What's Happening at Bigelow?

[neilh]

With the success of Falcon-9 f1, has there been any word from Bigelow about scheduling the test flight of Sundancer on the Falcon-9? It's been "on the books" for years, but now there is an operational launcher, I'm wondering if they are making serious preparations.

I think he's still waiting to see how the NASA-funded commercial crew debate turns out in congress. He's said in the past that he doesn't want to launch stations before there are more cost-effective ways for commercial passengers to reach them.

[mlorrey]

With the success of Falcon-9 f1, has there been any word from Bigelow about scheduling the test flight of Sundancer on the Falcon-9? It's been "on the books" for years, but now there is an operational launcher, I'm wondering if they are making serious preparations.

I think he's still waiting to see how the NASA-funded commercial crew debate turns out in congress. He's said in the past that he doesn't want to launch stations before there are more cost-effective ways for commercial passengers to reach them.

As I recall, the current manifest has it scheduled to launch in 2014. Provided the Dragon gets man rated by 2013, that would be right on schedule.

[kraisee]

With the success of Falcon-9 f1, has there been any word from Bigelow about scheduling the test flight of Sundancer on the Falcon-9? It's been "on the books" for years, but now there is an operational launcher, I'm wondering if they are making serious preparations.

I'd bet he's just biding his time to see how reliable F-9 turns out to be.   Planning for the worst, while hoping for the best, is always a safe way to proceed.

Ross.

[yg1968]

Bigelow Aerospace Joins the Commercial Spaceflight Federation:
http://www.commercialspaceflight.org/?p=1257

[Bill White]

Bigelow Aerospace Joins the Commercial Spaceflight Federation:
http://www.commercialspaceflight.org/?p=1257

From the link:

“Specifically, I’m appalled by the condemnation of commercial crew as being somehow less safe than government programs, and the refrain that commercial companies need to prove they can deliver cargo before they deliver crew.  In regard to the latter, a leading contender for commercial missions, the Atlas V, has had 21 consecutive successful launches.  This rocket is arguably the most reliable domestic launch system in existence today.  It strains the bounds of credulity to claim that any new rocket would be able to trump the safety of a system that has an extensive record of flawless operations.”

“Moreover,” Bigelow added, “we’re extremely pleased to be part of the Boeing team constructing the CST-100 capsule under the auspices of NASA’s own Commercial Crew Development program.  Boeing’s unparalleled heritage and experience, combined with Bigelow Aerospace’s entrepreneurial spirit and desire to keep costs low, represents the best of both established and new space companies.  The product of this relationship, the CST-100 capsule, will represent the safest, most reliable, and most cost-effective spacecraft ever to fly.  Again, I don’t understand the critics who say ‘commercial’ entities can’t safely build a capsule.  Why is it that Boeing, the company that constructed the ISS itself, can’t safely build a capsule that would go to their own space station?  These are the sorts of questions and issues that we will be posing in Washington as a member of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation.”

[Robotbeat]

Bigelow Aerospace Joins the Commercial Spaceflight Federation:
http://www.commercialspaceflight.org/?p=1257

From the link:

“Specifically, I’m appalled by the condemnation of commercial crew as being somehow less safe than government programs, and the refrain that commercial companies need to prove they can deliver cargo before they deliver crew.  In regard to the latter, a leading contender for commercial missions, the Atlas V, has had 21 consecutive successful launches.  This rocket is arguably the most reliable domestic launch system in existence today.  It strains the bounds of credulity to claim that any new rocket would be able to trump the safety of a system that has an extensive record of flawless operations.”

“Moreover,” Bigelow added, “we’re extremely pleased to be part of the Boeing team constructing the CST-100 capsule under the auspices of NASA’s own Commercial Crew Development program.  Boeing’s unparalleled heritage and experience, combined with Bigelow Aerospace’s entrepreneurial spirit and desire to keep costs low, represents the best of both established and new space companies.  The product of this relationship, the CST-100 capsule, will represent the safest, most reliable, and most cost-effective spacecraft ever to fly.  Again, I don’t understand the critics who say ‘commercial’ entities can’t safely build a capsule.  Why is it that Boeing, the company that constructed the ISS itself, can’t safely build a capsule that would go to their own space station?  These are the sorts of questions and issues that we will be posing in Washington as a member of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation.”

Alright! That's awesome.

I have also been tired of hearing that SpaceX is the only commercial crew contestant... ...and I almost believed it because of the relative silence on the part of Boeing, etc.

[robertross]

Alright! That's awesome.

I have also been tired of hearing that SpaceX is the only commercial crew contestant... ...and I almost believed it because of the relative silence on the part of Boeing, etc.

I'm just glad the commercial guys are joining forces to advance their own needs & looking to be prepared for things on NASA's end, which seemed a bit lacking.

Good stuff Bigelow! (looks like they are moving forward in earnest)

[docmordrid]

If that picture is accurate Boeing is doing Apollo not Orion lite.

It appears to be about 4 meter diameter.
That would be under a 6 mt capsule.
Angles seem a little better adding some volume.

Imagery a bit rough,  but if those fellows are just shy of 2m tall it's a tad larger than 4  meters

[HMXHMX]

If that picture is accurate Boeing is doing Apollo not Orion lite.

It appears to be about 4 meter diameter.
That would be under a 6 mt capsule.
Angles seem a little better adding some volume.

Imagery a bit rough,  but if those fellows are just shy of 2m tall it's a tad larger than 4  meters

You certainly can fit Bigelow's required crew complement into a compact volume if you are creative.

Below is a design I proposed to them in 2007, but they were not ready to think about building their own spacecraft.  Up to 8 crew could be accommodated on an Atlas 401 or 402.

[docmordrid]

Very creative!  /impressed/

[JohnFornaro]

With the success of Falcon-9 f1, has there been any word from Bigelow about scheduling the test flight of Sundancer on the Falcon-9? ...

That's a good question.

[ChefPat]

With the success of Falcon-9 f1, has there been any word from Bigelow about scheduling the test flight of Sundancer on the Falcon-9? ...

That's a good question.

Bigelow is pretty tight lipped about what he's going to do but you can infer some of what he wants to do by what they say in interviews. The SpaceX Manifest has a Bigelow F-9 launch listed for 2014. Bigelow has said in an interview that when a Sundancer goes up, two crew would be sent up to facilitate the outfitting of it.
If you fill in the blanks between things that Bigelow & Elon Musk have said in interviews & public announcements you can infer that the 2014 launch could be a Sundancer & several outfitting launches will take place in the near term after that first one.

[yg1968]

He also said in the NY time article that the 2014 date was dependant on whether commercial crew (i.e. the Boeing capsule) was available at that time. He won't launch the Sundancer until commercial crew is ready.

[Ronsmytheiii]

He also said in the NY time article that the 2014 date was dependant on whether commercial crew (i.e. the Boeing capsule) was available at that time. He won't launch the Sundancer until commercial crew is ready.

Well Roscosmos is trying to enter the commercial market by buying more Soyuz Spacecraft:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22059.0

[Namechange User]

He also said in the NY time article that the 2014 date was dependant on whether commercial crew (i.e. the Boeing capsule) was available at that time. He won't launch the Sundancer until commercial crew is ready.

Transportation has been the company's critical path nightmare for a number of years now.  That is why he commissioned America's Space Prize to lure investment but no one met it, which was unfortunate and disappointing.

[zaitcev]

He also said in the NY time article that the 2014 date was dependant on whether commercial crew (i.e. the Boeing capsule) was available at that time. He won't launch the Sundancer until commercial crew is ready.

Well Roscosmos is trying to enter the commercial market by buying more Soyuz Spacecraft:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22059.0

If Mr. Bigelow wants to permit the Russian option, he would need to launch Sundancer into a high inclinantion orbit. I heard that doing so forces some downsides, currently reaped at ISS, e.g. next to impossible to find a resonant orbit that's not too high. Although, it may be ok for Sundancer, as a proof of concept.

-- Pete

[HMXHMX]

He also said in the NY time article that the 2014 date was dependant on whether commercial crew (i.e. the Boeing capsule) was available at that time. He won't launch the Sundancer until commercial crew is ready.

Well Roscosmos is trying to enter the commercial market by buying more Soyuz Spacecraft:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22059.0

If Mr. Bigelow wants to permit the Russian option, he would need to launch Sundancer into a high inclinantion orbit. I heard that doing so forces some downsides, currently reaped at ISS, e.g. next to impossible to find a resonant orbit that's not too high. Although, it may be ok for Sundancer, as a proof of concept.

-- Pete

The "Russian Option" would seem to be unlikely, since the current $50-55m Soyuz seat price is double Bigelow's announced target price of ~$25M for both launch and long term stay at his facility.  Plus he wants to fly 6-8 revenue seats per flight.

[yg1968]

Plus most of these seats will be purchased by the CSA or the ESA. Very few seats for flight participants. I doubt the CSA or the ESA is interested in renting the Sundancer.

[mmeijeri]

Lots of updates on the Bigelow website. Pictures, details of the construction schedule, facilities expansion etc.

Some technical details too. It turns out the aft propulsion system (hydrazine monopropellant) of the inflatable modules will be refuelable and reusable. I had expected the GOX/GH2 thrusters using electrolysed water to be used for that instead.

[kraisee]

There are more sub-systems involved in the GOX/GH2/Electrolysed system.   Hydrazine is just simpler.

This decision likely improves costs, schedules, safety and even offers some weight saving too.

It may not be as "cool", but there is a valid reason why so many satellites use Hydrazine for their RCS.   Bigelow's team seem to have found that reason and seem to agree with it for their solution.

I'm all for Bigelow deciding that "cool" can take a back seat to good engineering and cost savings.

Ross.