What's Happening at Bigelow?

[mmeijeri]

The assumption that RMS berthing is easier or cheaper than docking is dubious. The requirements to station keep in the capture box don't appear much less stringent than those required for docking.

That's correct.

Is it safer?

[Jorge]

The assumption that RMS berthing is easier or cheaper than docking is dubious. The requirements to station keep in the capture box don't appear much less stringent than those required for docking.

That's correct.

Is it safer?

Possibly.  In either berthing or docking, the vehicle should hold, retreat, or abort when commanded by the ground or the crew. In either berthing or docking, an unmanned vehicle should retreat if it loses comm, or suffers a failure that leaves it zero-fault tolerant to loss of navigation or control. If a berthing vehicle somehow lost control and headed toward collision with ISS, the crew would have a few more minutes to prepare compared to a docking vehicle, but that's about it.

None of this applies to Progress, of course, since it is grandfathered from having to meet the modern VV requirements.

The raison d'etre for berthing vehicles is the ability to transfer large-diameter cargo. Any safety advantage they might have is a side-effect, not an intent.

[ChefPat]

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/
Congratulations SpaceX!
On behalf of myself and all of us at Bigelow Aerospace, we would like to congratulate our friends at SpaceX on the unprecedented success of the Falcon 9's second launch and the inaugural flight of the Dragon capsule. Such early success with a rocket as affordable as the Falcon 9 represents an extraordinary accomplishment, and is a testament to the ingenuity and robust capability of the commercial space industry. Moreover, we applaud the demonstration of the Dragon capsule, an achievement that has the potential to substantially reduce America's human spaceflight gap. Again, we wish to extend our heartfelt congratulations to Elon Musk and his entire team. - Robert T. Bigelow

[Danderman]

FWIW, a RMS of some kind on the Bigelow station would be useful mainly to help berth cargo vehicles without needing them to have expensive rendezvous and docking hard and software.

The assumption that RMS berthing is easier or cheaper than docking is dubious. The requirements to station keep in the capture box don't appear much less stringent than those required for docking.

Another factor is that all berthings to date have required a human controlling the arm, while fully autonomous dockings are well proven.

AFAIK, capture box requirements for berthing are more stringent, since docking requirements allow for a little more uncertainty in the inbound vector, ie the docking system can allow for a little bit or less velocity and still function, whereas the RMS can't handle positive or negative velocity and still grapple.

To complicate the question, we have learned that Russian docking systems can be used for berthing, as well, in the case of the MRM-1.

[baldusi]

I was wondering. To make big telescopes one of the problems is the fairing diameter of current LV. It forced JWST to use a complicated system to deploy its segmented mirror. Could a Bigelow hangar be built, that has the ECLSS protruding on one side, and a 4m ID port on the side? That way you could get all the mirrors and panels with a bunch of EELV launches, then pressurize, and actually assemble it in space, but on a pressurized vessel. You'd only have to divide in pieces with no more than 4m OD, but you might send longer pieces, like structural beams.
When you're done assembling, you'd have to cut the habitat in half to let the telescope free. But may be you could send a replacement. You wouldn't need a new ECLSS nor the wall of the 4m port. It's just an idea, but if designing and building the mirror deployment system cost close to a billion, then this system might be cheaper, specially if you use it for more than one mission. Regrettably you'd need a LEO tug, and an EDS to actually put the telescope in the desired orbit, so If there is a Bigelow station, and a LEO tug is developed, this might be a nice expansion option.

[Lampyridae]

I was wondering. To make big telescopes one of the problems is the fairing diameter of current LV. It forced JWST to use a complicated system to deploy its segmented mirror. Could a Bigelow hangar be built, that has the ECLSS protruding on one side, and a 4m ID port on the side? That way you could get all the mirrors and panels with a bunch of EELV launches, then pressurize, and actually assemble it in space, but on a pressurized vessel. You'd only have to divide in pieces with no more than 4m OD, but you might send longer pieces, like structural beams.
When you're done assembling, you'd have to cut the habitat in half to let the telescope free. But may be you could send a replacement. You wouldn't need a new ECLSS nor the wall of the 4m port. It's just an idea, but if designing and building the mirror deployment system cost close to a billion, then this system might be cheaper, specially if you use it for more than one mission. Regrettably you'd need a LEO tug, and an EDS to actually put the telescope in the desired orbit, so If there is a Bigelow station, and a LEO tug is developed, this might be a nice expansion option.

Which would necessitate ultraclean and ultraprecise equipment in the Bigelow station. Simply cutting it open would also contaminate the mirror. Anyway, 4m fairings exist, and some as large as 7.2m for EELV have been considered. Rather use a Bigelow as an L2 workshack  if at all in this way (even then I'm not sure it's worth it but is a good publicity stunt).

[baldusi]

Which would necessitate ultraclean and ultraprecise equipment in the Bigelow station. Simply cutting it open would also contaminate the mirror. Anyway, 4m fairings exist, and some as large as 7.2m for EELV have been considered. Rather use a Bigelow as an L2 workshack  if at all in this way (even then I'm not sure it's worth it but is a good publicity stunt).

I'm not proposing to make the mirrors. I don't know how do they handle mirrors for space based telescopes, but for land use they simply cover them with a film. And the JWST does have active optics. So you'd have to design a module with the active frame that can be pieced together. And use the included wavefront sensor to make the adjustments. In any case the thermal environment in the Bigelow would be very different from outer space. And you could make it a clean room. You just need the astronauts to use earthside clean room clothes, and have more filters. But you'd have very little in place of contaminants save the humans. Regarding port size, the I was thinking of a 30m diameter telescope. If you can design a modular frame, you don't have to worry about it's own weight. But you'd need to worry about torsion forces and be very careful where you put the gyros. Have you seen the ATLAST 16m proposal? Something like that but assembled in space.
If it still needs clean room, or is more expensive than making it self opening, then consider this an uninformed rambling.

[Ben the Space Brit]

@ baldusi,

The mirrors need to remain in ultra-clean environments during all parts of the assembly of the overall telescope unit.  This is particularly a problem in a pressurised microgravity area, where floating dust and even fairly large globules of oily fluids is a serious and continual contamination issue.  In any case, the degree of precision required to place the mirrors into the vehicle structure would be far beyond the limits of any currently-extant microgravity engineering capability.

[Comga]

This discussion has little or nothing to do with "What's Happening at Bigelow".

There are also problems with statements by people on both sides of the discussion of building large telescopes in space, specifically one like JWST.   For instance "you'd have very little in place of contaminants save the humans"  Humans are THE largest source of contaminants and existing protocols for contamination control rely on things like disposable gloves and filters and frequent changes of garments, which would be too mass intensive for orbit.  On the other hand, the ability to launch items in the equivalent of shipping containers and mount them on their adjusters once in microgravity could simplify design and construction. Precision work would not be needed, and some early steps in the alignment might be eased with manual input rather than full autonomy necessary for an unattended system at Earth-Sun L2.  It's a long discussion, but not one necessarily involving Bigelow. 

[bolun]

UK tech to aid private space shot

UK technology could aid a US company's ambitions to send spacecraft beyond low-Earth orbit.

Bigelow Aerospace's plans include telescopes that could be sent into deep space.

The UK's Astronomy Technology Centre (UK ATC) has signed a memorandum of understanding with Bigelow.

UK ATC has developed an infrared sensor for the US-European James Webb Space Telescope.

Bigelow's space telescope concepts include operating beyond the Moon, more than one million kilometres away at one of the Lagrange points - gravitational "sweet spots" where spacecraft can hold station without expending too much fuel.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12150812

[Diagoras]

bolun, you beat me to it by about a minute.

Bigelow seems really interested in BEO activities - I guess that would dovetail nicely for them with NASA's HSF plans.

[Chris Bergin]

NASA Managers Discuss Prospect of Bigelow Inflatable on ISS - by Pete Harding:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/01/nasa-managers-discuss-prospect-bigelow-inflatable-iss/

Specific thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23824.0

[Ronsmytheiii]

NASA Managers Discuss Prospect of Bigelow Inflatable on ISS - by Pete Harding:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/01/nasa-managers-discuss-prospect-bigelow-inflatable-iss/

Specific thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23824.0

Ok, one thing that is bothering me, weren't all the Node 4 CBM's with exception of the AFT CBM going to be converted to LIDS?  If so, the Bigelow module could not be berthed to the Hub with a PCBM.

[Robotbeat]

NASA Managers Discuss Prospect of Bigelow Inflatable on ISS - by Pete Harding:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/01/nasa-managers-discuss-prospect-bigelow-inflatable-iss/

Specific thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23824.0

Ok, one thing that is bothering me, weren't all the Node 4 CBM's with exception of the AFT CBM going to be converted to LIDS?  If so, the Bigelow module could not be berthed to the Hub with a PCBM.

Would that many more LIDS be necessary? If it's a problem, then just keep an extra CBM! Problem solved! Does NASA send me money, now?

[Lars_J]

NASA Managers Discuss Prospect of Bigelow Inflatable on ISS - by Pete Harding:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/01/nasa-managers-discuss-prospect-bigelow-inflatable-iss/

Specific thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23824.0

Ok, one thing that is bothering me, weren't all the Node 4 CBM's with exception of the AFT CBM going to be converted to LIDS?  If so, the Bigelow module could not be berthed to the Hub with a PCBM.

No, I seem to recall reading a node 4 document that indicated that 2 of the 4 radial ports would remain CBM for future expansion. The remaining two (plus forward) would be LIDS.

[ChefPat]

This article says the new module could be attached to the station 24 months after they're given the go ahead & they're looking at Node 3 as where it'll be placed.

http://www.space.com/10686-nasa-bigelow-module-international-space-station.html

[ChefPat]

NASA Deputy Administrator Tours Bigelow Aerospace
Category: Space Commercialization





Event Format: Media Opportunity



Date: Friday, February 4, 2011



Location: 1899 W. Brooks Ave, North Las Vegas, NV US



WASHINGTON -- NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver will travel to Las Vegas and Boulder, Colo., this week to meet with leaders of two commercial space companies, Bigelow Aerospace and Sierra Nevada Corp., and tour their facilities. NASA is partnering with the commercial sector to develop innovative technologies to ensure that the U.S. remains competitive in future space endeavors.

[Malderi]

Another interesting article, this one from a local Florida news source, about a partnership between Bigelow and Space Florida.

http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2011/february/203609/Aerospace-partnership-could-bring-new-jobs-to-Space-Coast

[arnezami]

Interestingly, a Dragon is now attached to the station aswell...



Hires:
http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/DSC_7295.jpg

[RocketEconomist327]

I like the Dragon hooked up to that station.  Biglow is doing awesome things for spaceflight.

VR
RE327