And no, facility divestitures is nowhere close to be analogy or even a precedent. That is even lubricous to even make the comparison. A facility can exist with no maintenance for months and even years. Also, it can just remain a shell, empty of former equipment. Neither which can apply to a space vehicle. What NASA is "giving" away requires little money up front.
Quote from: Jim on 08/04/2014 01:24 amAnd no, facility divestitures is nowhere close to be analogy or even a precedent. That is even lubricous to even make the comparison. A facility can exist with no maintenance for months and even years. Also, it can just remain a shell, empty of former equipment. Neither which can apply to a space vehicle. What NASA is "giving" away requires little money up front. Trying to decide if Jim meant ludicrous or lubricious.
To me, Bigelow seems like a dinosaur, trying to do the "space startup thing" in the 21st century, while still having the previous century's mentality. Even relatively unimportant to their business things like their website look like a 1997 scam site, especially when you compare it to SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, Firefly, etc.A cutting edge technology company should embrace technology, not hide from it.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 07/05/2014 11:22 pmNASA would like smooth transition from ISS to a commercial station the question is when do they start that transition. If ISS doesn't get backing from the international partners for the 2024 extension then NASA needs to start that transition ASAP. Leasing some of a Bigelow station would start them in right direction. A Bigelow station should be able to duplicate ISS internal functions. The external facilities that ISS provides for experiments will be more expensive to duplicate.IMHO, the most likely scenario is that when the time comes, NASA and its international partners will divest themselves of the ISS to a commercial operator who operates, expands, consolidates, etc. the station's remaining capabilities depending on customer needs at the time.
NASA would like smooth transition from ISS to a commercial station the question is when do they start that transition. If ISS doesn't get backing from the international partners for the 2024 extension then NASA needs to start that transition ASAP. Leasing some of a Bigelow station would start them in right direction. A Bigelow station should be able to duplicate ISS internal functions. The external facilities that ISS provides for experiments will be more expensive to duplicate.
The major problem is that any commercial operator would be stuck having the Russians send Soyuz flights up to re-boost the station at intervals because that's a design-thing that can't be changed without major re-work...Randy
Soyuz does do not usually reboost ISS due to it's limited delta V instead Progress and the ATV usually handle that if the thrusters on the Russian modules are not used.
There's also plans to add a VASIMR engine to ISS which could be used for orbit maintenance.
Technically a commercial vehicle also should be able to perform reboot if it uses the ATV or Shuttle docking port as both non Russian vehicles have performed orbit raising burns from those ports.Dragon or the CST-100 should be capable of handling reboost operations with the right docking adapter.
Technically a commercial vehicle also should be able to perform reboot if it uses the ATV or Shuttle docking port as both non Russian vehicles have performed orbit raising burns from those ports.
atv uses russian docking mechanism and one of russian ports
Quote from: aga on 08/10/2014 06:28 amatv uses russian docking mechanism and one of russian portsMore to the point, it uses the perfect docking port for station reboost: where it can push on the port rather than pull, and where the line of thrust goes through the station center of gravity. Given the normal orientation of the ISS in orbit, it needs to accelerate with the USA end in front.
Mars-class missions will require crew life support for many hundreds of days at a minimum; a deep space habitation capability (hab) is critical for mission success. It is essential that the hab design receive thorough testing in a relevant deep space microgravity and high radiation environment—well before a final design and committing a crew on a Mars mission. The first deep space hab could be provided by a commercial or international partner, and could provide additional resources including power, EVA suits, stowage, science instruments, and advanced life support testing for Mars class missions as well as extend the in-space time of crewed Orion missions. The hab element also could facilitate additional docking ports to open the cis-lunar space to commercial and international missions in concert with or in addition to the Orion flights. In keeping with our space infrastructure reuse principle, a deep space hab also could provide a dual purpose, in addition to proving systems for Mars missions, by potentially serving as a staging point for lunar surface robotic science or human missions sought by our international partners. Based on the early results of orbital mechanics studies, the cis-lunar proving ground is a favorable location to test and develop the Mars class spacecraft systems prior to sending humans to pioneer Mars.
Exploration Augmentation Module Partnership: NASA is investigating concepts for deep space habitation module systems development. The deep space habitation module itself is likely to be provided by a commercial or international partner—or some hybrid of these.
Here is another potential commercial customer for a Bigelow station. http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/09/10/acme-advanced-materials-produces-commercial-sic-wafers-micogravity/The other big plus of in space manufacturing is that you have access to a large dust free vacuum environment. The vacuum allows materials to be made without oxidizing and free of gas bubbles.
FWIW, they made the wafers on a suborbital flight, not orbital.
Quote from: Llian Rhydderch on 07/30/2014 09:01 pmQuote from: A_M_Swallow on 07/30/2014 07:11 pmQuote from: matthewkantar on 07/30/2014 06:20 pm"this video has been removed by the user" Nice to have a screen shot of the docking gear though.MatthewIt was weird to have an advert that starts and stops with warnings about showing it.Agreed. And then it ended with a telephone number for "contact". Bigelow Aerospace, pushing backforward into the 20th Century!Unfortunately, the warnings and the absence of an email address are indicative of some of the, shall we say, peculiarities of the founder. He doesn't do email, nor accept them in his office. Reads through a stack of daily faxes printed out by his secretary however.Oldschoolness is such an adorable thing
Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 07/30/2014 07:11 pmQuote from: matthewkantar on 07/30/2014 06:20 pm"this video has been removed by the user" Nice to have a screen shot of the docking gear though.MatthewIt was weird to have an advert that starts and stops with warnings about showing it.Agreed. And then it ended with a telephone number for "contact". Bigelow Aerospace, pushing backforward into the 20th Century!Unfortunately, the warnings and the absence of an email address are indicative of some of the, shall we say, peculiarities of the founder. He doesn't do email, nor accept them in his office. Reads through a stack of daily faxes printed out by his secretary however.
Quote from: matthewkantar on 07/30/2014 06:20 pm"this video has been removed by the user" Nice to have a screen shot of the docking gear though.MatthewIt was weird to have an advert that starts and stops with warnings about showing it.
"this video has been removed by the user" Nice to have a screen shot of the docking gear though.Matthew