What's Happening at Bigelow?

[Sparky]

IMO, he won't get those solid customers until the transportation problem is solved. That in turn depends on some US crew capability, because even if Bigelow was willing to go against his preference and go with the Russians, they won't have capacity while they are the sole transport for ISS.

Dumb idea here, but I'll throw it out there:
If Commercial Crew fails to take off as hoped, do you think he might go with China? Right now they have the only human rated Orbital vehicle outside of the US and Russia. China plans to launch its own station, but if they could save money and resources by launching Bigelow modules instead (or at least by augmenting their homegrown station with them) then why not?

[hop]

China plans to launch its own station, but if they could save money and resources by launching Bigelow modules instead (or at least by augmenting their homegrown station with them) then why not?

As far as I can tell, the whole reason they are in space is to build up their own technical capabilities and prove that they are a first class world power. It's not as if a space station confers some big economic or strategic value.

If that is correct, they would only be interested in buying modules as a way of acquiring the technology for domestic production, as they did with Soyuz. I don't see US regulators going for that.

As for providing transport service: They have only flown 3 crewed flights total, over a period of 8 years. There's no indication that they are ready to provide transportation service to a 3rd party in the way the Russians are, or that they have extra capacity beyond their own needs.

Even if they were in a position to provide transport, the engineering and bureaucratic challenges on both sides would be considerable.

Bottom line, I think Chinese involvement with Bigelow is extremely unlikely.

[JSz]

Anybody knows about current status of Bigelow Expandable Activity Module that is prepared fo ISS? We are waiting for NASA decision for adding the module, however it was promised that the decision would be made in the spring (2011).
Is the concept still on?

[Jim]

Anybody knows about current status of Bigelow Expandable Activity Module that is prepared fo ISS? We are waiting for NASA decision for adding the module, however it was promised that the decision would be made in the spring (2011).
Is the concept still on?

It is only an idea.  Nothing has gone forward.

[JSz]

Anybody knows about current status of Bigelow Expandable Activity Module that is prepared fo ISS? We are waiting for NASA decision for adding the module, however it was promised that the decision would be made in the spring (2011).
Is the concept still on?

It is only an idea.  Nothing has gone forward.

I suppose it is not only an idea, but negotiations.
E.g. 8NewsNow.com said: "Garver confirmed that negotiations are underway to add one of the Bigelow modules to the ISS. A deal could be finalized within three months and the module could be launched in about two years." (link). This news is from February.

[Jim]

No, it is still an "idea".  There is no budget for it and no firm plans. 

[Prober]

No, it is still an "idea".  There is no budget for it and no firm plans. 

hmmm, looks like more games.  It was reported in all the papers and news media as a "done" deal only the contract needed to be signed.
 
 

[hop]

From the Commercial Space: No Bucks, No Buck Rogers! thread: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=25891.msg776388#msg776388

Does Bigelow has any hotel business in India? How about a tax break in India in exchange for the ISS module? India wouldn't have to actually put money, might get an investment, so in overall trade balance it would actually get dollars, and Bigelow might find that the hotel chains pays the module.

That's sounds like something which would (rightly) fall foul of anti-corruption laws on both sides.

India, like China, is not going to be interested in buying black boxes. They are only going to spend a lot of money if they actually get to domesticate the technology.

[baldusi]

From the Commercial Space: No Bucks, No Buck Rogers! thread: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=25891.msg776388#msg776388

Does Bigelow has any hotel business in India? How about a tax break in India in exchange for the ISS module? India wouldn't have to actually put money, might get an investment, so in overall trade balance it would actually get dollars, and Bigelow might find that the hotel chains pays the module.

That's sounds like something which would (rightly) fall foul of anti-corruption laws on both sides.

India, like China, is not going to be interested in buying black boxes. They are only going to spend a lot of money if they actually get to domesticate the technology.

I don't see what's corrupt on that. Tax breaks are very normal incentives. And corruption means something done against the fiduciary obligations of an official.
Regarding the lack of domestic technology, it might include the Indians selling some parts of the Bigelow. And, they would get all the training and experience on the ISS ops.

[hop]

I don't see what's corrupt on that. Tax breaks are very normal incentives. And corruption means something done against the fiduciary obligations of an official.

AFAIK Bigelow Suites and Bigelow Aerospace are different companies, which just happen to be founded and owned by the same individual. So giving one a tax break to one in return for favorable terms from the other would be highly irregular at best.

Even if that isn't corrupt in the strictest sense, I can't imagine it would meet Indian government procurement standards.

Beyond that, you don't think the Indian hotel industry is going to cry foul when a foreign competitor gets hundreds of millions in tax breaks ? Or that other potential space station module providers won't complain to their governments or the WTO ?

[ChefPat]

Robert Bigelow is sole owner of 18 Budget Suite's America hotels in 3 states, 14,000 apartment units in 5 states, Bigelow Development Corporation (a construction Co.) & then all his Space related activities.

[Patchouli]

Sundancer has disappeared from their evolution profile.

It sure has.
I guess that simplifies their assembly line. Now they're making only Propulsion/Docking Nodes & BA-330's.

Kinda a shame they discontinued Sundancer as it would be good for BEO missions.

Though even a BA330 really is not that much mass to bring along on an asteroid mission it's not much heavier then a Russian DOS module.

A Centaur probably could push one though TLI.

[ChefPat]

Kinda a shame they discontinued Sundancer as it would be good for BEO missions.

Though even a BA330 really is not that much mass to bring along on an asteroid mission it's not much heavier then a Russian DOS module.

A Centaur probably could push one though TLI.

I'll bet everybody & his brother with a manned BEO mission plan is looking at EOR with whatever ship they've got & a BA-330.
I'll bet further that somebody is looking at the feasability of launching the whole kit & kaboodle with a FH.

[Chandonn]

Sundancer has disappeared from their evolution profile.

It sure has.
I guess that simplifies their assembly line. Now they're making only Propulsion/Docking Nodes & BA-330's.

Kinda a shame they discontinued Sundancer as it would be good for BEO missions.

Now, before we get ahead of ourselves, has anybody OFFICIALLY said that Sundancer is dead?

[ChefPat]

Now, before we get ahead of ourselves, has anybody OFFICIALLY said that Sundancer is dead?

No, to my knowledge all we have is anecdotal evidence.

[A_M_Swallow]

Sundancer has disappeared from their evolution profile.

It sure has.
I guess that simplifies their assembly line. Now they're making only Propulsion/Docking Nodes & BA-330's.

Kinda a shame they discontinued Sundancer as it would be good for BEO missions.

Now, before we get ahead of ourselves, has anybody OFFICIALLY said that Sundancer is dead?

Commercial cancellations, being bad news, are rarely included in press releases.

Bigelow Aerospace has removed the Sundancer from the list of spacestation types on its website entitled "Station Development".

The webpage says

Bigelow Aerospace Expediting BA 330 Development

Due to customer demand and progress in commercial crew transportation, Bigelow Aerospace has moved directly to BA 330 development. As the name indicates, the BA 330 will provide roughly 330 cubic meters of usable volume and can support a crew of up to six. The BA 330 can function as an independent space station, or several BA 330s can be combined to support an even larger orbital complex.  "It's extremely exciting to proceed with the actual construction of BA 330s," said Robert T. Bigelow, President and founder of Bigelow Aerospace,  "This robust habitat will serve as the backbone for a new, dynamic era of commercial human spaceflight. The BA 330 will support a wide variety of utilization and exploration missions both in Low Earth Orbit and beyond. "

My italics.

From which we can conclude that the Sundancer development got bypassed.

[docmordrid]

Pretty strong anecdotal evidence though; imagery removed, as well as references in station development.

Last time they did this Galaxy dropped out of mention in favor of manned units. Now it seems their prospective customers are saying 'bigger is better.' 

Also; I can't see such large changes in 'the plan' if MOU's are the only paper involved. Methinks there is more, just unannounced.

[marsavian]

At 20-23mT an EELV/Falcon Heavy could lift one. Although it would require an SLS EDS to push a 3 node lunar version to the Moon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BA_330

[baldusi]

At 20-23mT an EELV/Falcon Heavy could lift one. Although it would require an SLS EDS to push a 3 node lunar version to the Moon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BA_330

I don't know how space limited in FH fairing would it be. But They can use water as extra radiation protection. So if SpaceX had a bigger fairing, they could double or more the BA330 rad protection.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

I don't know how space limited in FH fairing would it be.

I took a look at the proposed faring and it is too short by ~4m. The diameter is not a problem. The BA330 is 13.7m long. The current proposed faring (the F9 developed one) will only fit at best a little over 10m of the diameter of the BA330 in stowed configuration. A 4 or 5 m longer faring is needed for the FH to accommodate taller payloads. Total faring length of 19 or 20m instead of the 13.9 F9 length.