit SNC's (before the name change) press event for LIFE (now LIFE 1.0). It's HUGE. It was three levels and felt a lot like the inside of my two-story + basement house. These larger ones, if they ever exist, will feel like auditoriums.
LIFE’s Testing StatusOur LIFE technology is decades in the making. Backed by a talented and driven team of engineers and scientists, our goal is to reach structural perfection in the near future.We have gone through a lengthy development journey including numerous stress tests to make this a reality.A stress test assesses the structure’s resilience under the most extreme conditions. Previous tests, such as the Ultimate Burst Pressure (UBP) test, dealt with the maximum pressure that the inflatable craft could contain—all of which were overwhelmingly successful.During a UBP test, the teams inflate the test article until it fails, which helps determine how strong its softgoods materials would be under extreme stresses in the harsh environment of space.Our team achieved a groundbreaking UBP milestone in December by successfully designing, manufacturing, assembling, and testing our first full-scale LIFE 285, expandable space station structure. The test unit stood over 20’ tall (comparable in size to an average family home) and was 1/3 the volume of the International Space Station. Test results exceeded NASA’s recommended x4 safety levels by 27%.We also conducted Accelerated Systematic sub scale (LIFE10) creep tests, which determined the maximum time that the softgoods structure could withstand high pressure to calculate overall life expectancy in years. Sierra Space’s and NASA’s suggested guideline targets were short and medium duration tests based on 100 and 1,000 hours, and our softgoods shell lasted well over 150 hours on the short duration and met the medium duration performance expectations, marking a huge step in the future of human space habitation.Our team is continuing to push the boundaries of the softgoods inflatable habitat technology by leveraging advancements in LIFE 10 (10 cubic meters) LIFE 285 (285 cubic meters) and now introducing LIFE 500 (500 cubic meters). We will continue to conduct test campaigns in 2024 and early 2025 by testing two LIFE 10, two LIFE 285, and one LIFE 500.
Sierra Space Continues to Lead the Industry in the Development of the First Business-Ready Commercial Space StationSierra Space, a leading commercial space-tech company and next generation defense-tech prime building a platform in space to benefit life on Earth and protect the freedom of economic activity in the Orbital Age®, announced today that its expandable space station technology is scheduled for its seventh key validation test, and second full-scale structural test, this June at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala.Completion of successful testing next month will accelerate this innovative technology to on-orbit operations. The test article in the company’s historic first full-scale burst test last December reached 77 psi before it burst, which well exceeded (+27%) NASA’s recommended level of 60.8 psi (maximum operating pressure of 15.2 psi multiplied by a safety factor of four). Sierra Space is the only space company that has advanced to full-scale structural testing of commercial space station technology.The company’s second full-scale test next month will be another Ultimate Burst Pressure (UBP) test to validate the technology’s ability to perform flawlessly in the unforgiving conditions of space. The test article, currently in assembly, is equivalent to one third the volume of the entire International Space Station (ISS).The upcoming test will also mark another milestone in Sierra Space’s co-development of Orbital Reef with Blue Origin, along with the technical maturation of its LIFE® (Large Integrated Flexible Environment) product line of expandable “softgoods” modules. The modules are launched (packed) inside a standard rocket fairing and can expand up to 6x in size once on orbit. The LIFE pressure shell is constructed of high-strength woven fabric materials, or softgoods, consisting primarily of Vectran, which form rigid structures when pressurized on orbit.In addition to this technology being used by Sierra Space and Blue Origin as part of their Orbital Reef partnership, it will also be employed by Sierra Space for the company’s pathfinder space station, which will be focused on biotech use cases.
Our team is preparing for the second LIFE 285 full-scale burst test of our space station technology at @NASA_Marshall in June. The full-scale test article features an updated blanking plate design and interface, along with improvements in manufacturing, assembly, and integration.
Sierra Space, a leading commercial space company and emerging defense tech prime building a platform in space to benefit and protect life on Earth, announced today its collaboration with Japan-based partners on a cutting-edge passive docking system, or PDS, that will be integrated into the company’s new commercial space station platform. The system is being developed jointly by IHI Aerospace Co., Ltd., a principal contributor to Japan’s space engineering expertise, and Kanematsu Corporation, a global trading powerhouse.The new PDS system – an integral element facilitating secure and efficient spacecraft docking including with Sierra Space’s Dream Chaser® spaceplane – will be developed in accordance with the International Docking System Standard (IDSS). IHI Aerospace’s solution is designed to offer simplicity, versatility and utmost reliability in space docking operations.(...)
Our LIFE285 Ultimate Burst Pressure test article's softgoods integration instrumentation, painting and photogrammetry preparation has been completed. The test article passed a rigorous inspection prior to being transported for a low pressurization test located at @NASA_Marshall.
We are "bursting" with enthusiasm at @NASA_Marshall - where we are set for a historic second full-scale burst test of our inflatable space station technology.
Jul 25, 2024Sierra Space, a leading commercial space-tech company that is Building a Platform in Space to Benefit Life on Earth®, announced today that its expandable space station technology successfully passed a seventh key validation test, and second full-scale structural test, at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The results herald a giant leap towards building the world’s first end-to-end business and technology platform in Low Earth Orbit, enabling humanity to find the answers to some of the toughest problems faced on Earth.Completion of the successful Ultimate Burst Pressure test, which occurred on June 18 in collaboration with ILC Dover Astrospace and NASA, accelerates Sierra Space’s revolutionary softgoods technology towards on-orbit operations. Planned for an initial stand-alone pathfinder mission before the end of the decade, the technology will also feature as a key element of the Orbital Reef commercial space station. The test will close out Milestone #8 for Orbital Reef with Blue Origin under NASA’s Commercial Low Earth Orbit Development Program.
The latest test by the numbers: • Company’s second Ultimate Burst Pressure test of a full-size, inflatable space station structure occurred on June 18 • Test unit stood over 20’ tall and was comparable in size to an average family home • The article was 300 m³ in volume, or 1/3rd the volume of the International Space Station • Test results exceeded NASA’s recommended x4 safety levels by 22% • Two 4-ft x 4-ft steel blanking plates were integrated into the highest loaded cylinder section of the article; both were 50 lbs. lighter than the ones used in the first full-scale test and accommodate larger windowsThe test article in the company’s historic first full-scale burst test last December peaked at 77 psi, which well exceeded (+27%) NASA’s recommended level of 60.8 psi (maximum operating pressure of 15.2 psi multiplied by a safety factor of four). This most recent test in June showed similar results – within five percent of the pressure loading of December’s test article – with this one reaching 74 psi, exceeding NASA’s 4x safety factor by 22 percent. These back-to-back test results accelerate Sierra Space’s path to flight certification, verifying scalability for 10 cubic-meter and up to 1,400 cubic-meter structures based on the company’s current softgoods inflatable architecture. Sierra Space is currently gearing up for a first test of its 500 cubic-meter space station technology next year.“No other company is moving at the speed of Sierra Space to develop actual hardware, stress-tested at full scale, and demonstrate repeatability. We’ve taken a softgoods system that very few companies around the world have been able to design, and now we have consistent, back-to-back results,” said Shawn Buckley, VP of Earthspace™ Systems, Space Stations, at Sierra Space. “A second successful full-scale test is an absolute game changer. We now know it’s possible to equal or surpass the total habitable volume of the entire International Space Station, in a single launch.”The test article once again included two four-foot by four-foot blanking plates – metallic structures inserted into the softgoods shell to emulate a future design component, such as a window, robotic arm or antenna attachment point. They were 50 pounds lighter than the ones used in the first full-scale test and designed to accommodate larger windows.In the ever-evolving landscape of space exploration and commercialization, Sierra Space’s Large Integrated Flexible Environment (LIFE®) technology stands as a pioneering concept that will reshape how humans live and work in space. LIFE launches on a conventional rocket and inflates on orbit. The first LIFE product in the roadmap is a large, three-story structure that is 27 feet in diameter. It can comfortably sleep four astronauts, with additional room for science experiments, exercise equipment, a medical center and Astro Garden® system, which can grow fresh produce for astronauts on long-duration space missions.
NASA, Sierra Space, and ILC Dover recently conducted the second full-scale ultimate burst pressure test on Sierra Space’s LIFE (Large Integrated Flexible Environment) habitat using testing capabilities at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.
Last month, we announced the second successful LIFE 285 Ultimate Burst Pressure test. The second test was within 5% of the the first test result, with this test article reaching 74 psi, exceeding NASA’s 4x safety factor by 22 percent. Full video: https://bit.ly/4fC7S62
Sierra Space, a leading commercial space-tech company that is Building a Platform in Space to Benefit Life on Earth®, announced today that its expandable space station technology successfully passed a seventh key validation test, and second full-scale structural test, at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The results herald a giant leap towards building the world’s first end-to-end business and technology platform in Low Earth Orbit, enabling humanity to find the answers to some of the toughest problems faced on Earth.Completion of the successful Ultimate Burst Pressure test, which occurred on June 18 in collaboration with ILC Dover Astrospace and NASA, accelerates Sierra Space’s revolutionary softgoods technology towards on-orbit operations. Planned for an initial stand-alone pathfinder mission before the end of the decade, the technology will also feature as a key element of the Orbital Reef commercial space station. The test will close out Milestone #8 for Orbital Reef with Blue Origin under NASA’s Commercial Low Earth Orbit Development Program.
We are in the final steps of softgoods certification for our LIFE 10 pressure shell test. Since 2022, we have surpassed NASA’s certification recommendations on six sub-scale inflatable units.
Nov 20, 2024We have successfully completed our sixth stress test and fourth Ultimate Burst Pressure (UBP) test for our LIFE® 10 commercial space station technology, achieving a rupture at 255 psi, the highest pressure yet. This test exceeded NASA's Factor of Safety recommendations, demonstrating a safety factor greater than 16x in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and 23x in lunar environments. Our team continues to lead in the development of expandable structures for various space applications, as we build the world's first commercial space station.Press Release: https://www.sierraspace.com/press-releases/sierra-spaces-commercial-space-station-technology-nears-certification/
In this virtual field trip, Sierra Space engineer and program manager Beth Licavoli will walk us through the production of the inflatable habitat, explain how they test the structure of the habitat, and give us a tour inside a fully inflated habitat.
Interesting that both Bigelow and now Sierra both lay out their floors longitudinally rather than radially.
Quote from: edzieba on 12/11/2024 11:18 amInteresting that both Bigelow and now Sierra both lay out their floors longitudinally rather than radially. It's always been that way.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=53484.msg2215037#msg2215037
Quote from: Lee Jay on 12/11/2024 01:59 pmQuote from: edzieba on 12/11/2024 11:18 amInteresting that both Bigelow and now Sierra both lay out their floors longitudinally rather than radially. It's always been that way.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=53484.msg2215037#msg2215037NASA's original layout for TransHab was radial.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransHabThen Bigelow purchased the rights from NASA to develop it. But the longitudinal layout was adopted early on when habitat planners couldn't make the radial layout work in an inflatable that size. It was just too restrictive.
Quote from: clongton on 12/11/2024 05:52 pmQuote from: Lee Jay on 12/11/2024 01:59 pmQuote from: edzieba on 12/11/2024 11:18 amInteresting that both Bigelow and now Sierra both lay out their floors longitudinally rather than radially. It's always been that way.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=53484.msg2215037#msg2215037NASA's original layout for TransHab was radial.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransHabThen Bigelow purchased the rights from NASA to develop it. But the longitudinal layout was adopted early on when habitat planners couldn't make the radial layout work in an inflatable that size. It was just too restrictive.I meant since the first version from Sierra.
Nobody has claimed otherwise, Sierra/SNC have always made their layouts public since their inflatables programme was announced.The question is why longitudinal rather than radial, not when.
For over 20 years, we have been at the forefront of researching how to grow plants in space.Our Astro Garden system is a large-scale vegetable production system that uses hydroponics to grow plants without soil and offers a sustainable means of producing fresh food fresh food for crew while also augmenting life support functions such as water purification, carbon dioxide removal and oxygen production.We are committed to pushing the boundaries of technology to create solutions that benefit both long-duration space missions and our planet.Link: https://sierraspace.com/space-technology/microgravity-environmental-systems/space-station-payloads/
Sierra Space announced today that it recently conducted successful hypervelocity impact trials at NASA’s White Sands Test Facility in Las Cruces, New Mexico, to optimize the structural integrity of Sierra Space’s Large Integrated Flexible Environment (LIFE®) habitat. The goal of this NASA-supported testing was to refine a shield for the company’s expandable, flexible space station structure to make it capable of withstanding impacts from hazards on orbit.The LIFE habitat’s shield, constructed from innovative, high-strength, flexible “softgoods” – a chemically-woven fabric material called Vectran® – provides a lightweight yet durable alternative to traditional rigid structures. The Sierra Space and NASA test teams used a two-stage light gas gun to simulate micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) impacts to LIFE’s outer shield. The testing aimed to select materials and configurations that enhance the habitat’s shielding performance while achieving significant mass savings – critical for space missions.[...]The impact testing, conducted under an unfunded Space Act Agreement called Collaborations for Commercial Space Capabilities (CCSC-2), used NASA’s .50 caliber two-stage light gas gun to replicate MMOD traveling at speeds around seven kilometers per second. Housed in the Remote Hypervelocity Test Laboratory, the gun uses gunpowder (the first stage) and highly compressed hydrogen (the second stage) to accelerate projectiles at high velocities to simulate orbital debris impacts on spacecraft and satellite materials and components. Testing is conducted in a near vacuum chamber to simulate space conditions.Material Selection and Testing ProcessThe impact trials were conducted in two phases. The first grouping of shots varied the softgoods materials while keeping gun parameters constant, simulating MMOD impacts to directly compare how each material performed. After identifying the most promising materials, the team adjusted gun parameters to develop an equation characterizing the efficacy and performance of the selected shield stack. During the tests, 40 experimental shots were fired toward the materials to confirm the configuration selection. Once the team had established a strong but mass-efficient shield configuration, 19 additional shots were discharged at the material. These efforts were critical to mitigate future risks posed by MMOD—tiny, high-speed particles that can cause significant damage to spacecraft and habitats in orbit.Sierra Space team members traveled to White Sands to observe the shots firsthand and collaborate on real-time adjustments to the follow-on tests based on immediate results. This hands-on approach allowed for rapid, data-driven decisions to refine the shield design.
Any updates when they go to launch the LIFE module prototype?
