Author Topic: Bigelow Habs - How Big Will They Go? Where Will They Go?  (Read 20300 times)

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5573
  • Liked: 3375
  • Likes Given: 1652
Re: Bigelow Habs - How Big Will They Go? Where Will They Go?
« Reply #60 on: 06/18/2018 02:13 pm »
Inflatables still allow much larger volumes, though. And BFR only makes them cheaper.

For example, a single BFR launch could lift a 140 tonne, 100 meter deflated Kevlar sphere with 3 mm thick walls (5x safety factor) and a 10 tonne docking port/service/propulsion module. It would take 5 BFR flights of liquid air tanks to pressurize it to 1 atmosphere, but then you have a volume equal to 635 BFSes or 1600 BA-330s. Figuring out how to manufacture that sounds like a Bigelow specialty.

It would take some outfitting to make that volume useful though, unless all you wanted was an orbital bouncy castle :)
I wholeheartedly agree that inflatables are in principle cheaper.
But, if your inflatable pricing is not in fact cheaper than just using a BFS (and bigelow hasn't shown any enthusiasm for massive cheap stations), you have a significant illogicality.
Even without inflatables, or on-orbit assembly, 8m diameter * 12m aluminium cylinders tested for several cycles of 140PSI is another obvious backstop to pricing, and it's reasonable to ask if bigelow modules will go anywhere.

Bigelow pricing assumes launch on Atlas V at $10,000/kg to LEO. They have not adjusted their pricing for BFR level launch costs, as far as I can tell. It probably doesn't make much sense for them to do that yet.

I think most of the cost and complexity comes from almost everything other than the inflatable part. Once they re-optimize mass, complexity, and cost against $100/kg to LEO, their prices should be very different.

Offline johnfwhitesell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 198
Re: Bigelow Habs - How Big Will They Go? Where Will They Go?
« Reply #61 on: 06/18/2018 03:08 pm »
With so many things in space it's hard to judge what the proper price is and what is an issue of scaling.

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1022
  • Liked: 359
  • Likes Given: 2202
Re: Bigelow Habs - How Big Will They Go? Where Will They Go?
« Reply #62 on: 03/22/2019 01:26 am »
Not heard anything from Bigelow for a long time now. I know they stopped development on BA330 because they were waiting for crew capsules to become commercially available. Now that this is imminent, I would have expected increased activity and announcements of launch of BA330 and/or XBase. Anyone know what is going on?
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk

Offline Tywin

Not heard anything from Bigelow for a long time now. I know they stopped development on BA330 because they were waiting for crew capsules to become commercially available. Now that this is imminent, I would have expected increased activity and announcements of launch of BA330 and/or XBase. Anyone know what is going on?

I maked the same question the other day...I wait for more info...I wish Bigelow win something with the station Gateway too...
The knowledge is power...
Everything is connected...

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5454
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2843
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Bigelow Habs - How Big Will They Go? Where Will They Go?
« Reply #64 on: 03/22/2019 04:25 am »
Dunno if that's likely with the much larger & well funded Sierra Nevada also offering inflatable habitats.
DM

Offline JonathanD

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Liked: 343
  • Likes Given: 107
Re: Bigelow Habs - How Big Will They Go? Where Will They Go?
« Reply #65 on: 04/18/2019 02:28 pm »
Not heard anything from Bigelow for a long time now. I know they stopped development on BA330 because they were waiting for crew capsules to become commercially available. Now that this is imminent, I would have expected increased activity and announcements of launch of BA330 and/or XBase. Anyone know what is going on?

Based upon some of the stories about that company, I would be surprised if we ever see a self-sustaining inflatable from them.  BEAM was NASA tech basically gifted to them, and has none of the power or life support systems that Bigelow aspirationally proposes for larger habs.  It was an important accomplishment, but I just don't have confidence they can scale that up and add substantial complexity.

Tags: