Author Topic: Bigelow Aerospace Update and Discussion Thread (3)  (Read 661128 times)

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #340 on: 01/06/2014 10:51 pm »
« Last Edit: 01/06/2014 10:54 pm by Ronsmytheiii »

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 544
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #341 on: 02/02/2014 02:37 am »
Jeff Foust "Here's a preview of the event, based on advance copy of the report: http://bit.ly/1eIEngT"
Does anyone have a copy of the report?
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #343 on: 02/03/2014 06:49 am »
Thoughts on whether his declared ability to fund two significantly up the odds that he'll be able to fund one?

The real number is zero.

Let me review the bidding. BA has been at it since about 1998, predicting mid-term space platforms. BA has launched a couple of subscale modules, and has been awarded a NASA contract for  a larger base-bones module.

Extrapolate the trend.

Next Bigelow needs to sell NASA a module with ECLSS.

Offline WmThomas

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 163
  • An objective space fan
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 5217
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #344 on: 02/05/2014 08:05 pm »
Forgive my ignorance, but what good does it do to test a space pressure vessel under water? It will face less external, not more, when it is in space.

Offline sublimemarsupial

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 386
  • Liked: 261
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #345 on: 02/05/2014 08:15 pm »
Forgive my ignorance, but what good does it do to test a space pressure vessel under water? It will face less external, not more, when it is in space.

You can just pressurize the inside of the pressure vessel such that the overall pressure difference between the internal and external environments is the same as it'll see in space, that gets the loading correct. Testing in the water helps mitigate the energy release if the pressure vessel fails.

Offline mheney

  • The Next Man on the Moon
  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 780
  • Silver Spring, MD
  • Liked: 398
  • Likes Given: 199
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #346 on: 02/06/2014 01:31 am »
Plus, if it leaks, you see bubbles ...

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #347 on: 02/06/2014 03:34 pm »
When testing the life support on a spacecraft you have to ensure that any air being breathed is not coming from the Earth's atmosphere.  In addition the seals around the hatches have to be tested as well as the carbon dioxide scrubbers.

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #348 on: 02/06/2014 03:37 pm »
Plus, if it leaks, you see bubbles ...

Perhaps not, they may be pressurizing it with water. In that case it's done in a pool because of the buoyancy.

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2443
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 410
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #349 on: 02/07/2014 09:07 pm »
Didnt someone here insist that Bigelows habitats are unsuitable for the moon?

The habitat would need a floor but that is not hard to provide.

The other problem with the Moon is that a BA330 weighs 20 tonne.  We do not have any lunar landers that can take payloads that big.  Developing such a lander would be a major project.

You're forgetting Bigelow's plan is to berth three BA-330's and four propulsion busses in LLO or at L1 then land them under their own steam - no separate lander necessary unless you count the legged propulsion busses.

Google Patents....

If you were to replace the docking node module with a cre cabin of sorts, you'd have a fairly decent horizontal lunar lander.  If it has enough fuel after landing, it could even be reusable.
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6466
  • Liked: 4572
  • Likes Given: 5136
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #350 on: 02/11/2014 07:11 pm »
Plus, if it leaks, you see bubbles ...

Perhaps not, they may be pressurizing it with water. In that case it's done in a pool because of the buoyancy.

Doesn't it have to be mostly full of water because it is not floating?
sublimemarsupial has it right.  Just like testing SCUBA tanks, there is very little stored energy if most of the volume is filled with water, leaving only a small pocket of compressed gas with which the pressure is regulated.  If the vessel bursts there is little energy to dissipate, as opposed to a full tank of (8X!) full pressure gas.  Plus if it does burst it does so into water, so fragments don't fly away.

edit: Does anyone have isight into how they are doing with the schedule for a June 2015 launch?
Is the system being tested the flight system or a development unit?
« Last Edit: 02/11/2014 07:12 pm by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #351 on: 02/18/2014 12:54 am »
« Last Edit: 02/18/2014 12:55 am by yg1968 »

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #352 on: 02/18/2014 01:35 am »
Bigelow: Manned missions from Wallops?

http://www.delmarvanow.com/article/20140217/NEWS/302170016/

To be easily accessible from Wallops the Bigelow space stations would have to be in a similar orbit to the ISS.

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1459
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 914
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #353 on: 02/18/2014 02:42 am »
What would they use for a launch vehicle and spacecraft?
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6466
  • Liked: 4572
  • Likes Given: 5136
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #354 on: 02/18/2014 03:59 am »
Bigelow: Manned missions from Wallops?

http://www.delmarvanow.com/article/20140217/NEWS/302170016/

To be easily accessible from Wallops the Bigelow space stations would have to be in a similar orbit to the ISS.

It depends on what you mean by "similar"

Wallops is at 37.9 deg N.   Orbits directly accessible from there can be up to 13 deg lower inclination than the 51.6 deg inclination of the ISS.

A 2007 NSF article by Braddock Gaskill said
"ULA has recommended to Bigelow that it place their space station in a 264 nmi (428 km) circular repeating ground track orbit at 41 degrees inclination that would provide daily launch opportunities.
The repeating ground track would bring the station over the same locations on the Earth every day, and would provide crew landing opportunities four times per day at the Utah Test Range or Edwards AFB with minimal cross-range requirement."

This orbit would be compatible with Wallops and not very similar to the ISS.
edit:  This says nothing about using Atlas at Wallops.  It is quoted for the qualities of the proposed orbit
« Last Edit: 02/18/2014 04:01 am by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #355 on: 02/18/2014 10:02 am »
Bigelow: Manned missions from Wallops?

http://www.delmarvanow.com/article/20140217/NEWS/302170016/

To be easily accessible from Wallops the Bigelow space stations would have to be in a similar orbit to the ISS.

It depends on what you mean by "similar"
{snip}

Not 0 degrees and not 90 degrees.  The two obvious orbits for a space station.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #356 on: 02/18/2014 01:31 pm »
What would they use for a launch vehicle and spacecraft?
Probably a CST-100 on top of an upgraded and crew-rated Antares.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #357 on: 02/18/2014 01:34 pm »
What would they use for a launch vehicle and spacecraft?
Probably a CST-100 on top of an upgraded and crew-rated Antares.
That seems unlikely to me. CST-100 already requires a dual-RL-10, dual-SRB Atlas V. Antares would need to at least double its performance.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #358 on: 02/18/2014 01:39 pm »
@Robotbeat,

It's the only thing even remotely close to the right size that can launch from WFF without investing in a whole new pad and infrastructure. Maybe wrap-around Castor-120s and a larger or even liquid-fuelled U/S?
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (3)
« Reply #359 on: 02/18/2014 01:56 pm »
@Robotbeat,

It's the only thing even remotely close to the right size that can launch from WFF without investing in a whole new pad and infrastructure. Maybe wrap-around Castor-120s and a larger or even liquid-fuelled U/S?
I think he's just keeping his options open. You probably want the space station at around 40 degrees or more anyway, because otherwise you don't get to pass over the visitors' home country much.

I mean, much of the reason to build a space station is for Earth observation. Originally, when the first space station concepts were around, that was their primary purpose (for military space stations).
« Last Edit: 02/18/2014 08:42 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Tags:
 

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